DOCSLIB.ORG

Modern Slavery Bill: Progress of the Bill

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Modern Slavery Bill: Progress of the Bill Modern Slavery Bill: Progress of the Bill Standard Note: SN/HA/7006 Last updated: 13 March 2015 Author: Sally Lipscombe Section: Home Affairs This is a note on the progress of the Modern Slavery Bill. It complements Library Research Paper 14/37 prepared for the Commons Second Reading. The Bill had its Second Reading in the Commons on 8 July 2014 and was considered by a Public Bill Committee over eleven sittings between July and October 2014. It completed its Report and Third Reading stages on 4 November 2014. The Public Bill Committee agreed a small number of minor Government amendments to the Bill. It also agreed more substantive Government amendments that added a requirement for individuals subject to either of the proposed new prevention orders to notify the authorities of their name and address. There were numerous divisions on almost every part of the Bill. There was particularly lengthy debate on the scope of the proposed slavery and trafficking offences, the need for a standalone exploitation offence, the territorial extent of the provisions on enforcement powers for ships, the independence and role of the Anti-slavery Commissioner and child trafficking advocates, the proposed statutory defence for victims, and the need for the National Referral Mechanism to be placed on a statutory footing. A new clause (moved by David Hanson) aimed at reversing changes to visas for overseas domestic workers, was narrowly defeated on division only after the Chair added his vote to the noes. On Report, the Commons agreed a number of Government amendments to the Bill. The most significant was a new clause requiring commercial organisations that supply goods or services to publish an annual “slavery and human trafficking statement”. The Bill completed its Lords stages between November 2014 and March 2015. On 17 March 2015 the Bill is due to return to the Commons for consideration of Lords amendments. The most significant amendment was the result of a Government defeat following a division on overseas domestic workers. For full background on this, please see Library Standard Note 4786 Calls to change migrant domestic worker visa conditions. This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It should not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it was last updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is required. This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public. Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 Second Reading 4 3 Committee Stage 5 3.1 Slavery, servitude and forced or compulsory labour 5 3.2 Trafficking 6 3.3 Exploitation 7 3.4 Procuring sex for payment 8 3.5 Enforcement powers in relation to ships 9 3.6 Prevention orders 10 3.7 The Anti-slavery Commissioner 11 The Commissioner’s independence 11 The Commissioner’s remit 12 The role of Parliament 13 3.8 Defence for slavery victims 14 Child victims 14 The list of exceptions 15 3.9 Child trafficking advocates 16 3.10 The National Referral Mechanism 18 3.11 Gangmasters Licensing Authority 19 3.12 Corporate supply chains 19 3.13 Overseas domestic workers 21 4 Report and Third Reading 22 4.1 Corporate supply chains 22 4.2 Exploitation 23 4.3 Consent to slavery and servitude 23 4.4 Enforcement powers relating to ships 24 4.5 The Anti-slavery Commissioner 24 4.6 Remit of the Gangmasters Licensing Authority 24 4.7 Overseas domestic workers 25 4.8 Prostitution 25 5 Lords amendments 26 5.1 Slavery, servitude and forced or compulsory labour 26 2 5.2 Independent Anti-slavery Commissioner 26 Independence 26 Duty to co-operate 27 5.3 Statutory defence for child victims 27 5.4 Child trafficking advocates 28 5.5 Victim identification and support 29 5.6 Overseas domestic workers (Government defeat) 29 5.7 Transparency in supply chains 31 5.8 Gangmasters Licensing Authority 32 Appendix: Members of the Public Bill Committee 33 3 1 Introduction The Modern Slavery Bill 2014-15 was introduced on 10 June 2014.1 The Library briefing paper 14/37 The Modern Slavery Bill 2014-5 gives full background to the provisions. The Government published a draft Modern Slavery Bill in December 2013 for pre-legislative scrutiny, together with a white paper. The subsequent Joint Committee published its report on 8 April 2014. The Committee welcomed the principle of legislation, but was critical of the approach taken in the draft Bill, as merely a ‘cut and paste’ of existing offences. It set out its own draft Bill at the beginning of its report. The Government’s response was published with the Bill on 10 June. The Bill extends to England and Wales and has four main parts covering offences, prevention orders, the Anti-slavery Commissioner, and protection of victims. Part 1 would consolidate (with some amendments) the existing slavery and trafficking offences. Part 2 would introduce two new civil orders to enable the courts to place restrictions on those convicted of modern slavery offences, or those involved in such offences but not yet convicted. The orders are conceptually similar to civil orders issued under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 aimed at restricting the activities of individuals convicted of sex offences and those thought to pose a risk of sexual harm. Part 3 would establish a new Anti-slavery Commissioner to encourage good practice in the prevention, detection and investigation of offences and identification of victims. Part 4 is based largely on the Joint Committee recommendations on treatment of victims, and (other than clause 44) did not appear in the Government’s draft Bill. Part 4 includes a new statutory defence for slavery or trafficking victims compelled to commit criminal offences, and provision for new child trafficking advocates. 2 Second Reading Second reading took place on 8 July 2014.2 The Home Secretary, Theresa May, outlined the provisions of the Bill, acknowledging concern expressed about supply chains and the review into the National Referral Mechanism, due to be published shortly. The Shadow Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, said that the Opposition supported the Bill but could not see why the Joint Committee’s proposals for a separate offence of child exploitation were not being adopted.3 She also called for a stronger focus on victims and international efforts against slavery. Fiona Mactaggart, co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on human trafficking and modern slavery, made some detailed points, including the nature of the proposed offences. The SDLP member Mark Durkan, expressed reservations on the failure to take on board the criticisms made by the Joint Committee of the Bill. He argued for stronger child guardian provisions. Other points made by backbench Members were on the need to strengthen the independence of the Commissioner, to review the visa rules for domestic workers and to improve the prosecution rate. Frank Field commented “the Government will 1 Bill 8 of 2014-15 2 HC Deb 8 July 2014 c166-260 3 HC Deb 8 July 2014 c183 4 be hard pressed to hold the line they have drawn in the Bill that they have submitted for second reading” given the depth of feeling expressed in the debate.4 The Minister, Karen Bradley, in her winding-up speech urged MPs not to endanger the passage of the Bill in a very short session by trying to widen its scope. The Bill represented a crucial first step in the process.5 The Bill was given an unopposed second reading. A programme motion followed which was also unopposed. 3 Committee Stage The members of the Committee are listed in the Appendix to this note. There were 11 sittings at Commons committee stage ending on 14 October 2014. The first sitting on 21 July 2014 heard oral evidence from a number of witnesses. The individual clauses and parts of the Bill are discussed in the following sections of this Note. Square brackets are used to refer to the numbering of the Bill as reprinted after Committee Stage, as two extra clauses were added (clauses 20 and 27 on the requirement for individuals subject to the new prevention orders to provide details of their name and address). 3.1 Slavery, servitude and forced or compulsory labour David Burrowes moved an amendment that would have provided that consent was irrelevant when determining whether a person was held in slavery or servitude under clause 1.6 The Committee also considered a similar amendment tabled by the Opposition that would have also covered forced or compulsory labour. Speaking to the lead amendment, David Burrowes said that this would “recognise the important role of psychological constraints and manipulation” in slavery and servitude cases.7 Speaking to the Opposition amendment, Diana Johnson said that making consent irrelevant to the clause 1 offence would enable cases to be prosecuted “regardless of how the victim behaves”.8 Sarah Champion said that removing the issue of consent from the offence would prevent juries from wrestling with “whether consent is informed, uninformed or not given” and would remove the risk that “the psychological manipulation and abuse that goes on means that victims will try, in court, to protect their slavemaster”.9 In response, the Minister,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Renewal of Control Orders Legislation 2010
    House of Lords House of Commons Joint Committee on Human Rights Counter–Terrorism Policy and Human Rights (Sixteenth Report): Annual Renewal of Control Orders Legislation 2010 Ninth Report of Session 2009–10 Report, together with formal minutes, and oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 23 February 2010 Ordered by The House of Lords to be printed 23 February 2010 HL Paper 64 HC 395 Published on Friday 26 February 2010 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 Joint Committee on Human Rights The Joint Committee on Human Rights is appointed by the House of Lords and the House of Commons to consider matters relating to human rights in the United Kingdom (but excluding consideration of individual cases); proposals for remedial orders made under Section 10 of and laid under Schedule 2 to the Human Rights Act 1998; and in respect of draft remedial orders and remedial orders, whether the special attention of the House should be drawn to them on any of the grounds specified in Standing Order No. 73 (Lords)/151 (Commons) (Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)). The Joint Committee has a maximum of six Members appointed by each House, of whom the quorum for any formal proceedings is three from each House. Current membership HOUSE OF LORDS HOUSE OF COMMONS Lord Bowness Mr Andrew Dismore MP (Labour, Hendon) (Chairman) Lord Dubs Dr Evan Harris MP (Liberal Democrat, Oxford West & Baroness Falkner of Margravine Abingdon) Lord Morris of Handsworth OJ Ms Fiona MacTaggart (Labour, Slough) The Earl of Onslow Mr Virendra Sharma MP (Labour, Ealing, Southall) Baroness Prashar Mr Richard Shepherd MP (Conservative, Aldridge-Brownhills) Mr Edward Timpson MP (Conservative, Crewe & Nantwich) Powers The Committee has the power to require the submission of written evidence and documents, to examine witnesses, to meet at any time (except when Parliament is prorogued or dissolved), to adjourn from place to place, to appoint specialist advisers, and to make Reports to both Houses.
    [Show full text]
  • Women Mps in Westminster Photographs Taken May 21St, June 3Rd, June 4Th, 2008
    “The House of Commons Works of Art Collection documents significant moments in Parliamentary history. We are delighted to have added this unique photographic record of women MPs of today, to mark the 90th anniversary of women first being able to take their seats in this House” – Hugo Swire, Chairman, The Speaker's Advisory Committee on Works of Art. “The day the Carlton Club accepted women” – 90 years after women first got the vote aim to ensure that a more enduring image of On May 21st 2008 over half of all women women's participation in the political process Members of Parliament in Westminster survives. gathered party by party to have group photographs taken to mark the anniversary of Each party gave its permission for the 90 years since women first got the vote (in photographs to be taken. For the Labour February 1918 women over 30 were first Party, Barbara Follett MP, the then Deputy granted the vote). Minister for Women and Equality, and Barbara Keeley MP, who was Chair of the Labour Party Women’s Committee and The four new composite Caroline Adams, who works for the photographs taken party by Parliamentary Labour Party helped ensure that all but 12 of the Labour women party aim to ensure that a attended. more enduring image of For the Conservative women's participation in the Party, The Shadow Leader of the House of political process survives Commons and Shadow Minister for Until now the most often used photographic Women, Theresa May image of women MPs had been the so called MP and the Chairman “Blair Babes” picture taken on 7th May 1997 of the Conservative shortly after 101 Labour women were elected Party, Caroline to Westminster as a result of positive action by Spelman MP, enlisted the Labour Party.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (9MB)
    A University of Sussex PhD thesis Available online via Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/ This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Please visit Sussex Research Online for more information and further details 2018 Behavioural Models for Identifying Authenticity in the Twitter Feeds of UK Members of Parliament A CONTENT ANALYSIS OF UK MPS’ TWEETS BETWEEN 2011 AND 2012; A LONGITUDINAL STUDY MARK MARGARETTEN Mark Stuart Margaretten Submitted for the degree of Doctor of PhilosoPhy at the University of Sussex June 2018 1 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................ 1 DECLARATION .................................................................................................................................. 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 5 FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................... 6 TABLES ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • OBV 15 YEARS of CHANGE  OBV Is Now on Facebook
    SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY ISSUE SUMMER 2011 OBV 15 YEARS OF CHANGE OBV is now on Facebook. Join our group. Stay Informed. ‘If you don’t vote’ London Mayor and GLA election poster TRIBUTE launch 2008. (from left to right:) Francine I have come to the end of a fantastic 10 year Fernandes, Simon Woolley, Richard journey with OBV. I arrived in 2001 to offer Sudan, Winsome-Grace my services as a volunteer and got a small but Cornish, Leon Green, unexpected paycheck the end of the month. Ashok Viswanathan, US intern Celina Chan and Faz Hakim. It’s been a rollercoaster ride – the anxiety before thousands arrive for an event and tremendous high when happy smiling faces leave the venue. Over the years our small team has done a Christmas in Rome tremendous amount of work, which is nowhere 2006: Staff on a one day near captured in this special 15 year anniversary trip to see the ruins – Louise Alexander, Ashok magazine. There is still an enormous task ahead, Viswanathan, Sanjay and the hard work continues by the dedicated Mistry, Faz Hakim, Leon team, including volunteers and interns, both local Green, Rafiq Maricar, Francine Fernandes. and international whose invaluable help and enthusiasm spurs us all, urged on by our Director to ‘worry the work like a dog worries a bone’. I have worked alongside a great number of awesome people who have generously supported OBV’s work, and on behalf of the team I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the thousands who Contents have taken part in our programmes; to those who have become magistrates, politicians or P 4 OBV’s 15 year celebration! appointed to serve in boardrooms around the Simon Woolley tells the inside story about how OBV country; to those who have tried for elected was formed – and how it powers black politics today.
    [Show full text]
  • General Election 2015 Report to National Executive Committee 24Th March 2015 Harriet Harman QC MP
    Woman to Woman Campaign Tour - General Election 2015 Report to National Executive Committee 24th March 2015 Harriet Harman QC MP @HarrietHarman | #pinkbus1 | #Labour4women Table of Contents Labour’s Woman to Woman Campaign….…….……..…3 65 Constituencies Visited to Date……………………….….5 Meeting Women in Many Different Settings…….….…7 Woman to Woman Campaign Literature…….………….8 Woman to Woman Digital Campaign……………..……..10 Saturation National and Local Media Coverage……..13 Key Campaigners……………………………………………….....14 Women Trade Unionists…………..……………………….....16 The #Pinkbus tour has been made possible by enormous support from the Party and I would like to thank Iain McNicol and his team particularly Emilie Oldknow, Emma Meehan and her team, the Regional offices, the local and national Press teams, Kat Segal and the digital team, Caroline Adams, Anouska Gregorek, Beth Gardiner-Smith and my own team particularly Ayesha Hazarika, Sophie Wingfield, Clare Gosbee, Hannah Lazell and Matt Price. 2 Labour’s Woman to Woman Campaign Labour's Woman to Woman campaign is the biggest ever women's campaign to reach out to women across the country ahead of May's General Election - particularly the 9 million women who did not vote in 2010. With the famous Pink Bus, the Woman to Woman campaign has visited 65 constituencies and will be campaigning up to Election Day in every English Region, in Wales and Scotland. Women from across Labour's team - including Shadow Cabinet members, MPs, councillors, MEPs, peers, AMs, MSPs and members of the GLA as well as from our affiliated trade unions - have joined the Woman to Woman tour. We have been highlighting all of Labour's key policies on the NHS, on the economy, on housing, education and immigration - but also issues of childcare, equal pay, tackling domestic violence, older women and women's representation.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 3, No. 126, February 7, 2008
    An injury to one is an injury to all Volume 3 No. 126 7 February 2008 S& WoORlKiEdRS’a LIBrERiTtY y 30p/80p Government wallows in crisis and cash scandals Scapegoating BY ROSALIND ROBSON N increase in, and a strengthen- ing of, stop and search powers Alooks set to become a key part of the government’s “tough on crime” agenda. Currently the police have to state a specific reason for stopping someone and/or searching them in the street. The reason has to be in line with current black and legislation. They also have to give you form stating exactly why they stopped you and what the outcome was. If the stop and search is conducted under anti- terrorism legislation the police do not have to suspect you of having committed a crime in order to stop you. New Labour have extended a anytime, anywhere, any reason “stop and search” scheme to four piloted areas. A just- published review of policing (the Flannegan review) recommends ditching the police form when police stop “suspects”. The freed Asian up time, says the review, will enable the police to carry out more stop and searches. Whatever the government does, the Tories will say they have not gone far enough — short of having the legal right to batter you to death, the Tories want the police to be given many many more powers. It all looks bad especially as, in prac- tice, the police often stop people simply because they are black or Asian and young. In the cops’ minds they are more likely to have committed a crime, so they deserved to be stopped.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament
    Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament Annual Report 2016–2017 Chair: The Rt. Hon. Dominic Grieve QC MP Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament Annual Report 2016–2017 Chair: The Rt. Hon. Dominic Grieve QC MP Presented to Parliament pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of the Justice and Security Act 2013 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 20 December 2017 HC 655 © Crown copyright 2017 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence/version/3 Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at isc.independent.gov.uk Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us via our webform at isc.independent.gov.uk/contact ISBN 978-1-5286-0168-9 CCS1217631642 12/17 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office THE INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY COMMITTEE OF PARLIAMENT This Report reflects the work of the previous Committee,1 which sat from September 2015 to May 2017: The Rt. Hon. Dominic Grieve QC MP (Chair) The Rt. Hon. Richard Benyon MP The Most Hon. the Marquess of Lothian QC PC (from 21 October 2016) The Rt. Hon. Sir Alan Duncan KCMG MP The Rt. Hon. Fiona Mactaggart MP (until 17 July 2016) The Rt. Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • By Professor Paul Webb (Sussex University) Who Addresses the Issue of Disaffection with Party Politics in Democratic Systems
    democracy and p olitical parties bbyy PProrofessofessorr PPaaulul Webb With commentaries by John Healey MP, Geoff Mulgan and Baroness Shephard Democracy Series Editorial Board: Alex Brazier, Director, Parliament and Government Programme, Hansard Society Kate Jenkins, Vice Chair, Hansard Society Peter Riddell, The Times and Hansard Society Council Publications in the Democracy Series: Democracy and Islam Democracy and Voting Democracy and Capitalism Published by Hansard Society, 40-43 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1JA. Tel: 020 7438 1222. Fax: 020 7438 1229. Email: [email protected] © Hansard Society 2007 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the Hansard Society. The Hansard Society is an independent, non-partisan educational charity, which exists to promote effective parliamentary democracy. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors. The Hansard Society and the DCA are neither for nor against. They are, however, happy to publish these views and to invite analysis and discussion of them. For further information on Hansard Society publications, visit our website at www.hansardsociety.org.uk ISBN: 978 0 900432 68 3 Design, print and production by Premier Corporate Mail Limited Cover design by Ross Ferguson Sub-editing by Virginia Gibbons The Democracy Series Democracy and Political Parties Contents Page No. Preface 2 Biographies 3 Political Parties and Democratic Disconnect: A Call for Research 5 Professor Paul Webb The challenge is to meld representation and participation 26 Geoff Mulgan The evidence is on the doorstep 29 Baroness Shephard Research is helpful – but action is essential 32 John Healey MP 1 Democracy and Political Parties The Democracy Series Preface Alex Brazier Editor, Democracy Series Political parties were, by far, the most dominant method of political organisation in 20th century Britain and they remain central to the functioning of the democratic system.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact Assessment ‘No Passport Equals No Home’: an Independent Evaluation of the ‘Right to Rent’ Scheme
    Impact Assessment ‘No Passport Equals No Home’: an independent evaluation of the ‘right to rent’ scheme 14 October 2015 Contents Background ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Research ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Aims ................................................................................................................................................ 3 Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 3 Responses ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Collaborators ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Key Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Publication of the Report ................................................................................................................. 6 Dissemination ................................................................................................................................... 6 Media Coverage ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 26/03/2015 Luciana Berger Written Question in Vitro Fertilisation 26/03
    Date Member(s) Type Topic (click for transcript) 26/03/2015 Luciana Berger Written Question In Vitro Fertilisation 26/03/2015 Fiona Bruce Written Question Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome 25/03/2015 Jim Dowd Written Question Domestic Violence 25/03/2015 Jim Shannon Written Question Contraceptives: Inflammatory Bowel Disease 25/03/2015 Andrew Smith Written Question Democratic Republic of Congo 25/03/2015 Nicholas Brown Written Question International Assistance 24/03/2015 Richard Fuller Written Question Immigrants: Pregnant Women 24/03/2015 Andrew Smith Written Question Rape: Democratic Republic of Congo 23/03/2015 Jamie Reed Written Question Midwives 23/03/2015 Fiona Bruce Written Question Abortion 20/03/2015 Fiona Bruce Written Question Contraceptives: Young People 20/03/2015 Fiona Bruce Written Question Contraceptives 18/03/2015 Mark Pawsey, Ann Clwyd, Malcolm Bruce, Valerie Vaz, Mary Oral Questions Female Genital Mutilation / Early Forced Marriage Macleod 18/03/2015 Graeme Morrice Early Day Motion Hormone Pregnancy Test Drugs 18/03/2015 Seema Malhotra Written Question Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence 18/03/2015 Mike Freer Written Question Human Papillomavirus: Vaccination 17/03/2015 Frank Field, Emily Thornberry, Henry Smith, Fiona Mactaggart, Legislation Modern Slavery Bill [Consideration of Lords Amendments] David Burrowes, David Hanson, Michael Connarty, Mark Durkan, Caroline Spelman, Chloe Smith, Andrew Stunell, Caroline Nokes, Heather Wheeler, Paul Blomfield,
    [Show full text]
  • The Introduction of the Work Programme
    House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts Department for Work and Pensions: the introduction of the Work Programme Eighty–fifth Report of Session 2010– 12 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 25 April 2012 HC 1814 Published on 15 May 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £12.00 Committee of Public Accounts The Committee of Public Accounts is appointed by the House of Commons to examine ‘‘the accounts showing the appropriation of the sums granted by Parliament to meet the public expenditure, and of such other accounts laid before Parliament as the committee may think fit’’ (Standing Order No 148). Current membership Rt Hon Margaret Hodge (Labour, Barking) (Chair) Mr Richard Bacon (Conservative, South Norfolk) Mr Stephen Barclay (Conservative, North East Cambridgeshire) Jackie Doyle-Price (Conservative, Thurrock) Matthew Hancock (Conservative, West Suffolk) Chris Heaton-Harris (Conservative, Daventry) Meg Hillier (Labour, Hackney South and Shoreditch) Mr Stewart Jackson (Conservative, Peterborough) Fiona Mactaggart (Labour, Slough) Mr Austin Mitchell (Labour, Great Grimsby) Chloe Smith (Conservative, Norwich North) Nick Smith (Labour, Blaenau Gwent) Ian Swales (Liberal Democrats, Redcar) James Wharton (Conservative, Stockton South) The following Members were also Members of the committee during the parliament: Dr Stella Creasy (Labour/Cooperative, Walthamstow) Justine Greening (Conservative, Putney) Joseph Johnson (Conservative, Orpington) Eric Joyce (Labour, Falkirk) Rt Hon Mrs Anne McGuire (Labour, Stirling) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152.
    [Show full text]
  • Compact the Text in This Document May Be Reproduced Free of Charge in Any Format Or Media Without Requiring Specific Permission
    Publication date: March 2011 © Commission for the Compact The text in this document may be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission. This is subject to it not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. The source must be acknowledged as copyright of the Commission for the Compact. Contents Foreword 1 Summary 2 Acknowledgements 9 1. Introduction 10 2. Three Compacts: an overview 13 2.1 Original Compact 1998 13 2.2 Refreshed Compact 2009 14 2.3 Renewed Compact 2010 15 3. The Compact in perspective 18 3.1 The Compact in an international context 18 3.2 The Compact in a social policy context 23 4. The development and implementation of the Compact: an overview 27 4.1 Milestones in the development of the Compact 27 4.2 The development and acceptance of the concept of the Compact 33 4.3 Architecture of implementation 36 5. Assessing the impact of the Compact 64 5.1 Awareness 65 5.2 Funding and procurement 72 5.3 Consultation and policy appraisal 89 5.4 Volunteering 100 5.5 Local compacts 117 6. Discussion and conclusions 130 6.1 The “story” so far 130 6.2 Problems of implementation 132 6.3 Was it the right approach? 133 6.4 What next for the Compact? 135 Appendix 1: List of key informants 137 Appendix 2: Undertakings under the Original, Refreshed and Renewed 138 Compacts Appendix 3: Summary of Compact Joint Action Plans 164 Appendix 4: Statement of Support for the Renewed Compact 182 by Sir Bert Massie CBE, Commissioner for the Compact This study, a summative evaluation of the Compact, reviews the origins and effectiveness of the Compact as a policy instrument, assesses the difference it has made to the quality of relationships between the state and the voluntary and community sector, and considers its future prospects.
    [Show full text]