Monday Volume 593 23 February 2015 No. 111

HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD)

Monday 23 February 2015

£5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2015 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT

MEMBERS OF THE CABINET

(FORMED BY THE RT HON.,MP,MAY 2010)

PRIME MINISTER,FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY AND MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE—The Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER AND LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL—The Rt Hon. Nick Clegg, MP FIRST SECRETARY OF STATE AND LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS—The Rt Hon. William Hague, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER—The Rt Hon. George Osborne, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT—The Rt Hon. Theresa May, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS—The Rt Hon. Philip Hammond, MP LORD CHANCELLOR AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE—The Rt Hon. Chris Grayling, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE—The Rt Hon. Michael Fallon, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR BUSINESS,INNOVATION AND SKILLS AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE—The Rt Hon. Vince Cable, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS—The Rt Hon. Iain Duncan Smith, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HEALTH—The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT—The Rt Hon. Eric Pickles, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATION AND MINISTER FOR WOMEN AND EQUALITIES—The Rt Hon. Nicky Morgan, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT—The Rt Hon. Justine Greening, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE—The Rt Hon. Edward Davey, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR TRANSPORT—The Rt Hon. Patrick McLoughlin, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR SCOTLAND—The Rt Hon. Alistair Carmichael, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR NORTHERN IRELAND—The Rt Hon. Theresa Villiers, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WALES—The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR CULTURE,MEDIA AND SPORT—The Rt Hon. Sajid Javid, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENVIRONMENT,FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS—The Rt Hon. Elizabeth Truss, MP CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY—The Rt Hon. Danny Alexander, MP

DEPARTMENTS OF STATE AND MINISTERS Business, Innovation and Skills— SECRETARY OF STATE AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE—The Rt Hon. Vince Cable, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. , MP (Minister for Universities, Science and Cities) § Nick Boles, MP (Minister for Skills and Equalities) § The Rt Hon. Matthew Hancock, MP (Minister for Business and Enterprise) § Edward Vaizey, MP (Minister for Culture and the Digital Economy)§ Lord Livingston of Parkhead (Minister for Trade and Investment) § PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— George Freeman § Jo Swinson, MP § Baroness Neville-Rolfe, DBE, CMG Cabinet Office— MINISTER FOR THE CABINET OFFICE AND PAYMASTER GENERAL—The Rt Hon. Francis Maude, MP MINISTER FOR GOVERNMENT POLICY AND CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER—The Rt Hon. Oliver Letwin, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. David Laws, MP § The Rt Hon. Greg Clark, MP § Joseph Johnson, MP PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY— Sam Gyimah, MP § Rob Wilson, MP (Minister for Civil Society) MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO—The Rt Hon. Grant Shapps, MP Communities and Local Government— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Eric Pickles, MP MINISTER OF STATE—Brandon Lewis, MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Stephen Williams, MP Kris Hopkins, MP Penny Mordaunt, MP Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon ii HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT—cont.

Culture, Media and Sport—

SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Sajid Javid, MP MINISTER FOR CULTURE AND THE DIGITAL ECONOMY—Edward Vaizey, MP § PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE—Helen Grant, MP

Defence—

SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Michael Fallon, MP

MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. Mark Francois, MP (Minister for the Armed Forces) Anna Soubry, MP

PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Philip Dunne, MP Julian Brazier, MP Lord Astor of Hever, DL

Education—

SECRETARY OF STATE AND MINISTER FOR WOMEN AND EQUALITIES—The Rt Hon. Nicky Morgan, MP

MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. David Laws, MP (Minister for Schools) § Nick Gibb, MP Nick Boles, MP (Minister for Skills and Equalities) §

PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Edward Timpson, MP Sam Gyimah, MP § Lord Nash

PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WOMEN AND EQUALITIES—Jo Swinson, MP §

Energy and Climate Change—

SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Edward Davey, MP

MINISTER OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Matthew Hancock, MP §

PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Amber Rudd, MP Baroness Verma

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs—

SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Elizabeth Truss, MP

PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— George Eustice, MP Dan Rogerson, MP Lord de Mauley, TD

Foreign and Commonwealth Office—

SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Philip Hammond, MP

MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. David Lidington, MP (Minister for Europe) The Rt Hon. Hugo Swire, MP Lord Livingston of Parkhead § The Rt Hon. Baroness Anelay of St Johns, DBE

PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— James Duddridge, MP , MP

Health—

SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Jeremy Hunt, MP

MINISTER OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Norman Lamb, MP

PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Daniel Poulter, MP George Freeman § Jane Ellison, MP The Rt Hon. Earl Howe HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT—cont. iii

Home Office— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Theresa May, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. Lynne Featherstone, MP—(Minister for Crime Prevention) James Brokenshire, MP (Minister for Security and Immigration) The Rt Hon. Mike Penning, MP (Minister for Policing, Criminal Justice and Victims) § PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— , MP Lord Bates International Development— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Justine Greening, MP MINISTER OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Desmond Swayne, MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE—Baroness Northover Justice— LORD CHANCELLOR AND SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Chris Grayling, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. Simon Hughes, MP The Rt Hon. Mike Penning, MP (Minister for Policing, Criminal Justice and Victims) § Lord Faulks PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Shailesh Vara, MP Andrew Selous, MP § Law Officers— ATTORNEY-GENERAL—The Rt Hon. Jeremy Wright, QC, MP SOLICITOR-GENERAL—Robert Buckland, QC, MP ADVOCATE-GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND—The Rt Hon. Lord Wallace of Tankerness, QC § Leader of the House of Commons— FIRST SECRETARY OF STATE AND LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS—The Rt Hon. William Hague, MP DEPUTY LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS—The Rt Hon. Tom Brake, MP Northern Ireland— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Theresa Villiers, MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE—Andrew Murrison, MP Privy Council Office— DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER AND LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL—The Rt Hon. Nick Clegg, MP Scotland Office— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Alistair Carmichael, MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. David Mundell, MP Transport— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Patrick McLoughlin, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— Baroness Kramer The Rt Hon. John Hayes, MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Robert Goodwill, MP Claire Perry, MP Treasury— PRIME MINISTER,FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY AND MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE—The Rt Hon. David Cameron, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER—The Rt Hon. George Osborne, MP CHIEF SECRETARY—The Rt Hon. Danny Alexander, MP FINANCIAL SECRETARY—David Gauke, MP EXCHEQUER SECRETARY—Priti Patel, MP ECONOMIC SECRETARY—Andrea Leadsom, MP COMMERCIAL SECRETARY—Lord Deighton, KBE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY—The Rt Hon. Michael Gove, MP LORDS COMMISSIONERS— Mark Lancaster, MP David Evennett, MP John Penrose, MP Gavin Barwell, MP Harriett Baldwin, MP Alun Cairns, MP § iv HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT—cont.

ASSISTANT WHIPS— Andrew Selous, MP § Thérèse Coffey, MP , MP Ben Wallace, MP Damian Hinds, MP The Rt Hon. Tom Brake, MP Lorely Burt, MP Wales Office— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Stephen Crabb, MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE Alun Cairns, MP § Baroness Randerson Work and Pensions— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Iain Duncan Smith, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. Esther McVey, MP (Minister for Employment) The Rt Hon. Steve Webb, MP (Minister for Pensions) Mark Harper, MP (Minister for Disabled People) PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Lord Freud Office of the Leader of the House of Lords— LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS AND LORD PRIVY SEAL—The Rt. Hon. Baroness Stowell of Beeston, MBE DEPUTY LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS—The Rt. Hon. Lord Wallace of Tankerness, QC § Her Majesty’s Household— LORD CHAMBERLAIN—The Rt Hon. Earl Peel, GCVO, DL LORD STEWARD—The Earl of Dalhousie MASTER OF THE HORSE—Lord Vestey, KCVO TREASURER—The Rt Hon. Greg Hands, MP COMPTROLLER—The Rt Hon. Don Foster, MP VICE-CHAMBERLAIN—Anne Milton, MP CAPTAIN OF THE HONOURABLE CORPS OF GENTLEMEN-AT-ARMS—Lord Taylor of Holbeach, CBE CAPTAIN OF THE QUEEN’S BODYGUARD OF THE YEOMEN OF THE GUARD—The Rt Hon. Lord Newby, OBE BARONESSES IN WAITING—Baroness Jolly, Baroness Williams of Trafford, Baroness Garden of Frognal LORDS IN WAITING—Lord Gardiner of Kimble, The Rt Hon. Lord Wallace of Saltaire, Lord Popat, Lord Ashton of Hyde, Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth § Members of the Government listed under more than one Department

SECOND CHURCH ESTATES COMMISSIONER, REPRESENTING CHURCH COMMISSIONERS—The Rt Hon. Canon Sir Tony Baldry, MP HOUSE OF COMMONS THE SPEAKER—The Rt Hon. John Bercow, MP CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS—The Rt Hon. , MP FIRST DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS—Mrs Eleanor Laing, MP SECOND DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS—The Rt Hon. Dame Dawn Primarolo, MP PANEL OF CHAIRS Sir David Amess, MP, Sir Hugh Bayley, MP, Mr Joe Benton, MP, Mr , MP, Mr Peter Bone, MP, Mr Graham Brady, MP, The Rt Hon. Annette Brooke, MP, Martin Caton, MP, Mr Christopher Chope, MP, Katy Clark, MP, Mr David Crausby, MP, Philip Davies, MP, Nadine Dorries, MP, Sir Roger Gale, MP, Mr James Gray, MP, Mr Dai Havard, MP, Mr Philip Hollobone, MP, Mr Jim Hood, MP, The Rt Hon. George Howarth, MP, Sir , MP, Dr William McCrea, MP, Miss Anne McIntosh, MP, Mrs Anne Main, MP, Sir Alan Meale, MP, Sandra Osborne, MP, Albert Owen, MP, Mark Pritchard, MP, Mrs Linda Riordan, MP, John Robertson, MP, Andrew Rosindell, MP, Mr Adrian Sanders, MP, Jim Sheridan, MP, Mr Gary Streeter, MP, Mr Andrew Turner, MP, Mr Charles Walker, MP, Mr Mike Weir, MP, , MP SECRETARY—Matthew Hamlyn HOUSE OF COMMONS COMMISSION The Rt Hon. The Speaker (Chairman), Sir Paul Beresford, MP, Mr Frank Doran, MP, Ms Angela Eagle, MP, The Rt Hon. William Hague, MP, The Rt Hon. John Thurso, MP SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION—Robert Twigger ASSISTANT SECRETARY—Sarah Heath ADMINISTRATION ESTIMATE AUDIT COMMITTEE Dame Janet Gaymer, DBE (Chair), Ms Angela Eagle, MP, The Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP, The Rt Hon. John Thurso, MP, Stephen Brooker, Barbara Scott SECRETARY OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE—Ben Williams LIAISON COMMITTEE The Rt Hon. Sir Alan Beith, MP (Chair), Mr Graham Allen, MP, Mr Adrian Bailey, MP, The Rt Hon. , MP, Dame Anne Begg, MP, Mr Clive Betts, MP, The Rt Hon. Sir Malcolm Bruce, MP, Sir William Cash, MP, Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, MP, Mr Ian Davidson, MP, DavidTCDavies, MP, Mrs Louise Ellman, MP, Natascha Engel, MP, Dr Hywel Francis, MP, The Rt Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst, MP, The Rt Hon. Margaret Hodge, MP, Mr , MP, Miss Anne McIntosh, MP, Andrew Miller, MP, Mr George Mudie, MP, Sir Richard Ottaway, MP, Mr Laurence Robertson, MP, Mr Lee Scott, MP, Rory Stewart, MP, Mr Graham Stuart, MP, The Rt Hon. John Thurso, MP, Mr Andrew Tyrie, MP, The Rt Hon. , MP, Mr Charles Walker, MP, Joan Walley, MP, Mr John Whittingdale, MP, Dr Sarah Wollaston, MP, Mr Tim Yeo, MP CLERK—Andrew Kennon MANAGEMENT BOARD David Natzler (Acting Clerk of the House), Jacqy Sharpe (Acting Clerk Assistant and Acting Director General, Chamber and Committee Services), Andrew Walker (Director General, HR and Change), John Borley, CB (Director General, Facilities), Myfanwy Barrett (Director of Finance), John Benger, (Acting Head of the Department of Information Services), Matthew Taylor (Acting Head of Parliamentary ICT), Dame Janet Gaymer, DBE (External Member), Barbara Scott (External Member) SECRETARY OF THE MANAGEMENT BOARD—Tom Goldsmith SPEAKER’S SECRETARY—Peter Barratt SPEAKER’S COUNSEL—Michael Carpenter, CB SPEAKER’S CHAPLAIN—Rev. Rose Hudson-Wilkin PARLIAMENTARY COMMISSIONER FOR STANDARDS—Kathryn Hudson PARLIAMENTARY SECURITY DIRECTOR—Paul Martin, CBE

23 February 2015

THE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES OFFICIAL REPORT

IN THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE FIFTY-FIFTH PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND [WHICH OPENED 18 MAY 2010]

SIXTY-FOURTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II

SIXTH SERIES VOLUME 593 TWELFTH VOLUME OF SESSION 2014-2015

Anna Soubry: I am grateful to you, Mr Speaker. House of Commons Incidentally, I received a letter from Gedling, whose contents I may share with the hon. Member for Gedling (Vernon Coaker). Monday 23 February 2015 10. Charlie Elphicke (Dover) (Con): What progress he The House met at half-past Two o’clock has made on strengthening the armed forces covenant. [907676]

PRAYERS 12. Jack Lopresti (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Con): What progress he has made on strengthening the armed forces covenant. [907678] [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] 14. Mike Weatherley (Hove) (Con): What progress he has made on strengthening the armed forces covenant. Oral Answers to Questions [907680] Mr Jones: The Veterans Contact Point armed forces centre, which is based in my constituency, does vital work to support veterans, many of whom have found DEFENCE the transition from the armed forces to civvy street extremely difficult. Will my hon. Friend visit the centre to see the excellent work that is being done by a vital The Secretary of State was asked— charity that supports people throughout the Coventry Armed Forces Covenant and Warwickshire area?

1. Mr Marcus Jones (Nuneaton) (Con): What Anna Soubry: Yes, indeed. I look forward to visiting it progress he has made on strengthening the armed on, I believe, 9 March. I have seen the website of that forces covenant. [907667] excellent charity, and I pay wholehearted tribute to the work that is being done by a wide variety of people. I The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Anna note that the local council has reduced the charity’s rent Soubry): I am incredibly proud of the fact that it was in recognition of its commitment to the covenant. As I this Government who enshrined the covenant in law. have said, we must now roll out that work throughout We should all be extremely proud of that, and of the the United Kingdom. work we have done. I wrote to all the local authorities that signed the Charlie Elphicke: Some people leave the armed forces covenant. I have been overwhelmed by their response, suffering from mental health conditions. What action and by the outstanding work that many are doing in has been taken by the Government as a whole to help delivering on their pledges. We must now ensure that people who are suffering from those debilitating conditions? that work continues throughout the United Kingdom. Anna Soubry: We have invested an extra £7.4 million Mr Speaker: I believe that the Minister’s justified in precisely that sort of work. I pay tribute to Stockton- pride is accompanied by a desire for a grouping. on-Tees borough council, which—along with other councils 3 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 4 in the north-east—has been doing outstanding work, I recently went to my own jobcentre in Beeston—not and whose chief executive has written to me. Councils for reasons connected with 7 May, I quickly add—and are working across the piece, bringing together all the looked at the work it is doing with reserves and veterans. relevant bodies and people, and delivering good mental That is sporadic; not every jobcentre or Jobcentre Plus health services to veterans in particular. “gets it”, to put it in that way, but increasingly they do and that is invariably because of the good work of Jack Lopresti: Is there a follow-up system to ensure Members of Parliament and local councils. that when people leave the armed forces they do not fall by the wayside when it comes to medical provision? Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab): I am incredibly proud of the fact that Tameside was the first Anna Soubry: It is critical that we get that right. At council in Greater to sign the armed forces present, such services are delivered only at a local level. covenant, followed very quickly by Stockport, and the Many councils are involved, including those in the Minister is absolutely right to commend the work of the Greater Manchester combined authority, which signed Greater Manchester combined authority, the first whole the covenant at the end of December. All those councils city region in the country to bring together councils and are doing outstanding work which they are determined public bodies across the area for the armed forces to continue, on a completely cross-party basis. They are covenant, but what is she doing to make sure that in working with a number of parties, bringing in health other parts of the country local authorities are committing authorities, hospital trusts and clinical commissioning time and resources and making sure the same services groups. What is beginning to happen in councils must are available to our armed forces personnel so that we now be replicated throughout the United Kingdom. do not have a patchwork quilt?

Mike Weatherley: What progress has been made in Anna Soubry: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I regard to the commitment to an armed forces charter have an excellent letter here from the leader of Wigan based on the covenant that was made by the United council, Lord Smith, extensively detailing all the great States and others during the NATO summit? work being done. One of the tasks I want to do in the remaining weeks of this Government is to make sure Anna Soubry: That is a good point. We need to the covenant team with the MOD brings all this work proceed with that commitment. It was a great honour together and gives more advice to local authorities on for me to go to the United States, meet other veterans sharing best practice, because it is stacked full of ideas. Ministers, and share best practice. A number of countries There is £30 million available to deliver on many of are particularly interested in our work in delivering on these projects, and I am pleased to say many are taking the covenant, and, because other countries do things in that up as well. different ways, we learn from each other. NATO has provided us with a very good device to enable us to Sir Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD): The armed forces share that best practice and, as I have said, to learn covenant had, of course, the full support of Her Majesty’s from each other. Opposition, but does the Minister accept that this is still very much a work in progress? Not all local authorities Mr David Hanson (Delyn) (Lab): I am sure the Minister understand it. Only last week Essex county council will welcome the fact that Flintshire county council, refused to continue a support package for the needs of which is in my area, has signed the covenant, but what one military family moving with their child from another assessment has she made of the number of services part of the country. charities that understand what it means in practice? Anna Soubry: The hon. Gentleman makes a good Anna Soubry: That, too, is a good question. The point and I have to say my own county council in short answer is that it varies. It is clear from the website Nottinghamshire did not understand the covenant when of the charity mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member it came to a soldier constituent of mine coming down for Nuneaton (Mr Jones) that a huge number of charities from Catterick who needed to have a place for his child. have signed up and are delivering across the country. I reminded the county council of the covenant. That is Progress is sporadic, because not everyone “gets it”, but the sort of work that local MPs can do when these cases others absolutely do “get it”, and some great work is come to us through our casework. It is about making being done out there. sure we share best practice. There is masses more work to be done, and it would be nice to think I might be able David Wright (Telford) (Lab): I am pleased to say to continue after 7 May, Mr Speaker, but that takes us that Telford & Wrekin council has signed the covenant into different territory. on a cross-party basis. What has the Minister done internally, within the Government, to ensure that individual Gemma Doyle (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab/Co-op): Departments are delivering on the covenant? The Ministry The Minister of State says that other people do not get of Defence is doing a very good job, but it is important it. I am not sure that she gets it, because why else would for other Departments to commit themselves as well. she be consulting on removing the principle of no disadvantage from the armed forces covenant? I refer of Anna Soubry: I am really pleased that the hon. Gentleman course to the consultation she has commissioned through says we are doing a good job, because I think we are, her officials that Woodnewton Associates is carrying and he is absolutely right. We now must make sure out. She looks confused; I am surprised if she does not others do not just sign up, but actually start to deliver. know that her own officials are carrying out this On the work the Secretary of State for Work and consultation. Is that because the Government are still Pensions, for example, has been doing with jobcentres, refusing to test their own policies against the principles 5 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 6 of no disadvantage? A Labour Government will test the intention to restore a post-nominal award to recognise our policies against the armed forces covenant, and we long service in the reserves, I should like to take this will not drop the principle of no disadvantage, which opportunity to confirm that such an award will be this Government are apparently thinking about doing. restored for those of all ranks who achieve 10 years’ service. Anna Soubry: Of course the hon. Lady forgets that she has got to win an election, and there is every chance Ms Gisela Stuart (Birmingham, Edgbaston) (Lab): she will not do so. Let me make it absolutely clear: as far The new 77th Brigade, which will focus on psych-ops, is as I and the rest of the team here are concerned, this is expected to recruit about 40 % of its members from the news to us and we are absolutely committed to the reserves. According to press reports, however, by Christmas principle of no disadvantage. [Interruption.] It is in the only about 20 had been recruited. When does the Minister covenant, and chuntering from the sidelines achieves think he will achieve the full complement? nothing. Mr Brazier: For obvious reasons, some of the detail Reserve Forces of the recruiting in that area will not be published in the House, and I am sure that the hon. Lady—my hon. Friend, if I may call her that—will understand those 2. Daniel Kawczynski (Shrewsbury and Atcham) (Con): reasons. There is, however, a big upturn in recruitment What steps he is taking to promote service in the right across the reserves, as the figures I gave the House reserves. [907668] earlier indicated.

8. Andrew Stephenson (Pendle) (Con): What steps he Mr Frank Roy (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab): Over is taking to promote service in the reserves. [907674] the past two years, the MOD has spent £16.4 million on television advertising for recruitment purposes. Was The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence that money well spent? How many recruits resulted (Mr Julian Brazier): In the quarter to December, 1,490 from that large spend? personnel joined the Army reserve, an increase of 147% on the equivalent quarter last year. Colleagues will have Mr Brazier: We cannot say what proportion of recruits seen the multimedia campaign showing the range of resulted from it, but we can say that there has been a opportunities the reserves offer. We have unblocked the surge in recruiting, and that it was up 147% on the enlistment pipeline, more than 420 employers have signed quarter last year, as the figures I have just given the corporate covenants and the civil service is setting an House show. Additionally, although we are not going to excellent example as a supportive employer, too. publish the figures on cyber-recruiting, I can say that they are running ahead of the reserves average as a Daniel Kawczynski: A constituent, Reservist Rifleman percentage. Ben Taylor, was awarded the Queen’s gallantry medal for saving the lives of eight comrades in Afghanistan. 19. [907686] Mr John Baron (Basildon and Billericay) With hundreds following in Rifleman Taylor’s footsteps (Con): Government answers show that the average age every month, does my hon. Friend the Minister agree of an existing reservist infantryman is in the mid-30s. that the Chief of the General Staff’s blueprint for Given that we have added only 500 reservists in the two reaching our target is achievable? years that this plan has been in place, and that that has led to capability gaps and false economies, has not the Mr Brazier: I thoroughly agree with my hon. Friend time come to rethink the plan and to stop trying to get and I join him in congratulating Rifleman Ben Taylor. our defence on the cheap? With the upturn in recruitment, and with retention improving too, the trained strength of the Army Reserve Mr Brazier: Over the past 12 months, we have added has gone up 560 over the past 12 months to 20,480. more than 800 to the reserves. That followed a long That is above our target for the year end, and I am period—a whole generation—of decline. We make no confident that the plans of the new Chief of the General apologies for revising the age requirements for ex-regular Staff—who, incidentally, was also a rifleman—will be soldiers to join the reserves in order to share their achieved. knowledge and expertise. We are looking for people with key skills and it is a waste to lose people with Andrew Stephenson: On Friday, I held my fourth specialist skills in areas such as intelligence and medicine. Pendle jobs and apprenticeships fair, at the Colne municipal Dare I say that my hon. Friend, with his years of hall. I was delighted that the Army was one of more experience, might have something to offer to the reserves? than 20 organisations that took a stall, at which it promoted regular and reserve opportunities. Will my Mr Kevan Jones (North Durham) (Lab): We have had hon. Friend tell us more about the steps that the Ministry months of failing IT systems, targets being revised of Defence is taking to recruit more reservists in the downwards and recruitment to the reserves stalling. In north of England? addition, we learned last week that recruitment to the regulars was not meeting its targets. Will the Minister Mr Brazier: I congratulate my hon. Friend on his confirm the speculation that is going on within the Ministry initiative. The north of England provides the greatest of Defence and the Army that an alternative plan to proportion of our soldiers, regular and reserve, and scrap the current target of 30,000 is being drawn up? the relaunch of the Army recruiting campaign’s reserve component last month involved a major event in Liverpool, Mr Brazier: There are no plans, and no such planning as he knows. There will be more in the north. Following is going on, to scrap the target. The number I gave the Secretary of State’s announcement in October of earlier, of 1,490 people joining the reserves in just one 7 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 8 quarter, indicates that things are now moving sharply in The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence the right direction. That figure relates to the Army (Mr Philip Dunne): For the third consecutive year, the Reserve, but the Royal Naval Reserve has been ahead of defence equipment plan demonstrates a realistic and target all the way through and the Royal Air Force affordable plan to invest £163 billion on new equipment Reserve is also doing well, with 150 joining in a quarter. and support for our armed forces over the next 10 years. The delivery of this plan has been independently assessed Armed Forces: Home Ownership by the National Audit Office, through the major projects report. The best way to illustrate progress is to compare the report for 2009, when in-year cost overran by 3. Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con): What steps he is £4.5 billion, with cost underspends in 2014 of almost taking to increase home ownership among members of £400 million. My hon. Friend may recall who was the armed forces. [907669] responsible for the chaos of defence acquisition in 2009 and who is responsible for the competence we have 6. Stephen Hammond (Wimbledon) (Con): What brought to that department since. steps he is taking to increase home ownership among members of the armed forces. [907672] Oliver Colvile: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer and for the announcement made on Friday about the The Secretary of State for Defence (Michael Fallon): I Type 26s. What is the timetable for the building of the am delighted that the forces Help to Buy scheme, launched Type 26 frigates? When will there be an announcement just 10 months ago, has already helped 2,600 military about the base porting, which we hope will be in Plymouth? personnel on to the property ladder, and a further 1,400 approved applications are awaiting the completion of the property purchase. Those 4,000 fully approved Mr Dunne: My hon. Friend is a vigorous champion applications are broadly equivalent to the entire military of the merits of Devonport, in his constituency, as presence at Colchester, and the vast majority of them—more home to seven of the Royal Navy’s Type 23 frigates. The than 80%—are for those from non-officer ranks. Prime Minister did indeed announce on Friday, as confirmed in a statement to the House this morning, that a demonstration phase contract worth £859 million Henry Smith: I am grateful to my right hon. Friend to invest in detailed design work, shore-based test facilities for that answer. Does this scheme not just prove the and long-lead items for the first three Type 26 global good work that this Government have been doing in combat ships will sustain 1,700 jobs. The current planning ensuring the improvements to armed forces accommodation, assumption is that 13 Type 26 vessels will replace the in terms not only of service accommodation but enabling current frigates on a one-for-one basis, aligned to the people in the armed forces to buy their own properties? current split in base port allocation, with the first coming into service in 2022. Michael Fallon: Yes, this scheme enables military personnel to have the opportunity to buy their own Mr (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): It home and benefit from the increased domestic stability would be churlish of me not to welcome the recent that home ownership brings, bringing a more realistic contract that has been awarded that will benefit David life choice for those who have chosen to serve their Brown’s, a great employer in my constituency. Does the country. We also recognise the importance of continuing Minister agree that this Government’s failure to invest to offer subsidised accommodation of a good standard in men and equipment means that we are a laughing to service personnel who are not yet ready to own their stock around the world? Our defence capacity is derided own home, which is why we have committed that from by the President of the United States, and President next April no service family will be allocated a house Putin knows very well that we are too weak to be a that does not meet the Government’s decent homes powerful defence force in Europe? standard. Mr Dunne: I do not recognise the hon. Gentleman’s Stephen Hammond: I congratulate my right hon. Friend characterisation of the defence equipment plan or, indeed, on the success of this scheme, which shows how potent the capability of our defence industry to support it. the Government’s Help to Buy schemes are. Will he This country remains the second largest defence exporter ensure that he gets all military groups to work with the in the world. If our capability was so derided, as he says, new Mayor’s land commission to ensure that any unused how come we sold defence equipment worth nearly land can be brought forward for housing purposes? £10 billion last year? Michael Fallon: Yes, I will certainly do that. Of course, Christopher Pincher (Tamworth) (Con): Last October, under Labour the great recession meant that the prospect the Government announced the largest Army order in of buying a first home was no more than a pipe dream 30 years for the latest set of armoured vehicles. Will the for many thousands of hard-working taxpayers. That is Minister outline the potential for greater procurement why we launched Help to Buy, which enables those who from UK firms, which would benefit firms in the midlands, work hard and get on to enjoy the financial security that including Elite KL in Tamworth? they deserve. Mr Dunne: I am proud to confirm that the Scout Defence Equipment Plan contract was the largest vehicle contract for the British Army since the Falklands war, and more contracts have 4. Oliver Colvile (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport) now been let through the supply chain for that vehicle. (Con): What progress his Department has made on The number of UK jobs secured through the programme delivering its defence equipment plan. [907670] is expected to be some 2,400 across more than 160 suppliers. 9 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 10

Two-thirds of the suppliers are UK-based, including The Minister for the Armed Forces (Mr Mark Francois): several in the midlands, and from all parts of the The Ministry of Defence is committed to creating a country. more diverse work force, better able to represent the nation it serves and defends. That is why we are developing Angus Robertson (Moray) (SNP): Three of my a comprehensive defence diversity and inclusion programme constituents from RAF Lossiemouth were killed and a to increase the diversity of the whole work force, both fourth was seriously injured when two Tornados collided military and civilian. above the Moray firth. That occurred nearly 20 years after the Ministry of Defence recommended the installation Mike Freer: I thank the Minister for that answer, but of collision warning systems. Is it really true that only will he reflect on the comments of the Chief of the eight out of 100 Tornado aircraft have had such a General Staff who said this month that system installed, that they are not fully operational and “recruitment from the black, Asian and minority ethnic communities that there are no concrete plans for such a system to be has been improving…but it is nowhere near where it needs to be.” installed in the Typhoon fleet? What steps is the Army taking to ensure that it reflects the society that it protects? Mr Dunne: The hon. Gentleman has raised that subject many times in this House. He knows full well from the Mr Francois: I thank my hon. Friend for his support answers that I have given him to parliamentary questions for the Chief of the General Staff’s initiative, but as the that, when our Tornado fleet has a traffic collision CGS has made clear more needs to be done. For instance, avoidance system installed, it will be the first combat jet a significant amount is already being done to increase fleet anywhere in the world to have such a system. Civil the diversity of the Army, such as targeted recruitment airline fleets have been provided with such systems with campaigns and high-profile engagement events aimed success, but introducing such a system into a combat jet at the Sikh and Muslim communities, including the environment is exceptionally complicated. I can confirm establishment of an armed forces Muslim forum. that currently eight aircraft have been fitted with a system. We are working to iron out some of the residual Several hon. Members rose— issues with that system as we install it across the Tornado fleet. Mr Speaker: Order. In calling the right hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Sir Nicholas Soames) on the subject of Sir Nick Harvey (North Devon) (LD): May I echo diversity, I note for the benefit of the House his past the warm welcome for the signing on Friday of the and possibly current presidency or patronship of the demonstration contract on Type 26? But are the original Rare Breeds Survival Trust. assumptions from the 2010 strategic defence and security review still valid, or has anything significant changed? Sir Nicholas Soames (Mid Sussex) (Con): That is very helpful, Mr Speaker. Thank you so much. My right hon. Friend the Minister will be aware of the extraordinary Mr Dunne: As my hon. Friend is well aware, we are gallant and distinguished service by Sikhs to this country anticipating that a strategic defence and security review down the generations. Does he not agree that it is high will take place following the general election later this time to do away with the political correctness that summer, so all the planning assumptions that were infects some of this thinking and raise a Sikh regiment introduced in the 2010 review will be reconsidered in to serve in the country and make up a very serious gap 2015. As I mentioned earlier, as far as the frigate in our armed forces? contract is concerned, the current planning assumption is for a like-for-like replacement of the Type 23 class. Mr Francois: My right hon. Friend is nothing if not a survivor, as have been his illustrious predecessors who Alison Seabeck (Plymouth, Moor View) (Lab): That have served in this House. With regard to his specific was a very interesting comment from the Minister given suggestion, he is one of a number of Members of that the Prime Minister recently announced that both Parliament who have made the suggestion with me carriers would be operational. Clearly, it also has recently. We have passed the proposal on to the Chief of implications for the equipment programme. Is the Minister the General Staff, who is now considering the issue, and saying that he intends to build 13 frigates for carrier we are awaiting the CGS’s comments. The idea might support? well have merit.

Mr Dunne: I just explained in my answer to the Rory Stewart (Penrith and The Border) (Con): Following previous question what the planning assumption is for on from the comment made by my right hon. Friend the replacing frigates. I can reconfirm to the hon. Lady that Member for Mid Sussex (Sir Nicholas Soames), will the within the equipment plan is the capital cost of constructing Minister specifically consider the notion of a Sikh both aircraft carriers, and they are coming in on time company within the reserves as a starting point? There and on budget, in stark contrast to what happened seems to be much more possibility within the reserves to under the previous Government. begin what seems like an excellent idea.

Armed Forces: Diversity Mr Francois: I thank the Chairman of the Select Committee for his additional suggestion. I said earlier that the idea might have merit, and we are considering 5. Mike Freer (Finchley and Golders Green) (Con): as one specific option the possibility of a reserve company What steps he is taking to promote diversity in the that would inherit many of the proud traditions of Sikh armed forces. [907671] regiments in the British Army going back many years. 11 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 12

My hon. Friend the Minister responsible for the reserves threatened Yazidi refugees and have assisted the Kurdish is leading on that aspect and he, too, remains in contact peshmerga in pushing back and reclaiming territory with the CGS on the matter. from ISIL, which, in turn, helps the Yazidi population.

ISIL John Woodcock: Does the Secretary of State think that it is acceptable that none of the service chiefs who gave evidence to the Defence Committee as part of its recent 7. Stephen Metcalfe (South Basildon and East Thurrock) inquiry was willing or able to articulate the UK’s objective (Con): What steps his Department is taking to assist or strategic plan in Iraq? What exactly is our plan? Iraqi forces in countering ISIL. [907673] Michael Fallon: Our plan in Iraq is very simple: first, 9. Mary Macleod (Brentford and Isleworth) (Con): to disrupt threats to the UK mainland and to our What steps his Department is taking to assist Iraqi interests overseas; secondly, as part of an international forces in countering ISIL. [907675] coalition, to defeat ISIL, including discrediting its violent ideology; and thirdly, to mitigate the impact of ISIL 13. John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Lab/Co-op): and other violent extremist groups on the stability of What recent steps armed forces have taken against ISIL the whole region. in Iraq; and if he will make a statement. [907679] Richard Benyon: In Iraq, the Brimstone missile provides 15. Richard Benyon (Newbury) (Con): What steps the UK with a unique capability that minimises collateral his Department is taking to assist Iraqi forces in damage. What measures are being taken to integrate it countering ISIL. [907681] with the Typhoon system?

The Secretary of State for Defence (Michael Fallon): Michael Fallon: Let me pay to tribute to the important We are making a major contribution to the coalition. work being done at AWE sites in my hon. Friend’s We are conducting infantry training and have trained constituency and elsewhere in Berkshire and to the more than 1,000 Iraqis so far. We are leading on counter- highly skilled personnel working there. I will of course improvised explosive device training and, subject to look at his point about integration. We are accelerating parliamentary approval, will gift 1,000 hand-held metal the integration of those weapons with Typhoon, which detectors. As of Sunday, we have conducted 152 air will improve its attractiveness as an export and pick up strikes in Iraq and deployed a range of aircraft to the on some of the lessons we have learnt from the campaign region, including surveillance aircraft. in Iraq.

Stephen Metcalfe: One of the legacies of our time in Mrs Mary Glindon (North Tyneside) (Lab): Does the Afghanistan is our expertise in tackling IEDs. Will my Secretary of State recognise that the Kurds, who have right hon. Friend tell the House when Britain will begin lost 1,000 peshmerga, are key to isolating and defeating training Iraqi forces in this capability and what ISIS but are seriously short of the heavy weapons they equipment—for example, electronic IED counter-measures urgently need. Will he talk with the Kurdistan Regional such as those built by Selex ES in Basildon—will be Government about how the UK can do much more to made available so that they can better tackle ISIL? help them, as one of our closest and most reliable allies?

Michael Fallon: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for Michael Fallon: I have met the Kurdish Regional that question and can tell him that the counter-IED Government and we continue to be in touch with them. training will begin early next month. UK personnel are We have already gifted heavy machine guns, nearly already engaged in Baghdad in course design at the 500,000 rounds of ammunition and some 49 tonnes of coalition headquarters. In conjunction with the metal non-lethal equipment. We have also helped transport to detector equipment we intend to supply, the training the Kurdish region around 300 tonnes of weapons, will allow about six Iraqi battalions to have an improved equipment and ammunition from other eastern European counter-IED capability, as well as creating smaller specialist nations, because they tend to use former Soviet equipment. counter-IED teams. I hope that underlines the amount of help we are giving to the peshmerga, but it is important that we also help Mary Macleod: Will my right hon. Friend reassure the reconstitution of the Iraqi army further south. me and many constituents who have written to me in the past few months that the Government are doing all Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD): What stance they can to support and protect minority groups, such does the Secretary of State take in responding to requests as Yazidi Christians, especially women, who face from other Governments in the region seeking military unimaginable dangers from ISIL brutality? assistance to take on ISIL and its affiliates in the way the Iraqi Government did? Michael Fallon: Yazidi Christians, particularly women, have suffered more than most at the hands of ISIL. Michael Fallon: This is an international coalition, They are not alone. ISIL is a terrorist organisation that with between 40 and 50 countries involved, and we are brutally beheads and crucifies people, slaughters children, one of the 16 that are involved in the air strikes. Indeed, sells women as slaves and has systematically used rape we have so far recorded the second highest number of as a weapon. We flew supplies and surveillance missions air strikes—second only to the United States. However, last year to help Yazidi refugees on Sinjar mountain. countries in the region and internationally are all helping Since beginning air strikes last September, we have, with in different ways—for example, with logistics or by other coalition partners, hit ISIL positions that have providing bases. The hon. Gentleman is right that we 13 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 14 need to continue to reassure other countries in the Sir Peter Luff: Does the Secretary of State agree that region that we are committed to their security. That is all the major parties in the coming election should why we signed the recent naval base agreement in Bahrain commit to a real-terms increase in the defence budget and why, for example, I talked this morning with His and to the 2% NATO target, because only that way can Excellency the Qatari Defence Minister. we hope to keep our nation safe in an increasingly hostile and menacing world? Ian Lucas (Wrexham) (Lab): The Secretary of State is of course aware that ISIL is operating not only in Iraq, Michael Fallon: Since the 2010 SDSR, our planning but in Syria and, unfortunately, now in Libya. Will he assumption has been that real growth in the defence clarify what role the UK and its armed forces are budget, with 1% growth on equipment, is required to playing in those theatres? deliver the highly capable and adaptable armed forces that we set out in Future Force 2020. The scale of our Michael Fallon: The House has not given is authority current operations in Kabul, the middle east and Sierra for military operations to be conducted in Syria at the Leone underline the value of the flexibility that we moment. However, we are preparing plans to help train encouraged in that review. So far as the future is concerned, moderate Syrian opposition forces outside Syria, and we are spending £34 billion this year; we will be spending we are now drawing up plans to participate in that £34 billion next year. It is time we heard from Labour training at a number of sites outside Syria. The situation whether it will match that spending or whether it plans in Libya is equally disturbing. It now looks as though to cut it. ISIL has several footholds along the Libyan seaboard, so we are also considering what further role we might Sir Gerald Howarth (Aldershot) (Con): I congratulate play there. the Defence Secretary on highlighting the real and present danger posed by Mr Putin’s Russia to the stability Mr James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con): The Kurdish of Europe and the threat posed by ISIL. Does he agree peshmerga have indeed done a magnificent job in halting that it would be folly for the United Kingdom to cut its Daesh and regaining some ground from it. I am proud defence expenditure below the minimum requirement that we have given them 40 heavy machine guns and of 2% that NATO has set? that we have 46 members of 2nd Battalion the Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment training them in Sulaymaniyah, Michael Fallon: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I but I have heard that we are reducing the amount of have set out our planning assumptions for the current support we are actually giving them. Will the Secretary defence budget, but I still think we ought to hear exactly of State please outline in detail what extra help we can what the Opposition’s plan is. Are they going to match give the peshmerga forces in Kurdistan? our £34 billion a year, or are they going to cut it? Is it match or cut? [Interruption.] Michael Fallon: We are not reducing our effort; on the contrary, we have the RAF flying Tornadoes virtually Mr Speaker: Not very statesmanlike. Mr Jones, you day and night—a huge effort—from Cyprus. We have aspire to be a statesman. I have sought to encourage nearly 600 service personnel involved in this battle and nurture your ambitions. [Interruption.] No,hesays against ISIL, including more than 140 personnel in from a sedentary position. Don’t be so unambitious, Iraq. It is important to help the peshmerga, but it is also man, for goodness’ sake. important to help the reconstituted Iraqi army. Russian-made Military Aircraft: Argentina Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab): What are the Government doing to identify ISIL’s funding sources, 16. Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): What and have they taken any action, such as sanctions, recent assessment he has made of the potential against those they have identified? implications of deployment of Russian-made military aircraft to Argentina for the UK’s defence footprint in Michael Fallon: The hon. Lady is right that ISIL the south Atlantic. [907682] needs to be defeated not just militarily, but diplomatically and politically with all the instruments at our command, The Minister for the Armed Forces (Mr Mark Francois): and cutting off its financial sources of support is extremely The Ministry of Defence undertakes regular assessments important. We are working with our international partners of current and potential military threats to the Falkland to ensure that those financing streams can be cut off, Islands to ensure that we retain the appropriate defensive and that proper sanctions can be applied where we can capability. There is currently no suggestion that there identify exactly where the funding is coming from. will be any need to vary significantly our capability in the south Atlantic, but contingency plans are in place to do so if required. Strategic Defence and Security Review Mr Hollobone: To what extent is Russia re-establishing 11. Sir Peter Luff (Mid Worcestershire) (Con): What relations with Argentina, and to what extent might that budgetary assumptions he is making to inform the pose a military threat to the Falkland Islands? strategic defence and security review. [907677] Mr Francois: Let us be clear. The Government are The Secretary of State for Defence (Michael Fallon): clear about British sovereignty of the Falkland Islands, The Government’s priority remains the delivery of the and in March 2013 the Falkland Islands referendum 2010 strategic defence and security review. The next reaffirmed the islanders’ overwhelming wish to remain SDSR will not begin until after the election. British, with 99.8% voting in favour. We should always 15 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 16 defend the right of the Falkland Islanders to determine I want to see action by the three armed forces to their own political future. I believe the question may anticipate what may come forward so that we do not refer to media reports that the Argentines were proposing suffer any more delay and there are no injustices. to purchase Su-24 aircraft from the Russians, although this proposal came as a surprise even to the Argentine Topical Questions Defence Minister and was swiftly denied by the Argentine Government. Nevertheless, we are not complacent and the Ministry of Defence undertakes regular assessments T1. [907707] Yvonne Fovargue (Makerfield) (Lab): If of potential military challenges to the Falkland Islands he will make a statement on his departmental to ensure that we retain appropriate defensive capabilities, responsibilities. but it seems that the Russians did not tell him. The Secretary of State for Defence (Michael Fallon): Mr James Arbuthnot (North East Hampshire) (Con): My immediate priorities remain our current operations Does my right hon. Friend accept that the defence of against ISIL and Ebola, as well as the commitments the Falkland Islands would be made much more difficult reached at the NATO summit and the delivery of Future if we failed to spend 2%, at least, of our gross domestic Force 2020. We are building our reserve forces and product on defence? If we encouraged all parties, including investing in the equipment that our armed forces need Labour, to do that— to keep Britain safe. The House may also want to know that the solider Mr Kevan Jones (North Durham) (Lab): And yours. reported as missing last week has now been located and is being returned to his unit. Mr Arbuthnot: And ours, indeed. Then we would be standing by the encouragement and the commitments Yvonne Fovargue: Will the Secretary of State assure that we made at the NATO summit only six months the House that Britain is playing a key role in Ukraine ago. and that we have not been relegated to a mere junior partner in negotiations? Mr Francois: There are currently about 1,200 UK military and civilian personnel in the Falklands Islands. Michael Fallon: We have been playing the leading role They support a range of air, sea and land capabilities, politically in ensuring that Russia is subject to a proper including Typhoon aircraft, support helicopters, offshore degree of sanction for the actions it has been taking, patrol vessels, air defences, and a resident infantry and we will continue to press the case for further company. My right hon. Friend is an established former sanctions if Russia’s aggression is not halted. We are member of the Defence Committee—indeed, its former playing a key role politically and diplomatically in Chair—and the whole House will have heard what he trying to bring the conflict to an end. said. T2. [907708] Stephen Hammond (Wimbledon) (Con): Service Personnel: Police Cautions Further to that answer, will the Secretary of State update the House on his assessment of the recent 17. Mrs Madeleine Moon (Bridgend) (Lab): How militaristic threats of action in Ukraine by Russia? many service personnel were dismissed from the Army, demoted or otherwise penalised as a result of having Michael Fallon: Ahead of the second Minsk meeting, received a police caution between 2008 and 2011. Russia stepped up its military support to the separatists. [907683] It transferred hundreds of heavy weapons, including rocket launchers, heavy artillery, tanks and armoured The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Anna vehicles. It maintains hundreds of regular soldiers, including Soubry): Initially, in reply to the hon. Lady’s campaign, special forces in Ukraine. Since the latest Minsk agreement, I said that the figure was 1,500, but we have made we have seen the ground offensive at Debaltseve, leading further inquiries because our aim is to contact everybody. to the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces, and the denial of We now think that the figure is nearer to 1,200—1,000 access for OSCE monitors—both flagrant breaches of in the Army. As we make those inquiries, it is important the Minsk agreement. What matters now is that Russia to appreciate that not everybody who was penalised in returns to what it agreed at Minsk and implements it as some way had that happen as a result of their receiving soon as possible. a police caution—other matters may have been involved as well—so we are exploring all that. Vernon Coaker (Gedling) (Lab): Does the Defence Secretary agree that episodes in recent months in which Mrs Moon: The Minister will be aware that at least RAF jets have been scrambled to escort Russian bombers 58 of those personnel were discharged from the armed close to our airspace, aircraft from our NATO partners forces. On a rough calculation of losing, say, a £25,000 have been asked to help locate a suspected Russian salary for just one year, compensation of over £1.25 million submarine off the west coast of Scotland, and the would be due. What assessment has she made of the Royal Navy has been seen escorting a Russian warship cost to the defence budget of the military law-breaking in the English channel are very serious and risk a very and cover-up that was involved? serious incident? Will he tell the House how is he meeting these ongoing challenges and assure us that Anna Soubry: As I have explained, we are identifying gaps in our military capability such as the lack of all the individuals so that we can contact them and maritime patrol aircraft do not hinder us in any way in advise them accordingly. I have made it very clear that responding to such events? 17 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 18

Michael Fallon: These are indeed serious issues and defence budget that we are able to invest in new equipment serious threats. So far as the incursion of Russian in a way that the previous Government could not possibly aircraft around British airspace is concerned, we have have done. successfully intercepted all of those potential incursions and they have been shadowed by our quick-reaction John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab): On the aircraft based at either Lossiemouth or Coningsby. Our basis of a previous answer, can the Secretary of State Royal Navy has picked up and shadowed the transit of give an absolute assurance that none of the British Russian ships through the channel. We will, of course, military activities in Iraq will be allowed to drift across respond, though not in the sense of being provoked; we the border into Syria? will ensure that any potential incursion into our airspace or maritime area is properly dealt with. Michael Fallon: The hon. Gentleman knows that we So far as maritime patrol aircraft are concerned, of have authority under the terms of the motion passed in course we will look at that capability again in the new this House to act in Iraq but not in Syria. That, of review, but we share capabilities with our NATO allies. course, enables other members of the coalition to help We helped to lift French troops into Mali and, in return, the battle against ISIL in Syria; indeed, it frees up some we share other capabilities with NATO allies. of their capacity to do so. It is important that ISIL is defeated in both countries. ISIL does not respect the borders to which the hon. Gentleman refers. Vernon Coaker: I thank the Defence Secretary for that answer. He will, of course, be aware of ongoing T5. [907711] Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Con): The RAF events in eastern Ukraine and concerns about the stability has been using precision munitions effectively in Iraq, of other areas in the region. He recently talked of which, as far as is possible, are good at minimising Russia seeking to “test” NATO, so, while our response collateral damage. Further to the earlier comments by needs to be calm and considered, it also has to make the Secretary of State, will the Minister reassure the strategic sense. What is the Defence Secretary’s latest House that that important capability will not be lost assessment of the implementation of the ceasefire when the Tornado combat jet is retired in 2019? agreement, especially in the light of the deadly incident in Kharkiv yesterday; and what role is Britain playing, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence as a leading member of NATO, to reassure our partners (Mr Philip Dunne): Further to my right hon. Friend the of the fortitude, resilience and involving nature of that Secretary of State’s answer to an earlier question, I can alliance? confirm that—as it happens, yesterday—I witnessed a contract signature for the investment of a further Michael Fallon: It is pretty clear that the ceasefire £165 million to integrate Brimstone precision munitions agreement is not being properly respected. Russia needs on to Royal Air Force Typhoons, which will enable this to get back to the terms of that agreement and ensure unique air-to-ground strike capability to enter service that the fighting stops, that the heavy armour and other on our Typhoon fleet in 2018, before the Tornadoes equipment I have referred to are withdrawn and that the come out of service in 2019. territory of Ukraine is therefore respected. We have already been supplying non-lethal aid to Ukraine, as T8. [907714] Douglas Carswell (Clacton) (UKIP): the hon. Gentleman knows, and we are continuing to What assurance can the Minister give that the costs of consider what further help to provide in terms of training the new Type 26 global combat ship will not rise ever that might help to reduce the number of casualties and upwards? How much clout does his Department have fatalities and build up the capability of the Ukrainian in avoiding some of the mistakes of the past? forces, which have been subject to an awful onslaught. Mr Dunne: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for asking that question, because he invites me to draw T3. [907709] Mr Andrew Robathan (South Leicestershire) another comparison with the way in which this Government (Con): May I also congratulate the Defence Secretary have sorted out the manner of our defence procurement, on his forthright warning about an expansionist and in stark contrast to the previous Administration. We are aggressive Russia under President Putin representing undertaking detailed analysis and taking contract a real and present danger to the Baltic states and, negotiations to a much greater degree of granularity therefore, to NATO and European peace? May I be the before entering contracts so that we know what we are third former Defence Minister from the previous buying and we remove risk from layers of prime contractors, SDSR to urge the Defence Secretary to use the current following the model that we introduced in the aircraft SDSR to improve defence capability rather than reduce carrier renegotiation last year. it? May I also reassure him that there is a huge groundswell of opinion on the Benches behind him in T6. [907712] Richard Benyon (Newbury) (Con): As civil support of an increase in defence spending and nuclear developments expand the market for skilled certainly not in support of a cut? nuclear engineers, what steps is the Minister taking to ensure that we maintain the skills levels of the Michael Fallon: I hope that my right hon. Friend, hundreds of nuclear engineers at the Atomic Weapons who served with distinction as a Minister in my Department, Establishment in Berkshire? will recognise that, by investing in two aircraft carriers, committing to a replacement of the Type 23s, Mr Dunne: The facility in Berkshire is extremely investing in armoured vehicles, purchasing fighters and important—part of it is in my hon. Friend’s constituency— commissioning new offshore patrol vessels, we are improving and I have led cross-Government talks to consider how our defence capability. It is because we sorted out the we ensure that demands for nuclear engineering skills 19 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 20 across defence and civil sectors are successfully managed The Minister for the Armed Forces (Mr Mark Francois): by recruiting, training and retaining appropriately skilled I do indeed pay tribute to them. This Department engineers. Next week, I will host an event in Downing works in the recesses too, and last week I went to Royal street to raise awareness of degree courses in nuclear Air Force Lossiemouth and met our fighter pilots, who engineering. help defend the skies against any incursion from wherever it may come. They are incredibly impressive and they Mr Russell Brown (Dumfries and Galloway) (Lab): now include female pilots too. “Top Gun” was on Ministry of Defence police officers and their colleagues television last night. I have seen the real thing and it is in the defence fire and rescue service are currently more impressive than the movie. subject to the state pension age; yet their counterparts in the and the Department for Communities Keith Vaz (Leicester East) (Lab): Six hundred British and Local Government can retire up to seven years citizens have travelled abroad to support ISIL and we earlier. Does the Minister think that is fair? have heard the anguished pleas of the parents of three young London girls who have gone for similar reasons. The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Anna What further steps are we going to take to stop British Soubry): We are in the process of working with other nationals travelling in that way? colleagues in the Government to conclude that matter, and I very much hope that we can make an announcement Michael Fallon: As the right hon. Gentleman knows, very soon. I pay tribute to the fire service and the MDP, the Home Secretary is producing further proposals to both of which do an outstanding job. ensure that we continue to prevent the radicalisation of our young people in mosques and schools, and to T7. [907713] Nick de Bois (Enfield North) (Con): In introduce further passport controls where necessary addition to the training that my right hon. Friend to discourage the movement of young, radicalised Muslims mentioned earlier, will he tell the House what to Syria. equipment the British Government are providing to the Kurdish peshmerga, and whether they are providing Mr Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye and Lochaber) (LD): any equipment on behalf of other countries to assist Given the very welcome commitments that the Prime their fight against ISIL? Minister made in Scotland just last week about ongoing defence expenditure, bases and so on, will the Government Michael Fallon: May I wish my hon. Friend a very confirm that those commitments extend to the all-important happy birthday? and long-standing BUTEC—British underwater test As I said, Her Majesty’s Government have gifted and evaluation centre—submarine range in and around some 40 heavy machine guns with spares and some Kyle of Lochalsh and that it has a viable future, given 480,000 rounds of 12.7 mm ammunition, in addition to that defence will loom so large at the general election? 49 tonnes of non-lethal assistance, which was directly supported with training on machine guns. Most of the Mr Dunne: I confirm that the UK Government have requests for equipment we have received are of types no plans to close the British underwater test and evaluation that British forces do not normally use, but through our centre on the Applecross peninsula and at Kyle of strategic air transport capability, we have been able to Lochalsh. In fact, QinetiQ, supported by the Ministry work with other countries to deliver more than 300 tonnes of Defence, has plans to invest £22 million in its research of weapons, ammunition and equipment from mostly and testing facilities up there, which, of course, would east European— not have happened had Scotland been independent. Mr Speaker: Order. So many distinguished colleagues; John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Lab/Co-op): so little time to hear them. Can the Secretary of State say more about the circumstances in which the deserted soldier in Syria was found? What Mr Frank Roy (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab): Will steps can he take to prevent a recurrence of that situation? the Secretary of State explain why the House is not Does he understand the frustration that must be felt by allowed to know how many people were recruited from many in our armed forces who want to do more to fight an online source? ISIL, but who see the Government not doing enough? The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence Michael Fallon: We are, as I said, making a major (Mr Julian Brazier): There has been no attempt to contribution to the fight against ISIL, with nearly 600 service refuse to answer that question. All Army recruits, regular personnel involved, not just in Cyprus but in Irbil, and reserve—100%—come through online applications. Baghdad and elsewhere in the Gulf. We are fully involved We have published the numbers of enlistments. in this struggle. I would prefer not to comment on the [Interruption.] The number I cited earlier—1,490—was soldier who has been located and is being returned the number of Army reservists. I will write to the hon. safely to his unit until he has been fully debriefed. Gentleman with other numbers. There is no secret about this at all: all Army recruits come through the T10. [907716] Charlie Elphicke (Dover) (Con): May I online system. support the Defence Secretary’s warning about the danger that Russia poses to world peace? We should Mr Speaker: Put a copy in the Library. look at supporting brave Ukraine before Mariupol is put under pressure or falls. T9. [907715] Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (Con): Will my right hon. Friend join me in paying Michael Fallon: We have increased our assistance to tribute to our fast jet airmen, who help keep our skies the Ukrainian armed forces. Following the start of the safe and are dealing with the increasingly frequent crisis in spring last year, we have provided non-lethal Russian incursions? support, including personal protective equipment and 21 Oral Answers23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oral Answers 22 other supplies. We are helping with defence reform and Dr Liam Fox (North Somerset) (Con): There are four modernisation. We are considering providing further drivers and constraints on the defence budget: the non-lethal assistance to enhance the capacity of the international security environment, including what is Ukrainian armed forces to reduce casualties and fatalities happening in Ukraine; commitments already entered and to build their resilience, for example through further into, including upgrading our nuclear deterrent; the training. overall fiscal position; and our international obligations and moral authority. Does the direction of travel of any Mr Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): If of those four things justify our defence spending falling the Secretary of State is so pleased with our present below 2% of GDP? Is this a case, if ever there was one, defence capacity, will he say when was the last time an for a proper cross-party consensus in Britain? American President begged a British Prime Minister not to run down British forces any further?

Michael Fallon: I have made it clear throughout this Michael Fallon: Only because we sorted out the budget Question Time that far from running down our forces, mess that we inherited have we been able to invest in we are investing in them for the future. We are investing and modernise our defence equipment. I fully agree in aircraft carriers, armoured vehicles, new frigates, with my right hon. Friend: we would be in a stronger offshore patrol vessels and fresh equipment of all kinds. place if there was more consensus. We have yet to hear What we have not yet heard is whether the Labour party whether Labour would match our £34 billion or cut it. would match our £34 billion of spending or cut it. Is it time we had an answer? 23 23 FEBRUARY 2015 Tax Avoidance (HSBC) 24

Tax Avoidance (HSBC) Thirdly, the right hon. Member for Morley and Outwood asked why we appointed Stephen Green to the Government. 3.35 pm We appointed him because we thought he would do a good job as trade Minister, as did the Labour party, Ed Balls (Morley and Outwood) (Lab/Co-op) (Urgent which welcomed the appointment. The trade job was Question): To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if not Stephen Green’s first public appointment. That was he will make a statement about the HSBC tax evasion when he was appointed by the previous Government to scandal. be not just a member of the Prime Minister’s business council but its chair—a post he continued to hold after Mr Speaker: Order. I do not wish to be pedantic, the existence of the HSBC files became public and simply accurate, but I think the wording of the urgent after HMRC negotiated to recover them under the question was “avoidance”—the tax avoidance scandal. previous Government. I have explained why we appointed The point is on the record. Stephen Green. Perhaps the right hon. Member for Morley and Outwood will explain why he appointed The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr George Osborne): Stephen Green. The allegations about tax evasion at HSBC Swiss are extremely serious and have been the subject of extensive Fourthly, the right hon. Gentleman asked about investigation by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. discussions with Stephen Green on tax evasion. I can Money has been recovered for the Exchequer, and HMRC confirm that the Cabinet Secretary and the director continues to be in active discussion with our prosecuting general of ethics at the Cabinet Office carried out the authorities. The chief executive of HMRC and the background checks for ministerial appointments that Director of Public Prosecutions have confirmed that were put in place by the previous Government. Stephen they have the necessary resources to carry out their Green’s personal tax affairs were examined by HMRC work on this matter, and if they need more resources on behalf of the House of Lords Appointments they will get them. Commission, again using the procedures put in place by the previous Government. Those are the procedures we The House should know, however, that in each and followed when we appointed Stephen Green. What every case the alleged tax evasion—both by individuals procedures did the right hon. Gentleman follow? and the bank—happened before 2006 when the shadow Chancellor was the principal adviser on tax policy and Finally, the right hon. Gentleman asked me why I economic affairs to the then Labour Government. News signed a deal with the Swiss authorities in 2012. He that the French had got hold of the files with the names does not need my explanation. Listen to what the of the bank accounts became publicly known in 2009 shadow Chief Secretary at the time, the hon. Member when the shadow Chancellor was sitting on the Government for Newcastle upon Tyne North (Catherine McKinnell), Benches, and the files were requested and recovered by said: HMRC before May 2010, when he was a member of the “We support the agreement signed by the UK and Swiss Cabinet. Governments to secure billions in unpaid tax.”––[Official Report, The right hon. Gentleman has written to ask me five Finance Public Bill Committee, 26 June 2012; c. 655.] questions about my responsibilities. I will answer each She is right: billions of unpaid tax never collected under one directly, and in return he can account for his own a Labour Government. Under this Government, tax responsibilities. He asked about what he calls the selective evasion is at the top of the G8 agenda. We have collected prosecution policy pursued by HMRC, and whether more money and prosecutions have increased five times that decision was made by Ministers. Yes, that decision over. Ahead of the Budget, I set the Treasury to work was made by Ministers, and the Inland Revenue’s overall on providing further ways to pursue not just the tax approach to prosecuting cases of suspected serious tax evaders, but those providing them with advice. So anyone fraud was set out in the Official Report on 7 November involved in tax evasion, whatever your role, this Government 2002, column 784W,in an answer by the then Chancellor are coming after you. Unlike the previous Government, of the Exchequer, the right hon. Member for Kirkcaldy who simply turned a blind eye, this Government are and Cowdenbeath (Mr Brown). That was confirmed taking action now and will do so again at the Budget. again when HMRC was created in 2005—again by the So I am happy, any time, to answer for our record on right hon. Gentleman. I have increased resources for tackling tax evasion. Now, let him account for his. tackling tax evasion, and as a result prosecutions are up fivefold. I have answered for my responsibility on that question; perhaps the right hon. Member for Morley Ed Balls: Finally, the Chancellor has been dragged to and Outwood (Ed Balls) will answer for his and tell us the House to answer questions about the HSBC scandal, whether he drafted that policy. which broke a full two weeks ago. At a time when the living standards of working people are squeezed, when Secondly, the right hon. Gentleman asked when I was our public services are under pressure, when HSBC is first made aware of the HSBC files, what action I took, paying out high bonuses and when the amount of and whether I discussed them with the Prime Minister. I uncollected tax has gone up under this Government, we first became aware of the existence of the files in 2009 need proper answers, not another Chancellor sweeping Financial Times when a story appeared in the .Iwas these issues under the carpet as we have heard . shadow Chancellor at the time so I could take no [Interruption.] I think the hon. Member for Northampton action, and I could not discuss it with the then Prime North (Michael Ellis) should listen to these questions Minister because I was not on speaking terms with him. and then the Chancellor can tell us whether he actually That is what I knew. The right hon. Member for Morley has any answers. Don’t you agree, Mr Speaker? and Outwood was a Cabinet Minister. When he heard about these revelations, did he speak to the Prime Detailed information was passed to this Government in Minister about them? May 2010 about 1,100 HSBC clients—[Interruption.] 25 Tax Avoidance (HSBC)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Tax Avoidance (HSBC) 26

Mr Speaker: Order. These exchanges are not, frankly, Mr Osborne: Well, I do not think that performance to the advantage of this House. They will be conducted will save the shadow Chancellor’s political career. Every in a more decorous atmosphere. I say to Members on single question he asked I had already answered. The both sides who are calculatedly trying to whip it up and whole House can see that the person bringing this are shouting at the tops of their voices, some holding question to the House is the person with the most to very senior positions in this House: cut it out or get out. answer for, and that he has no answers. He has nothing to say about the fact that every single one of these Ed Balls: We know when they shout that it is because alleged offences occurred when he was the principal tax they have something to hide, Mr Speaker. That is the adviser to the last Labour Government, and nothing to truth. say about the fact that the HSBC files came to light while he was in office. He said I admitted I knew about First, let me ask the Chancellor about what he knew them in 2009. I read the Financial Times—it was in the and when. Two weeks ago, Downing street announced newspapers; he was in the Cabinet and did absolutely that no Minister found out about the HSBC issues until nothing about it. He said that the information was two-and-a-half weeks ago. At the weekend, the Chancellor provided to the Government in May 2010. said that he should not be involved in the tax dealings of any individual bank. Today, he has told us he knew in Ed Balls indicated assent. 2009. If he knew about systemic abuse on this scale in 2009, why did he not act when he became Chancellor? Mr Osborne: He nods his head, but the information That is the first question. was provided in April 2010, when there was a Labour Secondly, given that the Chancellor says he knew Government and he was in the Cabinet. He has nothing about this in 2009, why, five years on, has there been to say either about the agreement with the French only one prosecution after the provision of 1,100 names? authorities restricting the use that could be made of this We know that in November 2012 HMRC confirmed information—an agreement that we are now busily that the Government had adopted a selective prosecution trying to change. policy. Let me ask the Chancellor: given he knew what None of these things has the shadow Chancellor was happening at HSBC, did he confirm he wanted a admitted to or apologised for, and none of it is of any selective prosecution policy in these cases? surprise to Government Members, because the Labour Thirdly, why in 2012 did the Chancellor sign a deal party was the friend of the tax avoiders and the tax with the Swiss authorities that has prevented the UK evaders when it was in office. When we entered office, from actively obtaining similar information in the future? City bankers were paying lower tax rates than those The agreement states that the UK and Swiss Governments who cleaned for them; foreigners were not paying capital will gains tax; hedge funds were abusing partnership rules; “not actively seek to acquire customer data stolen from Swiss and the richest in our society routinely did not pay banks”. stamp duty at all. We have put at end to all of that, and Why sign up to a declaration that clearly impedes we will take more action in the Budget. All we have on HMRC’s and the Government’s ability to act in the the Opposition Benches is a bunch of arsonists throwing future? Two weeks ago, they told us it was because they rocks at the firefighters who are putting out the fire that did not know, but we now know that the Chancellor has they started. known for six years. Why did he sign that deal? The shadow Chancellor comes to the House fighting for his political life. He asks about tax evasion, but he Fourthly, if the Chancellor and the Prime Minister was the principal tax adviser when tax evasion occurred. knew what was happening at HSBC in 2009, why, one His economic policy is in tatters, and he cannot name a month after the Government received these files, did single business supporter of his business policy. His tax they appoint the chair of HSBC during the period in avoidance campaign has turned into a war with his own question as a Conservative peer and Minister? What window cleaner. Now he has lost the confidence of his due diligence did the Government carry out in advance, colleagues and his leader, but he lost the confidence of and did the Prime Minister and the Chancellor see the the country a long time ago. details? Fifthly, did Lord Green have any involvement in the Swiss tax deal when he was a trade Minister? Did (Wyre Forest) (Con): Will the Chancellor he ever advise the Treasury on it? Did the Chancellor confirm that British taxpayers will receive more money discuss what happened at HSBC with Lord Green in the back from tax evaders as a result of civil actions than almost three years he was a Conservative Minister? Two they would through criminal actions? weeks ago, the Prime Minister was unable to answer that question. Did the Chancellor discuss the Swiss deal Mr Osborne: When we can pursue criminal prosecutions, and those past events at HSBC with Lord Green, who of course we do so, but that is a matter for was appointed as a Minister after this scandal came to prosecuting authorities. Frankly, the suggestion from light? some on the Labour Benches that the Chancellor of the It is not good enough for the Chancellor to shout and Exchequer should direct the prosecutions of our bluster, and to try and sweep these questions under the independent prosecuting authorities shows how far they carpet and claim he did not ask the questions. Since the have gone from the constitutional principles of government. Government were given the files, he has been the Chancellor We set the overall resourcing for HMRC and pass for five years. Is it not clear either that he and the Prime the tax laws, but we have independent prosecuting Minister were negligent in failing to act on the evidence authorities. The shadow Chancellor goes on about the the Government received, including about HSBC and policy, but the policy was set out by the right hon. Lord Green, or, just as with the appointment of Member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath in 2002 and Mr Coulson, that they deliberately turned a blind eye? repeated in 2005. 27 Tax Avoidance (HSBC)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Tax Avoidance (HSBC) 28

Frank Dobson (Holborn and St Pancras) (Lab): Does Ian Swales (Redcar) (LD): Does the Chancellor think the Chancellor agree that obtaining financial advantage that corporate entities that advise on tax evasion or by deception is a criminal offence even when carried out enable it to take place should themselves be subject to by bankers? Does he recognise that HSBC has 556 criminal prosecution? subsidiary companies in tax havens? We know what has happened with one of them, but when will there be an Mr Osborne: Yesterday the Chief Secretary referred inquiry into the other 555? to a policy that the Treasury has been considering for the purposes of the Budget, involving the penalties that Mr Osborne: Some very serious allegations have been should be paid by those who actively facilitate tax made about HSBC Swiss and its role in knowingly evasion. As I have said, we are considering that policy, advising people on tax evasion. Of course, our prosecuting but the hon. Gentleman will have to wait for the Budget. authorities will want to look into the matter, but the House needs to know that the information that was Mr David Winnick (Walsall North) (Lab): If the received from the French authorities under the last position is now so clear and has now been dealt with, Government—[Interruption.] This is important, and it why did the former Tory treasurer say only the other is relevant to the right hon. Gentleman’s question. The week that “everyone” was engaged in tax avoidance? He information was received as the result of a negotiation meant the rich. Is not the situation summed up very with the French authorities about what use it could be well by an American woman, Leona Helmsley, who ran put to, and the French agreement struck by the last hotels? She said—and it apparently still applies in this Government said that we could use it only for prosecuting country to a large extent— or pursuing individuals with regard to their tax affairs. “We don’t pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes.” We are currently in active discussion, which I think will That illustrates the divide between the vast majority of come to a fruitful end, to get the French to allow us to people in our country and the rich. pass some of that information to the Serious Fraud Office and other prosecuting authorities, to address the Mr Osborne: We have taken steps to deal with precisely concern that he rightly raises about the potential or the abuses to which the hon. Gentleman has alluded, alleged role of banks in the affair. such as the use of vehicles to avoid paying stamp duty, the creation of partnerships so that hedge funds do not pay the proper amounts, and the fact that foreigners did Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford) (Con): Will my right hon. not pay capital gains tax. Disguised income is another Friend explain to the House how many tax avoidance abuse that we have sought to clamp down on—and, by schemes that he inherited in 2010 he has had to close the way, the Labour party voted against our action in down? that regard. As more abuses come to light and more contrived schemes are discovered, we take action to Mr Osborne: More than 40 tax avoidance schemes or deal with them, but I have to say that we have had very loopholes have been closed. Of course, we have also little support from the Labour party. introduced an anti-avoidance and anti-abuse rule, which the Labour Government had 13 years to introduce. Steve Baker (Wycombe) (Con): When objective members Now Labour Members are saying that we should be of the public review these exchanges, they could be stiffening the penalties under that anti-abuse rule, but— forgiven for thinking that there was little to choose [Interruption.] I will tell Members who was in charge. between our parties. Will the Chancellor confirm that The shadow Chancellor was in charge for 13 years and he has instituted not just the general anti-abuse rule, but did absolutely nothing. We came in, closed the loopholes, follower notices and accelerated payments, and will he introduced the anti-abuse rule, got rid of the abuse of also confirm that our party has dealt with this issue far partnerships by hedge funds, got rid of the abuse of more robustly than the Labour party? stamp duty by the richest in our society and started collecting the tax that should have been collected Mr Osborne: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The long ago. accelerated payments scheme means that if tax is in dispute, we ask for it up front, and if people can prove Mr Mike Weir (Angus) (SNP): The revelations about that we have got it wrong, they get the money back. HSBC are just the latest in a long line of misdeeds by That is the rule with which the vast majority of our our banks, which are undermining confidence in the citizens must comply at present, but it was not complied system throughout. Too often, HMRC seems to be on with by those who were very well off. We introduced the the back foot. The Chancellor said that if it required accelerator, and as a result we are collecting hundreds more resources it would be given them. Will he commit of millions of pounds of tax that was previously not those resources to a proactive investigation of the role collected. As my hon. Friend says, that is further evidence of banks, and some of the larger accountancy firms, in of the gulf between what the Labour Government did both tax avoidance and tax evasion? during the 13 years for which the shadow Chancellor advised them, and what we have done in the last five years. Mr Osborne: The amount collected by HMRC as a result of abuse of this kind has risen from £17 billion to Helen Goodman (Bishop Auckland) (Lab): The £26 billion. That is partly because we have put additional Chancellor described the steps taken by the civil service resources into tackling tax evasion and aggressive tax before the appointment of Lord Green, but will he now avoidance. We have done a great deal. However, I am answer this question? Did he ever discuss this matter the first to say that there is more to be done, and, as I with Lord Green, and did the Prime Minister ever said in my statement, more will be done in the Budget. discuss it with Lord Green? 29 Tax Avoidance (HSBC)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Tax Avoidance (HSBC) 30

Mr Osborne: I said in my statement that the proper the Inland Revenue board— procedures had been followed for the appointment of a “may accept a money settlement instead of pursuing a criminal Minister, and that the Cabinet Secretary and the director prosecution. general for ethics in the Cabinet Office had been involved. The Board will accept a money settlement and will not pursue I am not privy to the tax affairs of any individual a criminal prosecution, if the taxpayer, in response to being given citizen, and it would be a gross abuse of our constitution a copy of this Statement by an authorised officer, makes a full if I were. Our procedures allow HMRC to talk to the and complete confession of all tax irregularities.”—[Official Report, House of Lords Appointments Commission, and it did 7 November 2002; Vol. 392, c. 784W.] so on this occasion, so those procedures were followed. That was the approach of the right hon. Member for Any Labour Members who ask questions about our Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath to tax policy. [Interruption.] appointment of Stephen Green to the post of Trade The shadow Chancellor says it was before 2000, but the Minister could be asked questions about their decision revelations were made in 2009, and the last time I to appoint him as chair of the Prime Minister’s business checked there was a Labour Government in late 2009 council, and to retain him in that post after the revelations and early 2010. that appeared in the Financial Times in 2009. Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con): Many small (Lab): Will the Chancellor finally seriously consider the businesses and taxpayers in north Yorkshire will be issue of corporate liability for the criminal actions of shocked by the time line that the Chancellor has just employees? This would mean that banks could themselves described. Will he clarify once again what the last be prosecuted. Would he like a copy of Labour’s policy Government knew and when? review on tackling serious crime and white-collar crime that I launched two years ago? I have a copy here; he Stephen Pound (Ealing North) (Lab): What a creep! can have a read of it. I suggest a change in the law.

Mr Osborne They don’t want to hear about their Mr Osborne: Unfortunately for the hon. Lady, the record in government, Mr Speaker. Every single alleged Labour party had 13 years when they had a Labour offence happened when the Labour Government were Chancellor standing at this Dispatch Box able to introduce in office. The information became publicly known when all these things she talks about. As I have said, we are the Labour Government were in office. Lord Green’s looking very seriously in the Budget at what further first public appointment was as chair of the Prime action we can take to tackle not just those who evade Minister’s business council under the Gordon Brown their taxes, but those who facilitate that evasion. Administration. The information was received from the French authorities under the last Labour Government. Jacob Rees-Mogg (North East Somerset) (Con): Does So I think the whole House—and, indeed, my hon. this question itself show the danger of eliding tax Friend’s constituents, who pay their taxes—would like avoidance and tax evasion? There is no obligation on the shadow Chancellor to get up and express a little bit anybody to pay more tax than the law requires and even of humility and contrition for the mistakes made when the most respectable families have schemes of arrangements he was in office. to minimise things like death duties, whereas tax evasion is a very serious criminal offence which should be come Mr Andrew Love (Edmonton) (Lab/Co-op): Since down on with the full force of the law. 2010 the Chancellor or Treasury Ministers have met HSBC 56 times. Was tax avoidance or tax evasion ever Mr Osborne rose— discussed at those meetings, and what was the outcome Ian Lucas (Wrexham) (Lab): That’s the Tory party! of those discussions? Mr Osborne: The hon. Gentleman says that that’s the Mr Osborne: First of all, it is not surprising that the Tory party, but, as it happens, I think my hon. Friend British Government—Conservative, coalition or Labour— the Member for North East Somerset (Jacob Rees-Mogg) would meet one of the country’s largest institutions and is referring to the newspaper accounts of the Labour banks. So that it is not a matter for surprise. I am happy leader. I am not going to get drawn into that. Of course to write to the hon. Gentleman about any details we there is a difference in law between tax avoidance and have about particular meetings. tax evasion, although the shadow Chancellor managed to mess it up in the question he put today, but I have David Mowat (Warrington South) (Con): In 2005, at said as well that aggressive tax avoidance is something the height of all of this, the then Chancellor told the we also need to clamp down on and stop, and we have CBI dinner that he supported a “light” and “limited” taken many actions to do so. approach to regulation including tax administration. What does the Chancellor think the previous Chancellor Kevin Brennan (Cardiff West) (Lab): The Chancellor meant by a “light” approach to tax administration, and said he was answering all the questions, but, as I heard can he confirm that we have cleared it up? him, he left out the second part of the question about the deal with the Swiss authorities, which was why was a Mr Osborne: Well, we have taken a much more aggressive deal signed which prevents the UK from actively obtaining approach. As a result, prosecutions are up fivefold. I similar information in the future. Will he tell our constituents have the following parliamentary answer from the then why the Government decided to do that deal? Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath (Mr Brown), and this is what he told the Mr Osborne: I can confirm that the agreement we House: have signed would not prevent us from receiving the “Where serious tax fraud has been committed, the Board”— so-called Lagarde list in exactly the way that we have 31 Tax Avoidance (HSBC)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Tax Avoidance (HSBC) 32

[Mr George Osborne] Michael Connarty (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (Lab): The Chancellor has to realise that this will not wash been doing. Also, thanks to the Prime Minister’s leadership with the general public and the tax-paying businesses in at the G8, we will now have an automatic exchange of my constituency and elsewhere, or with the companies information with Switzerland from 2017. That is one of that paid their taxes under the arrangement in Switzerland the most important steps forward in tackling tax evasion. and elsewhere when they transferred their money. The The answer is—[Interruption.] The shadow Chancellor reality is that people want a law under which people will is again not listening to the answers that he is getting not only have money taken off them but go to jail. If he across the Dispatch Box; the problem is that all his is not going to introduce such a law, he should step questions have been answered. The answer is that our aside and let another Government do it for him. agreement with Switzerland would not prevent us from receiving the Lagarde list. Mr Osborne: These abuses happened when there was a Labour Government in office. That Government, and Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD): Should we not the former Chancellor, set in place the selective prosecution design greater resilience into our tax base instead of policy. We have increased the resources and, as a result, engaging in endless games of cat and mouse with firms the number of prosecutions has gone up fivefold. There of tax advisers? is still one particular barrier, however, to the potential prosecution of HSBC Swiss if it is found to have Mr Osborne: The hon. Gentleman asks a good question. committed a crime. That barrier is the agreement signed There are two approaches. The first involves introducing by the last Government with the French Government, into our domestic law things like the general anti-abuse and we are currently in negotiations with the French rule, which is more of a catch-all and tries to anticipate Government to unravel that terrible agreement. Then, changes by accountancy firms and others who devise our independent prosecuting authorities will see whether aggressive avoidance schemes. The second approach, there are any cases to bring. which is not to be underestimated, involves the major international agreement on the automatic exchange of Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con): It has recently people’s tax information between jurisdictions such as emerged that the Gloucestershire-based business Ecotricity Switzerland and the United Kingdom. That agreement lent its founder £4 million on seriously tax-advantageous has happened only because the Prime Minister put it at terms. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there the top of the G8 agenda; no previous leader of the G8 should be an investigation into whether the transactions had done so. That is why we will have the automatic between Ecotricity and Dale Vince represent aggressive exchange of information, which will be a revolution in tax avoidance? Does he also agree that it is possible that tax transparency. Labour has not carried out appropriate due diligence on what might otherwise look like a naked attempt at a Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab): What explanation can thank-you for the £37 million of taxpayer subsidies the Chancellor give in response to comments by the given to Ecotricity’s onshore wind farm business? former tax inspector Richard Brooks that the Treasury and HMRC Mr Osborne: I am not going to discuss an individual’s tax affairs, but I would say this: the hypocrisy of the “knew that there was a mass of evidence of tax evasion at the heart of HSBC” Labour party on this issue is simply breathtaking. Labour Members complain about Conservative party donors in 2011, but that the Government and then we hear all these revelations about Labour “simply washed their hands of it”? party donors; they complain about individual accountancy firms and then it turns out that Labour collects hundreds Mr Osborne: As I have explained, HMRC received in of thousands of pounds of donations from those April 2010 the disc that had all the information on accountancy firms; and they complain about the alleged individual bank accounts. It then set about investigating tax evasion at HSBC Swiss and every single one of all those individuals and bringing those prosecutions. those offences happened when Labour was in government. We have known—[Interruption.] The shadow Chief It is time Labour Members got up and apologised. Secretary to the Treasury says that we have known this for five years. We have known for five years that there Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab): No one on the Labour was egregious tax evasion 10 years ago under the Labour Benches is complaining that the Chancellor met people Government. We have put the resources into pursuing from HSBC 56 times—we are not surprised by that. that, collecting the money and passing the international The question is: was evasion or tax avoidance discussed agreements to ensure that it never happens again in our at those meetings and what was the outcome of those country. discussions? [Interruption.]

Alec Shelbrooke (Elmet and Rothwell) (Con): Will Mr Osborne: I have already answered that question. my right hon. Friend clarify what he believes to be the [Interruption.] I have; I said it is not surprising that difference between tax avoidance and tax efficiency? Ministers meet one of the largest companies in this country, which employs close to 50,000 people in Britain Mr Osborne: As I said earlier, tax evasion is illegal. and, as I understand it, a quarter of a million people Aggressive tax avoidance is something that we are taking around the world. As I also said earlier, I am happy to enormous steps to prevent. We have passed laws and write about any of the content of those meetings, which introduced the general anti-abuse rule to ensure that we were not just with me, but across the government. are collecting a fair amount of taxation from our population. Several hon. Members rose— 33 Tax Avoidance (HSBC) 23 FEBRUARY 2015 34

Mr Speaker: Order. Twenty Back Benchers have European Council contributed to this exchange. As the House knows, my normal practice is to try to facilitate everybody, on both sides of the House, who wants to take part, but I should 4.12 pm advise the House that we are time constrained today. The Prime Minister (Mr David Cameron): With We now have a very important statement by the Prime permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement Minister, on which there will doubtless be substantial on the most recent European Council, which covered questioning, and then important matters in the Serious Ukraine, the eurozone, terrorism and extremism. Crime Bill, in which a lot of people are interested and for which, frankly, there is not adequate time. The On extremism, let me first address the case of the inadequacy of the time is down to the business managers. three British schoolgirls from east London leaving their It is not a matter for me, but I am doing my best to cope families and attempting to travel to Syria. All of us have with the situation in the interests of Back-Bench Members. been horrified by the way that British teenagers appear to have been radicalised and duped by this poisonous ideology of Islamist extremism while at home on the internet in their bedrooms. They appear to have been induced to join a terrorist group that carries out the most hideous violence, and believes that girls should be married at nine and that women should not leave the home. Their families are, understandably, heartbroken and we must do all we can to help. We should be clear that this is not just an issue for our police and border controls. Everyone has a role to play in preventing our young people being radicalised, whether that is schools, colleges, universities, families, religious leaders or local communities. That is why we have included a duty on all public bodies to prevent people being radicalised as part of our Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015. But of course stopping people travelling to join ISIL is vital. When people are known risks, whatever their age, they go on our border warnings index, and we can intervene to prevent travel and seize their passports. But what this incident has highlighted is the concerning situation where unaccompanied teenagers such as these, who are not a known risk, can board a flight to Turkey without necessarily being asked any questions by the airline. We need new arrangements with airlines to ensure that these at-risk children are properly identified and questioned, and the Home Secretary and Transport Secretary will be working with the airlines to bring this about. Whenever there are concerns, police at the border should be alerted so that they can use the new temporary passport seizure powers to stop people travelling. Secondly, given reports that one of the girls was following as many as 70 extremists online, this case underlines the importance—this was covered at the EU, too—of the work we are doing with social media companies. We have made progress with these companies, which are working with the police and Home Office to take down extremist content online, and at the EU Council we agreed to do this across the European Union. But we also need greater co-operation over contacts between extremists and those who could be radicalised. Internet companies have a social responsibility and we expect them to live up to it. Thirdly, we need to continue to press for our police and security services to have access to passenger name records for as many routes as possible in and out of Britain and we need that to happen right across the European Union. That was the subject of the most substantial discussion at the European Council as those records provide not just passenger names, but details about how tickets were bought, what credit cards and bank accounts were used and with whom people were travelling. That is vital information that helps us identify in advance when people are travelling on high-risk 35 European Council23 FEBRUARY 2015 European Council 36

[The Prime Minister] in being ready to impose ever-increasing costs on its Government if it does not take this opportunity to routes, and often helps us identify terrorists. I raised change course decisively. this matter explicitly with my Turkish counterpart in Turning to the eurozone, immediately before the December, and will continue to press to get this vital European Council started, I met the new Greek Prime information wherever we need it. Minister, Alexis Tsipras. With him, and then again at Until recently, in spite of British efforts to get this the Council, I urged all those involved to end the stand issue prioritised, discussions on these passenger name off between Greece and the eurozone over its support records in the EU had been stuck. But following the programme. We welcome the provisional agreement terrible attacks in Paris and Copenhagen, it was agreed subsequently reached last Friday evening. Britain is not at the European Council that EU legislators should in the eurozone, and we are not going to join the urgently adopt a “strong and effective”European passenger eurozone, but we do need it to work effectively. The name records directive. That was probably the most problems facing Greece and the eurozone continue to important outcome of this Council. We have to fix this pose a risk to the world economy and to our own matter. It would be absurd to have the exchange of this recovery at home. That is why we have stepped up our information between individual EU member states and eurozone contingency planning. other countries outside the EU but not among ourselves. Before the Council, I held a meeting in Downing street Most people travelling to Syria do not go there directly; with all the key senior officials to go through those they often take many different routes within the EU plans and to ensure that vital work continues apace—this before getting even to Turkey, so we badly need this crisis is not over. Protecting our economy from these information. wider risks in the eurozone also means sticking to this Government’s long-term economic plan. It is more The European Council also agreed that law enforcement important than ever that we send a clear message to the and judicial authorities must step up their information world that Britain is not going to waver on dealing with sharing and operational co-operation and that there its debts and that we retain the confidence of business—the should be greater co-operation in the fight against illicit creators of jobs and growth in our economy. We must trafficking of firearms. continue to scrap red tape, cut taxes, build world-class Turning to the situation in Ukraine, I met President skills and support exports to emerging markets. We Poroshenko before the start of the European Council must continue investing in infrastructure. Today’s figures meeting. He thanked Britain for the role we have played show that in 2014 the UK received a record level of in ensuring a robust international response at every lending from the European Investment Bank to support stage of Russia’s illegal aggression. We were the first to the infrastructure projects in our national infrastructure call for Russia to be expelled from the G8. We have been plan. I hope that the shadow Chancellor will cheer the strongest proponent of sanctions and a vital ally in when we win European money for British infrastructure— keeping the EU and the US united. President Poroshenko for the roads, the bridges and the railways we need. welcomed the diplomatic efforts that had been made Today we have the lowest inflation rate in our modern leading up to the Minsk agreements. He agreed that it history and the highest number of people in work ever. was essential to judge success not by the words people We have the biggest January surplus in our public say but by the actions they take on the ground. finances for seven years, putting us on track to meet our Let us be clear about what has happened in the borrowing target for the year. To put it simply, we have 10 days since the European Council met. Far from a great opportunity to secure the prosperity of our changing course, Russia’s totally unjustifiable and illegal nation for generations to come. We must not put that in actions in eastern Ukraine have reached a new level, jeopardy; we must seize that chance by sticking to this with the separatists’ blatant breach of the ceasefire to Government’s long-term economic plan. I commend take control of Debaltseve made possible only with the the statement to the House. supply of Russian fighters and equipment on a very large scale. It is clear what now needs to happen: the 4.20 pm ceasefire must be respected in full by both sides; heavy Edward Miliband (Doncaster North) (Lab): I thank weapons need to be drawn back, as promised; and the Prime Minister for his statement. Let me start by people must do the things to which they have signed up. expressing my deepest sympathy to the families of those All eyes should now be on Russia and the separatists. killed in Copenhagen in the dreadful terrorist attack Russia must be in no doubt that any attempts by the that has happened since the House last met. We stand separatists to expand their territory—whether towards with all of Europe against all those who seek to terrorise Mariupol or elsewhere—will be met with further significant and attack our most cherished values and who perpetrate EU and US sanctions. Russia must change course now intolerance, anti-Semitism and all other forms of prejudice. or the economic pain it endures will only increase. The European Council said that there would be action In the coming days, I will be speaking to fellow G7 to step up information sharing and co-operation with leaders to agree on how we can ensure that the Minsk our European partners to tackle terrorism. The Prime agreements do indeed bring an end to this crisis. We are Minister repeated that in his statement today, but will also looking urgently at what further support we can he tell us exactly how it will happen? He will know that provide to bolster the Organisation for Security and Labour’s Members of the European Parliament supported Co-operation in Europe mission. The International the speedy resolution of the question of the European Development Secretary is today committing an additional passenger name record, which allows information to be £15 million to support the humanitarian effort. However, shared with European countries on airline passengers. at this moment the most important thing we can do is Will he update us on the timetable for agreeing and show Russia that the EU and America remain united implementing the measure? 37 European Council23 FEBRUARY 2015 European Council 38

To counter the threat we face, we need co-operation terrorism, I think that the movement on passenger abroad and vigilance at home. I echo the Prime Minister’s name records is good news. The second thing agreed anxieties about the three schoolgirls travelling to the was about weapons. There is a particular issue with region. Does he agree that in addition to the measures weapons that have been decommissioned and turned that he has set out, we must also look again at the into model weapons, as some of those have been reconverted Prevent programme and strengthen it with a stronger to dangerous weapons and used by criminals. We need role for local communities and more action directly to more common standards across Europe to stop that challenge the warped ideology and lies that are being happening. spread, particularly through social media? I welcome what the right hon. Gentleman said about Turning to the fight against ISIL in the region and the three schoolgirls. We should do everything we can to the Council conclusions on north Africa, we were all prevent that happening in future, as I set out in my horrified by the barbaric murder in Libya of 21 Egyptian statement, and we must do what we can for those girls Coptic Christians by ISIL-linked extremists. These latest and their families. On the Prevent programme—he makes brutal acts of violence simply reinforce the importance this point regularly—I have to say that I think the of our efforts alongside our allies to counter the threat criticism that it does not do enough to help individual posed by ISIL. It was right to take action to protect communities is a little out of date. We commissioned a civilians and prevent a massacre in Benghazi in 2011. report by Lord Carlile, who is very respected in that Tragically, though, Libya now looks more and more like area, and he recommended what we are now doing, a failed state. Is the Prime Minister satisfied by the which is splitting the programme into Prevent, which is post-conflict planning and work that has been done? about de-radicalisation, and the work done through the Does he agree that for stability to be restored in Libya, Department for Communities and Local Government, the UN-led process towards establishing a transitional which is properly funded, to ensure that we encourage Government must be followed? If so, what further steps integration. All the evidence shows that the approach does he believe the UK and its allies can take to support we are taking is better than what came before, and that approach? frankly I think that we should all get behind it. On Greece, we welcome the deal agreed between the The right hon. Gentleman asked some very good Greek Government and eurozone members last week questions about the situation in Libya and about the and clearly the next few hours and days are crucial in appalling murder of the Coptic Christians on the beach ensuring its successful implementation. However, given in Libya. He asked whether I was satisfied with the that the four-month extension will run out, what does post-conflict situation, and of course I am not. What the Prime Minister think are the prospects of a long-term NATO and our allies did, as he knows, was stop a financing deal so that we do not face this crisis once murderous attempt by Gaddafi to kill his own people. again? We gave the Libyan people a chance to build a better future, and so far it is a chance that has not been taken. Finally, on Ukraine, we welcome the joint initiative We need to do more to help them in that regard. The by Chancellor Merkel and President Hollande for peace most important thing is to put together a Government in Ukraine and support fully the conclusions of the of national unity, and Jonathan Powell—someone I am Minsk agreement. As the United States has said, Russia sure he is familiar with—is working extremely hard, continues to support ongoing separatist attacks in violation with the full backing of the British Government, and of the ceasefire. It is vital that the international community with envoys from other countries, to try to put that stands ready to increase the pressure by extending economic national unity Government together. sanctions if President Putin refuses to change course. I The right hon. Gentleman asked about the prospects welcome what the Prime Minister said on this, but will for a long-term funding deal for Greece. I think that is he reassure us that if Russia fails to meet its obligations still some way away. There will have to be give and take under the terms of the Minsk agreement in the coming on both sides. At the European Council I was struck days there is an appetite in other EU countries for a not only by the gap between the parties, but by the very united position on further sanctions against Russia? strong feelings in those European countries that have President Putin must understand that he risks further taken difficult decisions and how little flexibility they isolating Russia on the world stage if he continues to appear to want to give Greece, so that is something we display belligerence and aggression in the face of need to watch very carefully. international laws and norms. The world will act. On Ukraine, I very much welcome what the right Anyone looking at the events of the past few months hon. Gentleman said about sanctions. We need to knows that we are living in incredibly challenging times demonstrate right across Europe and America that we for our security, freedom and values. In the face of are in this for the long haul and that if Russia continues those challenges, the right course for Britain is to be to destabilise an independent, sovereign country, there engaged in the world and to co-operate and lead in will be further sanctions. He asked how much enthusiasm Europe. The attacks in Paris and Copenhagen aim to and appetite there is in other European countries. Frankly, spread fear and divide our communities. They will fail. that is where we will have to work very hard, and I think They will fail because people across Europe, including that all of us with contacts in different political parties in Britain, are united in rejecting extremism. We have and Governments in Europe can help with that process. faced down these kind of threats before and will do so It was interesting that even at the European Council again. there was some attempt to prevent the next round of sanctions going ahead. Thankfully that was stopped The Prime Minister: I thank the right hon. Gentleman and the sanctions have gone ahead, along with the for his response to my statement and for his questions. naming of more individuals, but that is just a sign of Let me try to answer all of them. On the steps taken at how hard we will have to work to keep the consensus the European Council that are material to fighting together. 39 European Council23 FEBRUARY 2015 European Council 40

[The Prime Minister] Sir Richard Ottaway (Croydon South) (Con): Russia is ignoring all the rules of the international community. With regard to the right hon. Gentleman’s closing The Russians are unreliable and cannot be trusted. remarks about rejecting extremism and standing up for Does my right hon. Friend feel that the diplomatic the values of freedom and democracy that we believe in, process has been exhausted? If the answer to that is yes, and believing that ultimately those values will triumph, will he confirm that financial sanctions will be not only I absolutely agree. extended and deepened, but broadened to cover not just individuals, but the country as a whole? Several hon. Members rose— The Prime Minister: I do not think one should ever Mr Speaker: I remind the House that, in accordance say that the diplomatic process is exhausted, because it with usual practice, Members who arrived after the always makes sense to talk about these matters, but that Prime Minister started his statement should not expect has to be backed by consequences when diplomatic to be called to ask a question. I want to accommodate efforts do not work out. So yes, I agree that we need to as many Members as I can on the statement but am see more sanctions if the Russian attitude continues. keen to move on to the next business at, or as close as There is a strong case for bringing forward the renewal possible to, 5 o’clock. of the sanctions, which otherwise would happen later in the year. My right hon. Friend makes a broader point, Sir William Cash (Stone) (Con): Does my right hon. which is that if anyone thinks that this is an aberration Friend share my concern about the increasing assertiveness on the part of Russia and if only we understood a little of Germany in the EU, as shown in the language used more and listened a little bit harder it would all be fine, by Wolfgang Schaeuble regarding the Greeks, for example? we can now see that what happened in Georgia and Does he accept the assertion made by Mr Prodi on the Transnistria and what is happening in Ukraine is part “Today” programme last week that the Germans are the of a pattern, and the only language that Russia will leaders in Europe? Does he accept that we must step up understand is very tough sanctions and continued pressure to the mark and show that we will stand up for the from Europe and the US, making our economic weight interests of not only the United Kingdom, but Europe felt. as a whole, as we have in the past?

The Prime Minister: When it comes to issues about Ms Gisela Stuart (Birmingham, Edgbaston) (Lab): trade deals, single market issues and many foreign policy Can the Prime Minister update the House on whether issues, Britain plays a key and leading role, as we have progress has been made to enable OSCE observers to done over sanctions on Ukraine. On the question of have access to all parts of the eastern Ukraine? Without how the Germans behave towards Greece, that is a that, we will not get an accurate picture of what is matter for them. I know that if I were the German happening on the ground. Chancellor and I had lent another country a lot of money, I would want to get it back. I think my hon. The Prime Minister: The hon. Lady is right. Some Friend and I agree that this is one of the fundamental progress has been made. As I announced in my statement, challenges at the heart of the eurozone and is a permanent further resources will be given, but the OSCE has not reminder of why we are better off outside it. been able to get to every part of Ukraine and every part of the line of control, so the reports that it is able to give Keith Vaz (Leicester East) (Lab): Of course, Greece’s us are partial, rather than complete. As part of the problems are of its own making. However, Greece Minsk agreements it is important that it has full access. provides a vital service to the rest of the EU because it polices the external borders of the EU. Every month 7,000 illegal migrants cross the border between Turkey Alistair Burt (North East Bedfordshire) (Con): Will and Greece, and if we do not support Greece, that my right hon. Friend commend the patient work done becomes our problem in the future. On the issue of our by ambassador Michael Aron and British diplomats in borders, will the Prime Minister confirm that we will Libya, together with Bernadino Leon, the UN special have 100% exit checks by the end of March? representative, to try to make sure that Libya has the future that its people died for? Does he agree that the imminence and the extremism of the ISIL threat means The Prime Minister: On the second point first, I am that the factions in Libya now have to unite as never confident that our border exit checks will be in place by before in order to form that national Government and the end of March. That will transform the situation that be able to face off the threat that they face from the this Government inherited, where fewer than 40% of extremists? people were counted in and out. That will be totally transformed in the future. On what the Greeks, the Italians and others do to man the external frontiers of The Prime Minister: My right hon. Friend is correct. Europe, it is vital work and we should support them, as What is needed in Libya is a political coming together we do through Frontex and so on, but we need to make of the different parties. We obviously have to exclude sure that every country lives up to its obligations when those that are engaged in terrorism or violence, but we people arrive in that country. It is remarkable that when should try to bring together the other parties into a one looks at the percentage of asylum claims within national unity Government because otherwise the danger Europe that are still being heard in Germany, France or of fracture, a broken state and ungoverned space that Britain—not the first points of entry—compared to the we are seeing with the presence of ISIL will only get numbers being heard in Italy, Greece and Spain, there is worse. So I commend the efforts of our ambassadors. still a marked contrast. We need to work at this extremely hard. 41 European Council23 FEBRUARY 2015 European Council 42

Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab): I agree with the I put that in my election address back in 1997. It is not Prime Minister’s robust position on Russia. That is why my responsibility what the euro does. My argument is am so mystified that he still refuses to introduce a very simple: it is in Britain’s interest that we have Magnitsky Act to ban the people who were involved in stability and growth on the continent. That is our the murder of Sergei Magnitsky, and the people who argument; it is for the eurozone countries themselves to were engaged in the corruption that he unveiled, from work out what are the right answers for them. I am very coming to this country. The Prime Minister has written clear, and I have said this to a number of other European me a letter—five letters, in fact. The latest one says that countries, that I would not be in the eurozone in the he does not first place. “comment on individual cases, as groups of individuals.” Yet he has just stood at the Dispatch Box and announced Rory Stewart (Penrith and The Border) (Con): My new sanctions against individuals from Russia, through right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has spoken very the EU. Why cannot we do it for ourselves in this House eloquently about the arc of horror spreading from by introducing a Magnitsky Act? Libya through Ukraine, down to Yemen and South Sudan, and out to Iraq. May I encourage him to focus on the fact that in the end we do not have the solutions, The Prime Minister: Because the hon. Gentleman has because neither air strikes nor sanctions nor standard been so persistent, and because he has written me so training packages are going to deal with these problems? many letters and I have written him so many letters, I We need to invest much more heavily in the people on have had another look at whether there is a better way the ground who have a deep cultural understanding of of doing things. I think the truth is that what we do, if these places to begin to provide the options on which we there is a group of people involved in an appalling can work, and so we must invest in defence engagement. crime like this, is put them our warnings index and stop them coming to our country. The advantage is that we The Prime Minister: I would take the argument even can then be even more expansive. Of course we know further back and say that we are facing not simply a set who—[Interruption.] If the hon. Gentleman wants to of countries with broken institutions and extremism, ask a question, why does he not listen to the answer? I but an extremist Islamist movement that is occurring, would have thought that a former man of the cloth obviously, in Syria and Iraq most strongly, but also in would have better manners than that; I am trying to Libya, in Mali, and elsewhere. The fact that young girls answer his question. I am assured that we are actually can be radicalised on the internet in their bedrooms able to be more expansive. There are people we ban here in Britain and want to travel across the world to from this country who are not other countries’ Magnitsky join it demonstrates the scale of the problem we have. lists. I will write the hon. Gentleman a sixth letter and in My hon. Friend is right that this is not simply about that way try to make him happy. investing in defence capacity and the ability to take part in military action; it is about everything from de-radicalisation Mr John Redwood (Wokingham) (Con): As the euro at home all the way through to the diplomatic and area moves towards political transfer and banking union, defence engagement that he speaks about. is there a growing recognition by other EU member states that the United Kingdom will need a new relationship Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab): Last based on trade and friendship because we cannot possibly week, the Defence Secretary said that he was worried be part of that political union? about President Putin’s pressure on the Baltic states, which are in the EU and NATO, and the consequential The Prime Minister: There is a greater understanding testing of NATO that that is bringing about. Will the that as the euro deepens with the banking union and Prime Minister update the House on whether the NATO other elements—I would argue that countries will one rapid reaction force is having the desired effect, and day need greater fiscal union and burden sharing—there explain whether he thinks that Britain could do more to is an understanding, which is discussed around the EU contribute? table, that the countries that are not in the EU are going to need some guarantees of their own, because otherwise, The Prime Minister: The Defence Secretary is absolutely for instance, we will have a situation where a qualified right to refer to the unease and insecurity that the Baltic majority of EU eurozone countries are able to dictate states feel when faced with such Russian behaviour. to the rest of Europe what it can and cannot do, and When I talk to Prime Ministers from the Baltic states, that would clearly be unacceptable. There is a growing they make that point very vigorously and talk about recognition that change is required. That is why it is some of the trade embargos that Russia puts in place, right, after the election, to go into a proper renegotiation but they are also incredibly grateful for the support that and then hold an in-out referendum. Britain gives, whether through the readiness action plan we helped draw up in Wales, the 4,000 UK troops who Douglas Carswell (Clacton) (UKIP): The Prime Minister are taking part in exercises in eastern Europe this year spoke of increased contingency planning to deal with or the air policing missions that our Typhoons fly over the euro crisis. Is it still his view that the euro must be the skies of the Baltic states. Those things really matter, held together come what may, or does he have any but we should show real understanding of the insecurity sympathy with the argument that Greece might be that the Baltic states feel. better off out? Mrs Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham) (Con): The Prime Minister: My view has been consistent—it A lot has happened since the European Council and is that I do not think that Britain should join the euro, people in Ukraine are concerned that there is a real and I have been prepared to say “ever” on that basis. possibility that the unrest may spread beyond the territory 43 European Council23 FEBRUARY 2015 European Council 44

[Mrs Cheryl Gillan] only gives it legitimacy by linking it to Islam. Why not call it what Prince Turki al-Faisal of Saudi Arabia calls currently held by the pro-Russian separatists. I welcome it, namely Faesh, meaning an obscene organisation the stand taken by the Prime Minister, together with committing obscenities? other European leaders, on sanctions, but could he give a realistic estimate of how rapidly he thinks future The Prime Minister: I think there is a case for that, sanctions could be introduced, and when does he think but there has not been a tradition of calling it Daesh in Russia will finally get the message? Britain and I think people would find it difficult to know exactly what we were referring to. Some media The Prime Minister: I think the best way to answer organisations refer to it as either “ISIL” or “so-called my right hon. Friend’s question is to say that that will, Islamic State” and I think that is better than “Islamic of course, depend on what happens next in terms of the State”, because, frankly, it is not a picture of what Russian-backed separatists and Russia itself. What happened millions of people who follow the religion of Islam see in Debaltseve—after the Minsk agreement was signed— as Islam. It is also very arguable whether it is a functioning should teach a lesson to anybody who thinks that this is state, so I think that “so-called” or “self-styled Islamic going to be easily solved and that Russia will walk away. State” is better. I do not think that “Daesh” would be Frankly, if we see more behaviour like that, I think the widely understood, although people in the middle east, argument at the European Council should be about France and elsewhere use it as a term. how quickly can we renew the sanctions that we renewed later in the year anyway, and how quickly can we add to them. Certainly, that is the argument that Britain will Mr Ian Davidson (Glasgow South West) (Lab/Co-op): make, and many others will make it with us. At the end Does the Prime Minister agree that every day we should of the day, as I have said from this Dispatch Box many all give thanks for the fact that Britain did not join the times, Europe and America have to make the weight of euro? Does he agree that the eurozone and the EU seem our economic relationship pay against Russia. In the to be much tougher on Greece than they are on Russia, end, Russia needs us more than we need Russia. We and is that simply because Greece is small and Russia need to make that relationship pay and then we can get is large? it to change its approach. The Prime Minister: This issue is not really for Britain, Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North) (Lab): It is reported but between Greece and her creditors. I am happy to say that the Government have been privately discussing the that, because this Government got us out of the bail-out implications of a Greek exit from the euro. Greek exit zones, we are not one of Greece’s creditors. All I can say will happen sooner or later, and it is inevitable, in my is that I understand the passions on both sides. I can view, that other countries will follow. Has the Prime understand why German and Dutch Prime Ministers Minister discussed with his European counterparts the feel so strongly that they must get back the money they implications of such a wider collapse of the euro and, if have lent and should not take a massive loss, but I can so, what has emerged from those discussions? also understand the desire of the Greek people to see some economic growth after having seen their GDP The Prime Minister: I will be very frank about the decline 25%, so one can understand the arguments. discussions I have been having. I thought it was important Fundamentally, this is part of the problem of the design to chair some discussions here in the UK about what of the eurozone, which is why we are not in it. the consequences of Greek exit from the eurozone would be, because there is a chance that it could happen. Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): I overheard If it does happen, we would need to make sure that two constituents talking about the EU. They were discussing our banks were secure—which they are—that our businesses why the country should come out of this terrible superstate. understood what the consequences of Greek exit would One of them said, “In this country, we have created be and that we could support tourists, dual nationals more jobs than the rest of the EU added together,” and and British people who live in Greece. Those are all the other one said, “Well, it’s happening in north important questions that we should consider. Some Northamptonshire: in Kettering, unemployment has criticised me for holding those meetings, but, to be frank, fallen by more than 50%; in Wellingborough, it has I would argue that any responsible Prime Minister in fallen by more than 55%; and in Corby, it has fallen by any responsible European country should do exactly that. more than 60%.” The thing that Mrs Bone and Tom There are mixed opinions about the question whether Pursglove, the excellent Conservative candidate for Corby, a Greek exit from the eurozone would be followed by agreed on was that the long-term economic plan is other countries exiting, because the spread of bond working. Are they right? yields between Spanish, Portuguese and other bonds and Greek bonds has been very different in recent The Prime Minister: It is obviously good to bring months compared with 2011. I am clear about what my those characters together in one good story. The point I responsibility is: to encourage the eurozone countries to would make is that it is true we have created more jobs come to agreements that can get their economies to in Britain than the rest of the EU put together over the grow and the continent to stabilise, and, back at home, past four and three-quarter years, which is 1,000 jobs a to be very clear that we are ready for any eventuality, day. I would argue that the best way to go on creating including a Greek exit from the eurozone. jobs is to reform the European Union, have the renegotiation and then have a referendum, where the Rehman Chishti (Gillingham and Rainham) (Con): best outcome would be Britain remaining part of a On tackling international terrorism, calling this evil reformed European Union. I think we can get the best organisation ISIL or Islamic State—no such state exists— of both worlds. 45 European Council23 FEBRUARY 2015 European Council 46

Helen Goodman (Bishop Auckland) (Lab): One of The Prime Minister: Of course, not being in the euro the schoolgirls was lured over Twitter by another girl and not being a creditor of Greece, we do not have as from the same school who had gone to Syria just before much say as countries that have lent vast amounts of Christmas. Surely, that demonstrates to the Prime Minister money to Greece and that see that money at risk. There the weakness of his relying on a voluntary approach are areas where we can and do help. For instance, with social media firms. Will he explain why the authorities Treasury officials have helped the Greek authorities to did not keep track of the girl who had already gone to modernise their tax system, so that they actually collect Syria? tax from people who live in Greece, and those officials should do so again. The Prime Minister: That is a very difficult question. We do not have an entirely voluntary approach with Conor Burns (Bournemouth West) (Con): We appear social media companies. We passed a law through this to have emerged at a near consensus, albeit born of House, the so-called DRIPA legislation—the Data hindsight, that it is a very good thing that the United Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014—so that Kingdom is not in the eurozone. Has the Prime Minister we can enforce the extraterritoriality of our desire to see taken the time to reflect that many of those who are the data and content of communications between potential issuing dire warnings about the consequences of terrorists. We have that legal power because of the work renegotiation and trusting the British people in an we have done during this Parliament. The point I made in/out referendum are the very same people who advocated in my statement, and which I will continue to make, is our immediate membership of the single currency? Will that getting organisations such as Twitter, Facebook he undertake not to listen to them, as there is a chance and Google to help us, where possible, to combat terrorist that they are as mistaken today as they proved to be extremism voluntarily—by taking down pages with then? extremist content, and revealing to us people whom they think might be at risk of radicalisation, extremism The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend makes an important or worse—is all to the good, but when it comes to point. It was noticeable that the British Chambers of combating terrorism, we have legal remedies as well. Commerce, which is one of the biggest business organisations in Britain, far from being against a Sarah Newton (Truro and Falmouth) (Con): The renegotiation and a referendum, came out in favour of Government have made real progress in this Parliament a renegotiation and a referendum. Since we announced in raising awareness and preventing the online sexual the renegotiation and the referendum, investment from exploitation of young British people. Will my right hon. the rest of the world into Britain has not dried up and Friend commit to putting just as much effort into there has not been uncertainty; we have seen record preventing the radicalisation and recruitment of young amounts of investment from China, India and America British people into these hateful terrorist organisations? into Britain—often more than into other European countries. The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It is interesting that when we started down the Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab): Returning to the serious path of saying to internet companies that they must situation in Ukraine, the deadline of Thursday for the help us to get child pornography and disgusting child withdrawal of heavy artillery from the front line is fast sex pictures off the internet, the response was, “We’re approaching. I would be grateful if the Prime Minister not responsible for what people look for; we’re not gave his analysis of what progress is being made, told us responsible for doing anything other than supporting whether he thinks the deadline will be met and said free speech.” To be fair to those organisations, they have what plan of action he has if the deadline is not met. moved miles from that position. They have now banned something like 40,000 repulsive search terms: if people The Prime Minister: Frankly, since the signing of the plug them into their computer, they will get a nil return Minsk accords—so-called Minsk II—the progress has on them. They have done that not just in Britain, but all been very disappointing. The first thing that happened over the world. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that was the encircling, shelling and destruction of Debaltseve we now need to get them to apply the same thinking to by massive numbers of Russian rockets, tanks and guns. the problems of extremist violence and terrorism. There That tells us all we need to know about the bona fides of are some differences, but I am quite clear that if we ask the people we are dealing with. Having said that, I companies to employ some social responsibility, they commend Angela Merkel for the great diplomatic efforts, can work with us to take down even more pages than and we should still, even now, be trying to get the they do today. parties to the Minsk agreement to deliver what they said they would, including the withdrawal of the heavy weaponry. We should use this moment to say to those in Mr Andrew Love (Edmonton) (Lab/Co-op): The Prime Europe who have been less certain about Russian action Minister says that he understands the arguments on and sanctions, “Look what we are dealing with.” They both sides of the Greece-euro divide, but does he understand must recognise that it is in all our interests to stick the implications for the United Kingdom of the instability together and take a very tough approach. of a four-month negotiation? The difficulties that are being created for our economy and our ability to export make it critical that we do everything we can to resolve Andrew Stephenson (Pendle) (Con): Does the Prime the situation. He mentioned the word “encourage”. Minister agree that local communities and all public Will he tell us how he can encourage a successful bodies need to work together and make a concerted negotiation between the parties? effort to identify vulnerable young people to prevent 47 European Council23 FEBRUARY 2015 European Council 48

[Andrew Stephenson] police officer on British streets. We should pay tribute to those people and thank them for the amazing work another situation like that of the three girls who recently they do. went to Syria, which is surely every parent’s worst nightmare? Several hon. Members rose—

The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is absolutely Mr Speaker: Patience has its own reward. Mr Jim right. Anyone who watched the mother of one of the Shannon. young girls on television last night, saying that all she wanted was for her to come home, could not help but be Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): I have many friends moved by her testimony. Of course we need our police and contacts in Libya who tell me that it is awash with and border security to do everything they can to prevent firearms that are fuelling ISIL. What discussions has people from travelling in such circumstances, but we the Prime Minister had with the Libyan Government to also need schools, universities and colleges to put aside prevent access to the weapon warehouse that is Libya at concerns about cultural sensitivities and such like, and the moment? ensure that they are doing everything they can to tackle people who are at risk of radicalisation. This problem is The Prime Minister: The hon. Gentleman is right, quite similar in some ways to that of forced marriage, and the preponderance of weapons in Libya, where where people have disappeared from schools in parts of there are more weapons than there are people, is part of the country where there has not been proper advertising the problem. This goes to the problem of there being so and protection in the schools, and to the problem of many different armed militias, which in turn goes to the female genital mutilation. It is happening on an enormous problem of how to create a national Government of scale and that is why we need to take such action. unity where the militias are disarmed, and either disband or effectively become part of the armed forces or the Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab): Many people are working police and security of that country. Britain has put in a in our communities to try to prevent young people from lot of effort, including trying to train some of the becoming radicalised. I recently met a youth worker armed forces of that country to give them a central from my local Islamic centre who is concerned that the force and central state to start to enforce some order. Prevent work he is doing may come to an end at the end The state of Libya is in such chaos at the moment that it of March, and he has not heard about any future is very difficult to do that work, and the first step must funding. I support what the Prime Minister has said be a national unity Government. today, but when he next meets the Home Secretary will he ensure that organisations in our communities that Daniel Kawczynski (Shrewsbury and Atcham) (Con): are doing excellent work are given some security about We have all seen the terrible difficulties in Libya over future funding, so that they can continue doing it? many years, and there seems to be consensus that work on the national unity Government is a priority. What discussions did the Prime Minister have with fellow The Prime Minister: I will certainly look at what the European leaders about Egyptian requests that there hon. Gentleman has said, but from what I have seen, ought to be limited strikes against ISIS in Libya? particularly after announcements made in the light of Woolwich, Prevent funding has increased and the money The Prime Minister: One can understand the need to is there. As I said, we have tried to divide that money tackle ISIL directly in Libya, but with the Egyptian between the Prevent work, which includes a programme Government we must ensure that we do not try to solve of channelling people who have been radicalised away the problems of Libya by backing simply one faction from radicalisation, and a lot of community work that that could form part of a national unity Government is about integration and supporting things such as the against other factions. If we do that, we are likely to Big Iftar, and encouraging mosques and community create even more of a civil war in Libya. One of the keys centres to open themselves up and for others to come in. is to work with the Egyptians and others in the middle That has been a great success. east, and with the Americans, to try to bring everyone together—apart from, of course, those organisations Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con): Following involved in terrorism—into a national unity Government. the criticism over the weekend, does the Prime Minister agree that our intelligence and security services are Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con): I commend this doing the most amazing job in incredibly difficult times, Government for initiating the feasibility study into the and that we should pay tribute to every woman and resettlement of the Chagos islands. While we are still man working in those services? net contributors to the EU, at the next European Council will my right hon. Friend seek European development The Prime Minister: I am grateful to my hon. Friend funding to realise that resettlement of the British Indian for giving me the chance to say thank you to those Ocean Territory? people, because they are working round the clock to try to prevent plots against this country. They are having to The Prime Minister: I thank my hon. Friend for that prioritise whom they should be keeping the closest eye question—I think I am right in saying that a substantial on—they have to make those judgments all the time and number of Chagos islanders live in Crawley. This is the we cannot expect them to get it right every single time. first Government to really sit down and think about What is so remarkable is how they do get it right, and what we could do to help, which is why we commissioned even in the last three or four months they have prevented the resettlement studies. Those studies have been drawn as many as three different plots, for instance to behead a up and the National Security Council will consider 49 European Council 23 FEBRUARY 2015 50 whether further steps could be taken. My hon. Friend’s Serious Crime Bill [Lords] idea of looking at European funding is intriguing, and I will consider it and get back to him. Consideration of Bill, as amended in the Committee.

Michael Ellis (Northampton North) (Con): There Mr David Burrowes (Enfield, Southgate) (Con): On a have been disturbing reports in the past 48 hours of point of order, Mr Speaker. threats to shopping centres in London, the United States and Canada. At the European Council, did my Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): On a point right hon. Friend the Prime Minister discuss working of order, Mr Speaker. with local community leaders to help to prevent such attacks from happening in this country? Mr Speaker: Order. I am saving up the hon. Member The Prime Minister: We discussed at the European for Wellingborough (Mr Bone); it would be a pity to Council the appalling attacks in Copenhagen and Paris. waste him at this early stage of our proceedings. We will They had some similarities with the sorts of attacks put come to him for his point of order, he can be assured of forward in the video by al-Shabaab, which again have that. Before that, however, I have the following to say. some similarities with things that happened in Mumbai As the Government have not moved the programme and elsewhere, where there were a number of attackers motion, proceedings will be taken in the customary marauding with firearms and other weapons. Obviously, order on consideration: Government new clauses first, we take every such threat very seriously. The police are then other new clauses, and then amendments in the analysing that video. order they occur in the Bill. We will start as originally What I would say has already happened in Britain is envisaged, with the group on child exploitation and so that, after Mumbai and intelligence linked to Mumbai, on. We will then take the group on other issues, and we held a series of meetings and other exercises to try to then there is, for consideration, the group on abortion. make sure that we are prepared to deal with those sorts The selection list has been reissued, and the amendment of events. It is very difficult to plan, but in Britain, the paper has been reissued with the revised order. Proceedings counter-terrorism policing, the strength of our police on Report may continue until 9 pm, and Third Reading services, the number of armed police officers, the ability until 10 pm, under the earlier programme motion. of our special forces and others to come to assistance, That is what I have got to say for now, but let us hear and the work that the ambulance, the fire service and the point of order from Mr David Burrowes first. others can do in so-called “hot zones” where there are still weapons being fired all show that we have prepared, Mr Burrowes: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. As as much as we can, for the threats we undoubtedly face. the programme motion is not being moved, of which there was good notice, new clauses 1 and clause 25, Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con): As a former which deal with the important issue of gender-selective airline manager, I totally support the Prime Minister’s abortion, have effectively been shunted to the end of determination to get full access to airline passenger proceedings. I understand fully, and the House understands name records, which would be to the advantage of fully, the importance of addressing child exploitation Governments in both preventing terrorist movements and protection, and how they are integral to this very and protecting young and vulnerable UK nationals. important Bill. That needs proper debate and scrutiny. Will my right hon. Friend say how long it will take to However, gender-selective abortion is also a matter of have an EU directive that is endorsed by all member public interest. Concerns have been raised across the Governments? Would it not be faster to have something country, not least by the more than 100 Members of domestically that we could implement at our own airports Parliament who have put their name to new clause 1. fairly soon? There is a concern that, unless there is great restraint from parliamentarians in the debate, we may not even The Prime Minister: There are quite a lot of steps we get to the point of being able to move those new clauses. can take already with other countries, non-EU countries, where we can agree to the exchange of passenger name Mr Speaker, you have championed the role of the records. As I said, this is not just the names of people, Back Bencher. New clause 1 was tabled in the scintilla but details of bank accounts and how they booked the of time available between Committee and Report, and ticket, in order to find potential signals of terrorist now we run the risk of not getting to this business activity. It would be very frustrating if we could not before the end of our consideration. With respect, I agree it within the EU, but I am sure we will. What has wish to suggest a way out and to ask for your guidance, happened in Copenhagen and Paris has, I think, made Mr Speaker. According to the selection paper, after we people realise just how important it is, but a lot of it will have considered child exploitation and protection, we depend on the work being done by the European will move on to “other issues”, including investigative Parliament. powers, the publication of names, firearms offences, new psychoactive substances and money laundering measures. Could you also include under “other issues” the important other issue of gender-selective abortion? Otherwise, we will be left to rely on your customary guidance and urging of restraint across the House to ensure we get to the matter. In conclusion, we are all concerned about the esteem in which Parliament is held. I put Parliament on notice that if we do not get to the issue of gender-selective 51 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 52

[Mr Burrowes] (3) In section 48 (headed “Causing or inciting child prostitution or pornography”)— abortion, the public will hold us in disrepute, and it will (a) in the heading, for “child prostitution or pornography” be a grave day for Parliament. substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”; (b) in subsection (1)(a), for “to become a prostitute, or to Helen Goodman (Bishop Auckland) (Lab): Further to be involved in pornography,” substitute “to be sexually that point of order, Mr Speaker. exploited”. (4) In section 49 (headed “Controlling a child prostitute or a Mr Bone rose— child involved in pornography”)— (a) in the heading, for “prostitute or a child involved in Mr Speaker: We shall come to the hon. Gentleman pornography” substitute “in relation to sexual shortly—I have been saving him up, and I hope he is not exploitation”; going to disappoint me. I call Helen Goodman. (b) in subsection (1)(a), for “prostitution or involvement in pornography” substitute “sexual exploitation”. Helen Goodman: Mr Speaker, do you agree that had (5) In section 50 (headed “Arranging or facilitating child the House agreed with the Procedure Committee report prostitution or pornography”)— on this problem of Report, this problem would not have (a) in the heading, for “child prostitution or pornography” arisen this afternoon? substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”; (b) in subsection (1)(a), for “prostitution or involvement in Mr Speaker: That might well be so. I do not have the pornography” substitute “sexual exploitation”. details of that report with me, but I think it only (6) In section 51 (interpretation of sections 48 to 50)— courteous and perhaps charitable to observe that the (a) omit subsection (1); hon. Lady was for a period a distinguished ornament of (b) for subsection (2) substitute— that Committee, and it might well be that it was her own “(2) For the purposes of sections 48 to 50, a person (B) is intellectual stimulation that led to the report in question. sexually exploited if— She is too modest and self-effacing to claim the credit directly, but she might appreciate my proffering it in her (a) on at least one occasion and whether or not compelled to do so, B offers or provides sexual services to direction instead. another person in return for payment or a promise of I will come back to Mr Burrowes’ point of order, but payment to B or a third person, or not before I have heard from Mr Peter Bone. (b) an indecent image of B is recorded; and “sexual exploitation” is to be interpreted accordingly.” Mr Bone: I am interested to hear your response to (7) In section 1 of the Street Offences Act 1959 (loitering or my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, Southgate soliciting for purposes of prostitution), in subsection (1), after (Mr Burrowes), because I am also concerned about the “person” insert “aged 18 or over”.” —(Mr Buckland.) amount of time being allowed for debate, so I will leave This New Clause replaces the references to child prostitution and it like that. pornography in sections 48 to 51 of the with references to the sexual exploitation of children (without Mr Speaker: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for altering the substance of the relevant offences), and also restricts the self-denying ordinance that he has exercised. I say to adults the offence of loitering or soliciting for the purposes of two things to the hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate prostitution. (Mr Burrowes). First, I had understood that he was Brought up, and read the First time. going to ask me whether it would be in order, in the absence of a Minister moving the programme motion, 5.9 pm for him to move it, and I had intended to say that no it would not be in order for him to do so, because he is not The Solicitor-General (Mr Robert Buckland): I beg to a Minister and had not signed the motion. However, as move, That the clause be read a Second time. he did not raise the point, I will not make the point that I would have made if he had. Mr Speaker: With this it will be convenient to discuss Secondly, the hon. Gentleman inquires into the possibility the following: of eliding—if I can put it that way—consideration of Amendment (a) to new clause 8, leave out the abortion new clauses into the “other issues” group. “offers or provides sexual services to” He has raised an extremely important point, but there is and insert merit first in seeing what progress we make on the first group. I shall reflect on his point, which I take extremely “prepares to engage in, or engages in, sexual activity with”. seriously, over the next hour or so and then advise the Government new clause 9—Duty to notify police of House of my conclusion. I make him no promise, but I female genital mutilation. shall consider his suggestion very seriously. I hope that Government new clause 10—Guidance about female that is helpful. genital mutilation. New clause 2—Official Secrets Act 1989 (additional New Clause 8 defence)— ‘(1) The Official Secrets Act 1989 is amended as follows— CHILD SEXUAL EXPLOITATION (2) After section 8, insert— ‘(1) The Sexual Offences Act 2003 is amended as set out in “(8A) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence subsections (2) to (6). under any provision of this Act to prove that he knew, or had (2) For the heading before section 47 substitute “Sexual reasonable cause to believe, that the information, document or exploitation of children”. article disclosed was— 53 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 54

(a) germane to an official investigation of, or inquiry into, provide such food, clothing, medical aid or lodging, historic child abuse, and he has failed to take steps to procure it to be provided (b) provided only to an officer of such an investigation or to B. inquiry.”’ (3) A person may be convicted of an offence under this New clause 3—Child sexual exploitation— section— (a) notwithstanding that actual suffering or injury to ‘(1) In section 1(1) of the Street Offences Act 1059 (Loitering health, or the likelihood of actual suffering or injury or soliciting for purposes of prostitution), after “female)”, insert to health, was obviated by the action of another “, aged 18 or over,”. person; (2) The Sexual Offences Act 2003 is amended as follows. (b) notwithstanding the death of B. (3) In section 48 (Causing or inciting child prostitution or (4) In subsection (2)— pornography)— “parental responsibility” has the same meaning as in (a) in the title of the section, for “prostitution” substitute the Children Act 1989; “sexual exploitation”; and “relative” has the meaning given by section 63(1) of the (b) in subsection (1)(a), for “become a prostitute” Family Law Act 1996”. substitute “be sexually exploited”. New clause 15—Encouragement of Female Genital (4) In section 49 (Controlling a child prostitute or a child Mutilation Warning Notices and Orders (EWNs and involved in pornography)— EWOs)— (a) in the title of the section, for “child prostitute” substitute “sexually exploited child”; and In the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003, after section 2A (offence of Encouragement of Female Genital Mutilation) (b) in subsection (1)(a), for “prostitution” substitute insert— “sexual exploitation”. “2B Power to issue an Encouragement of Female Genital (5) In section 50 (Arranging or facilitating child prostitution Mutilation warning notice or pornography)— (1) A member of a police force not below the rank of superintendent (a) in the title of the section, for “child prostitution or (“the authorising officer”) may issue an Encouragement of Female pornography” substitute “the sexual exploitation of a Genital Mutilation warning notice (an “EWN”) under this section. child or sexual images of children”; and (2) An EWN may be issued to a person (“A”) who is aged 18 or (b) in subsection (1)(a), for “prostitution” substitute “sexual over if the authorising officer has reasonable grounds for exploitation”. believing that A has been encouraging the genital mutilation of (6) In section 51 (Sections 48 to 50: interpretation), in subsection women and girls as defined in section 1. (2), for “prostitute” substitute “sexually exploited child”; for (3) Before issuing an EWN, the authorising officer must, in “prostitution” substitute “sexual exploitation”. particular, consider any representations made by A as to the (7) References in any Act, Regulation, Order or other issuing of the EWN. legislative instrument to the sections and titles mentioned in this (4) The authorising officer must take reasonable steps to section shall be interpreted as referring to the sections and titles obtain the representations mentioned in subsection (3). as amended by this section.” (5) An EWN must prohibit A from encouraging the genital New clause 11—Child protection: 16 and 17 year olds mutilation of women and girls. living with their families— 2C Contents and service of an Encouragement of Female ‘(1) The Children’s Act 1933 is amended as follows. Genital Mutilation warning notice (2) After section 1 insert— ‘(1) An EWN must state— “1A Cruelty to a person aged sixteen or seventeen (a) the grounds on which it has been issued; (1) If any person A, who has attained the age of eighteen years (b) that a constable may arrest A without warrant if the and is personally connected to a child B aged sixteen or constable has reasonable grounds for believing that A seventeen, wilfully assaults, ill-treats (whether physically or is in breach of the EWN; psychologically), neglects, abandons, or exposes him, or causes (c) that an application for an Encouragement of Female or procures for him to be assaulted, ill-treated (whether Genital Mutilation warning order (an “EWO”) under physically or psychologically), neglected, abandoned, or exposed, section (application for an EWO) shall be heard in a manner likely to cause him unnecessary suffering or injury to within 48 hours of the time of service of the EWN health (including injury to or loss of sight, or hearing, or limb, or and notice time and place of the hearing will be given organ of the body and whether the injury is of physical or to A, and shall state that the EWN continues in effect psychological nature), that person shall be guilty of an offence, until that application has been determined. and shall be liable— (2) An EWN must be in writing and must be served on A (a) on conviction or indictment, to a fine or alternatively, personally by a constable. or in addition thereto, to imprisonment for any term (3) On serving A with an EWN, the constable must ask A for not exceeding 10 years; an address for the purposes of being given notice of the hearing (b) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £400 of the application for the Encouragement of Female Genital pounds, or alternatively, or in addition thereto, to Mutilation warning order. imprisonment not exceeding six months. 2D Breach of an Encouragement of Female Genital (2) For the purposes of this section— Mutilation warning notice (a) A and B are considered to be personally connected if ‘(1) A person arrested by virtue of section (contents and at the time of the offence they live together, and service of an EWN) for a breach of an EWN shall be held in (i) A has parental responsibility for B custody and brought before the magistrates’ court which will (ii) A is a relative of B hear the application for the EWO under (application for an EWO)— (iii) A is or has been married or civil partner to B’s parent. (a) before the end of the period of 24 hours beginning with the time of the arrest; or (b) A shall be deemed to have neglected B in a manner likely to cause injury to his health if he has failed to (b) if earlier, at the hearing of that application. provide adequate food, clothing, medical aid or (2) If the person is brought before the court by virtue of lodging for him or if, having been unable otherwise to subsection (1)(a), the court may remand the person. 55 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 56

(3) If the court adjourns the hearing of the application by 2H Further provision about remand virtue of subsection 6(8), the court may remand the person. ‘(1) This section applies for the purposes of the remand of a (4) In calculating when the period of 24 hours mentioned in person by a magistrates’ court under section (Breach of an subsection (1)(a) ends, Christmas Day, Good Friday, any Sunday EWN) or (Breach of an EWO). and any day which is a bank holiday in England and Wales under (2) In the application of section 128(6) of the Magistrates’ the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 are to be Court Act 1980 for those purposes, the reference to the “other disregarded. party” is to be read— 2E Application for an Encouragement of Female Genital Mutilation warning order (a) in the case of a remand prior to the hearing of an application for an EWO, as a reference to the authorising ‘(1) If an EWN has been issued, a constable must apply for an officer; and Encouragement of Female Genital mutilation warning order (an “EWO”). (b) in any other case, as a reference to the constable who applied for the EWO. (2) The application must be made by complaint to a magistrates’ court. (3) If the court has reason to suspect that a medical report will be required, the power to remand a person may be exercised for (3) The application must be heard by the magistrates’ court no the purpose of enabling a medical examination to take place and later than 48 hours after the EWN was served pursuant to a report to be made. section (contents and service of an EWN). (4) In calculating when the period of 48 hours mentioned in (4) If the person is remanded in custody for that purpose, the subsection (3) ends, Christmas Day, Good Friday, any Sunday adjournment may not be for more than three weeks at a time. and any day which is a bank holiday in England and Wales under (5) If the person is remanded on bail for that purpose, the the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 are to be adjournment may not be for more than four weeks at a time. disregarded. (6) If the court has reason to suspect that the person is (5) Notice of the time and place of the hearing of the suffering from a mental disorder within the meaning of the application must be given to A. Mental Health Act 1983, the court has the same power to make (6) The notice is deemed given if it has been left at the address an order under section 35 of that Act (remand to hospital for given by A under section 4(3). medical report) as it has under that section in the case of an accused person (within the meaning of that section). (7) If the notice has not been given because no address was given by A under section 4(3), the court may hear the application (7) The court may, when remanding the person on bail, require for the EWO if the court is satisfied that the constable applying the person to comply before release on bail or later, with such for the EWO has made reasonable efforts to give A the notice. requirements as appear to the court to be necessary to secure that (8) The magistrates’ court may adjourn the hearing of the the person does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise application. obstruct the course of justice. (9) If the court adjourns the hearing, the EWN continues in 2I Guidance effect until the application has been determined. ‘(1) The Secretary of State may issue guidance relating to the (10) On the hearing of an application for an EWO, section 97 exercise by a constable of functions under section (Power to issue of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 (summons to witness and an EWN). warrant for his arrest) does not apply in relation to a person for (2) A constable must have regard to any guidance issued under whose protection the EWO would be made, except where the subsection (1) when exercising a function to which the guidance person has given oral or written evidence at the hearing. relates. 2F Conditions for and contents of an Encouragement of (3) Before issuing guidance under this section, the Secretary of Female Genital Mutilation warning order (EWO) State must consult— ‘(1) The court may make an EWO if two conditions are met. (a) the Association of Chief Police Officers; (2) The first condition is that the court is satisfied on the (b) the National Crime Agency; and balance of probabilities that the conditions set out in section 3(2) are met. (c) such other persons as the Secretary of State thinks fit.” (3) The second condition is that the court is satisfied that New clause 16—Offence of encouragement of female making the EWO is necessary to protect women and girls from genital mutilation— harm as a result of the encouragement of FGM by A. ‘(1) The Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 is amended as (4) An EWO must state that a constable may arrest A without follows: warrant if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing (2) After section 2 (offence of assisting a girl to mutilate her that A is in breach of the EWO. own genitalia) insert— (5) An EWO may be in force for— “(2A) Offence of encouragement of female genital mutilation— (a) no fewer than 14 days beginning with the day on which (a) a person is guilty of an offence of encouragement of it is made; and female genital mutilation if he makes a statement that (b) up to a maximum of seven years from that date. is likely to be understood by some or all of the (6) An EWO must state the period for which it is to be in force. members of the public to whom it is published as a direct or indirect encouragement or other inducement 2G Breach of an Encouragement of Female Genital to them to mutilate the genitalia of a girl; Mutilation warning order ‘(1) A person arrested by virtue of section (conditions for and (b) A person commits an offence if— contents of an EWO) for a breach of an EWO must be held in (i) he publishes a statement to which this section custody and brought before a magistrates’ court within the applies or causes another to publish such a period of 24 hours beginning with the time of the arrest. statement; and (2) If the matter is not disposed of when the person is brought (ii) at the time he publishes it or causes it to be before the court, the court may remand the person. published, he— (3) In calculating when the period of 24 hours mentioned in (a) intends members of the public to be directly or subsection (1) ends, Christmas Day, Good Friday, any Sunday indirectly encouraged or otherwise induced by and any day which is a bank holiday in England and Wales under the statement to mutilate the genitalia of a the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 are to be disregarded. girl; or 57 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 58

(b) is reckless as to whether members of the public (2) A CAWN may be issued to a person (“A”) aged 18 years or will be directly or indirectly encouraged or over if the authorising officer has reasonable grounds for otherwise induced by the statement to mutilate believing that— the genitalia of a girl.”” (a) A has without lawful authority or reasonable excuse New clause 17—Mandatory reporting of suspected been found in the company of a child (“C”); and child abuse— (b) C is reported missing and is found on two or more occasions to be in the company of A; or ‘(1) A person commits an offence if— (c) there is reason to suspect that C‘s behaviour is, by (a) he is involved in the provision of regulated activity as reason of association with the defendant, giving defined by section 5 of the Safeguarding Vulnerable significant cause for concern. Groups Act 2006 for which he is paid; (b) he is a provider of regulated activity as defined by (3) Before issuing a CAWN, the authorising officer must, in section 6 of the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act particular, take reasonable steps to gather and consider— 2006; (a) representations made by the person with lawful authority (c) he becomes aware that a child has been harmed in forC;and connection to the regulated activity; and (b) representations made by A as to the issuing of the (d) he does not inform a relevant authority of this harm. CAWN. (2) A person does not commit an offence under this section (4) A CAWN must prohibit A from being in the company if— of C. (a) he can demonstrate he acted in the best interests of the 2B Contents and service of a child abduction warning child, or notice (b) he complied with relevant professional guidelines or ‘(1) A CAWN must state— institutional guidelines for the reporting of abuse as (a) the grounds on which it has been issued; he believed them to be, complying with institutional (b) that a constable may arrest A without warrant if the guidelines for the reporting of abuse can include constable has reasonable grounds for believing that A informing another individual with relevant safeguarding is in breach of the CAWN; responsibilities. (c) that an application for a child abduction warning order (3) In this section “harm” means conduct which amounts to under section 2D will be heard within 48 hours of the one of the following offences— time of service of the CAWN and a notice of the (a) cruelty to and neglect of children; hearing will be given to A; (b) cruelty to children/young persons; (d) that the CAWN continues in effect until that application (c) child abduction; has been determined; and (d) rape of a female child under 16; (e) the provisions that a magistrates’ court may include in a child abduction warning order (CAWO) under (e) rape of a female child under 13; sections 2D and 2E. (f) rape of a male child under 16; (2) A CAWN must be in writing and must be served on A (g) rape of a male child under 13; personally by a constable. (h) sexual assault on a male child under 13; (3) On serving A with a CAWN, the constable must ask A for (i) sexual assault on a female child under 13; an address for the purposes of being given the notice of the (j) sexual activity involving a child under 13; hearing of the application for the child abduction warning order. (k) sexual activity involving a child under 16; 2C Breach of a child abduction warning notice (l) sexual exploitation of children; ‘(1) A person arrested by virtue of section 2B(1)(b) for a breach of a CAWN must be held in custody and brought before (m) abuse of position of trust of a sexual nature; and the magistrates’ court which will hear the application for a child (n) sexual grooming. abduction warning order (CAWO) under sections 2D and 2E— (4) The Secretary of State may, by way of regulation, make (a) before the end of the period of 24 hours beginning guidance as to the interpretation of subsection (2) or amend with the time of the arrest; or subsection (3). (b) if earlier, at the hearing of that application. (5) Any regulations made under subsection (4) must be subject (2) If the person is brought before the court by virtue of to an affirmative procedure of both Houses of Parliament. subsection (1)(a), the court may remand the person. (6) In this section “relevant authority” means— (3) If the court adjourns the hearing of the application by (a) the local authority with safeguarding authorities; virtue of subsection 2D(8), the court may remand the person. (b) the local police force; and (4) In calculating when the period of 24 hours mentioned in (c) the Disclosure and Barring Service. subsection (1)(a) of this section ends, Christmas Day, Good Friday, any Sunday and any day which is a bank holiday in (7) A person guilty of an offence under this Part of this Act England and Wales under the Banking and Financial Dealings shall be liable— Act 1971 are to be disregarded. (a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term 2D Application for a child abduction warning order not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both such imprisonment ‘(1) If a CAWN has been issued, a constable must apply for a and fine; child abduction warning order (“a CAWO”). (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a (2) The application must be made by complaint to a magistrates’ term not exceeding three years.” court. New clause 19—Child abduction warning notice— (3) The application must be heard by the magistrates’ court no later than 48 hours after the CAWN was served pursuant to In the Child Abduction Act 1984, after section 2 (offence of section 2B(2). abduction of child by other person) insert— (4) In calculating when the period of 48 hours mentioned in “2A Power to issue a child abduction warning notice subsection (3) of this section ends, Christmas Day, Good Friday, (1) A member of a police force not below the rank of any Sunday and any day which is a bank holiday in England and superintendent (“the authorising officer”) may issue a child Wales under the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 are to abduction warning notice (“a CAWN”) under this section. be disregarded. 59 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 60

(5) A notice of the hearing of the application must be given (6) If the court has reason to suspect that the person is to A. suffering from a mental disorder within the meaning of the (6) The notice is deemed given if it has been left at the address Mental Health Act 1983, the court has the same power to make given by A under section 2B(3). an order under section 35 of that Act (remand to hospital for medical report) as it has under that section in the case of an (7) But if the notice has not been given because no address accused person (within the meaning of that section). was given by A under section 2B(3), the court may hear the application for the CAWO if the court is satisfied that the (7) The court may, when remanding the person on bail, require constable applying for the CAWO has made reasonable efforts to the person to comply before release on bail or later, with such give A the notice. requirements as appear to the court to be necessary to secure that the person does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise (8) The magistrates’ court may adjourn the hearing of the obstruct the course of justice. application. 2H Guidance (9) If the court adjourns the hearing, the CAWN continues in effect until the application has been determined. ‘(1) The Secretary of State may issue guidance relating to the (10) On the hearing of an application for a CAWO, section 97 exercise by a constable of functions under sections 2A to 2F. of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 (summons to witness and (2) The guidance must set out the behaviours associated with warrant for his arrest) does not apply in relation to a person for “giving significant cause for concern”, including, in particular, whose protection the CAWO would be made, except where the behaviours associated with giving cause for concern of sexual person has given oral or written evidence at the hearing. exploitation or grooming. 2E Conditions for and contents of a child abduction (3) A constable must have regard to any guidance issued under warning order subsection (1) when exercising a function to which the guidance ‘(1) The court may make a CAWO if two conditions are met. relates. (2) The first condition is that the court is satisfied on the (4) Before issuing guidance under this section, the Secretary of balance of probabilities that one or more of the criteria in State must consult— section 2A(2)(a)-(c) are satisfied. (a) the Association of Chief Police Officers; (3) The second condition is that the court thinks that making the CAWO is necessary to protect C from harm as a result of (b) the National Crime Agency; and association with A. (c) such other persons as the Secretary of State thinks (4) A CAWO must state that a constable may arrest A without fit.”” warrant if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing A is This amendment establishes child abduction warning notices in breach of the CAWO. (CAWNs) on a statutory basis, addressing concerns raised in the (5) A CAWO may be in force for— House of Lords on the issue, by introducing a two-stage process providing judicial oversight, without compromising the ability of (a) no fewer than 14 days beginning with the day on which the police to issue a CAWN without delay. The proposed process is it is made; and similar to that in place for Domestic Violence Prevention (b) until the date of the 16th birthday of C. Notices/Domestic Violence Prevention Orders (DVPN/DVPO). (6) A CAWO must state the period for which it is to be in force. New clause 22—Offence of child exploitation— 2F Breach of a child abduction warning order ‘(1) A person commits an offence if they exploit a child. ‘(1) A person arrested by virtue of section 2E(4) for a breach (2) A child may be in a situation of exploitation whether or of a CAWO must be held in custody and brought before a not— magistrates’ court within the period of 24 hours beginning with the time of the arrest. (a) escape from the situation is practically possible for the (2) If the matter is not disposed of when the person is brought child; or before the court, the court may remand the person. (b) the child has attempted to escape from the situation. (3) In calculating when the period of 24 hours mentioned in (3) The consent or apparent consent of the child to the subsection (1) ends, Christmas Day, Good Friday, any Sunday exploitation is irrelevant. and any day which is a bank holiday in England and Wales under the Banking and Financial. Dealings Act 1971 are to be (4) “Child Exploitation” includes but is not limited to, the disregarded. exploitation of the prostitute of others or other forms of sexual exploitation; the exploitation of labour or services including 2G Further provision about remand begging or practices similar to slavery, servitude or forced or ‘(1) This section applies for the purposes of the remand of a compulsory labour; the exploitation of or for criminal activities person by a magistrates’ court under section 2C(2) or (3) or including benefit fraud; the removal of organs; forced or servile 2F(2). marriage or enforced surrogacy; exploitation for unlawful (2) In the application of section 128(6) of the Magistrates’ adoption; and exploitation by enforced drugs smuggling, Court Act 1980 for those purposes, the reference to the “other manufacture, production or distribution. party” is to be read— (5) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable— (a) in the case of a remand prior to the hearing of an (a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term application for a CAWO, as a reference to the not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the authorising officer; and statutory maximum or both; (b) in any other case, as a reference to the constable who applied for the CAWO. (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years.” (3) If the court has reason to suspect that a medical report will be required, the power to remand a person may be exercised for New clause 26—Automatic Special Measures: controlling the purpose of enabling a medical examination to take place and or coercive behaviour cases— a report to be made. The Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 is (4) If the person is remanded in custody for that purpose, the amended as follows— adjournment may not be for more than three weeks at a time. In section 17, after “offence” insert “an offence of controlling (5) If the person is remanded on bail for that purpose, the or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family setting contrary to adjournment may not be for more than four weeks at a time. section 73 of the Serious Crime Act 2015.”” 61 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 62

New clause 27—Offence of abduction of child by other anachronistic references to “child prostitute” and “child person— prostitution” in the Sexual Offences Act 2003, the new ‘(1) In section 2 of the Child Abduction Act 1984, after clause will remove references to “child pornography”, subsection (1), insert— to which similar considerations apply. “(1A) Subject to subsection (3)(a)-(c), a person, other than one mentioned in subsection (2), commits an offence if, without Ann Coffey (Stockport) (Lab): I thank the Solicitor- lawful authority or reasonable excuse, he takes or detains a child General and the Government for tabling new clause 8. between the ages of sixteen and eighteen— It will make a big difference to the language we use (a) so as to remove him from the lawful control of any when talking about children who are sexually exploited. person having lawful control of the child; or I know that victims of child exploitation are pleased (b) so as to keep him out of the lawful control of any that the new clause has been introduced, so I thank the person entitled to lawful control of the child.” Government on their behalf as well. (2) In section 2(3) of the Child Abduction Act 1984, for paragraph (b) substitute— The Solicitor-General: I am extremely grateful to the “(b) that, at the time of the alleged offence under subsection hon. Lady, and I pay tribute to her for the work that she 2(1), he believed that the child had attained the age of has done, most recently in the report that she prepared sixteen, about child sexual exploitation in Greater Manchester. (bA) that, at the time of the alleged offence under New clause 9 will require persons working in regulated subsection 2(2), he believed the child had attained the professions to notify the police if they discover in the age of eighteen,”” course of their work that an act of female genital Amendment 20, in clause 72, page 63, line 27, leave mutilation appears to have been carried out on a girl out “the” and insert “a risk of”. under the age of 18. The new duty will help to ensure Amendment 21, in clause 73, page 78, line 22, leave out that professionals are clear about their responsibilities “he or she was acting” when they encounter cases of FGM in under-18s, and that those cases are reported to the police, thereby and insert supporting investigations. “their behaviour was necessary in order to act, and”. The consultation on what a mandatory reporting Amendment 22, page 78, line 23, in clause 73, at end duty should look like closed on 12 January, and we insert— received nearly 150 responses, including from health “(aa) a reasonable person in possession of the same information care professionals, education professionals, the police, would think that A’s behaviour was necessary in order charities and members of the public. We have considered to act in B’s best interests.” those responses carefully, which is reflected in our approach Government amendments 2 to 10. to the new clause. Amendment 33, in schedule 4, page 117, line 15, at The new duty will require regulated health and social end insert— care professionals and teachers in England and Wales “59A In Schedule 2 of that Act (sexual offences to which to report known cases of FGM to the police. Depending provisions about extra territoriality application apply) in on the specifics of the case, a report to the police will paragraph 1(d), insert— not necessarily trigger a criminal investigation immediately. “(iii) section 68 (possession of paedophile manual) of When a report is made, the police will work with the the Serious Crime Act 2015.”” relevant agencies to determine the most appropriate Provisions in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 enable certain child course of action, which may include referral to medical abuse offences committed outside the UK to be prosecuted in experts for diagnosis of whether FGM has taken place. England and Wales in some circumstances. This amendment That is important, because we want to reassure those enables these extra-territorial provisions to apply to the new involved in the detection and exposure of this appalling offence of possession of any item that contains advice or guidance child abuse that although prosecution and criminal about abusing children sexually contained in Clause 68 of this Bill. investigation are important, they are not the only means Government amendments 11 to 19. that we have to deal with this scourge.

The Solicitor-General: I am conscious that a number Sir William Cash (Stone) (Con): My hon. and learned of right hon. and hon. Members wish to speak, so I will Friend will understand that new clause 9 deals only keep my opening remarks as brief as possible. I am with circumstances in which FGM appears to have been doubly conscious of the need to ensure that, as has been carried out, not with those in which there is a risk of it mentioned, we have meaningful debates on other groups being carried out, to which I shall refer later. of amendments. New clause 8 responds to the compelling case made The Solicitor-General: I look forward to my hon. in Committee by the hon. Member for Stockport (Ann Friend’s contribution and will respond appropriately Coffey), to whom I am grateful, that we should remove when I have heard his full argument. from the statute book references to the phrase “child We recognise that some individuals captured by the prostitution” and limit the scope of the offence of new duty may be less likely than others to encounter loitering or soliciting for the purposes of prostitution, cases of FGM. The duty will apply only to cases so that it applies only to adults. As I made clear in identified in the course of an individual’s professional Committee, children who are sexually exploited, whether duties. There will be no new requirement for professionals for financial gain or other reasons, should not be referred to look for visual evidence, and we do not expect them to as prostitutes. They should be regarded as victims. to do so. New clause 8 will have substantially the same effect Where professionals fail to comply with the duty, it as the hon. Lady’s new clause 3, and in one important will be dealt with in accordance with existing disciplinary respect it goes even further. As well as replacing the procedures. That is in line with the approach favoured 63 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 64

[The Solicitor-General] it far more relevant to an offence of communication, given that communications no longer respect national by the vast majority of respondents to the consultation borders, but can take place throughout the world through and will ensure that appropriate sanctions are imposed the internet and social media. in accordance with the circumstances of an individual I was explaining the context in which we considered case. The Government expect employers and the the issue of extraterritorial jurisdiction. It was in the professional regulators to pay due regard to the seriousness light of speeches made by my hon. Friend the Member of breaches of the new duty. for Mole Valley (Sir Paul Beresford) and the hon. New clause 10 will confer on the Secretary of State a Member for Feltham and Heston () power to issue guidance on FGM to relevant individuals that we reconsidered the issue, and concluded that it in England and Wales, and will require them to have should be extended to the offence of sexual communication. regard to it. That guidance will take the form of updated Amendment 10 gives effect to that. multi-agency guidelines, which will explicitly capture I hope that the House will welcome these important good safeguarding practice, including for non-regulated amendments. I look forward to hearing from other practitioners. In addition, the existing frameworks for Members who have tabled amendments in this group, the purpose of dealing with child abuse will, of course, and I will respond to them as best I can when I wind up continue to support appropriate safeguarding responses. the debate.

5.15 pm Sir Edward Garnier (Harborough) (Con): During our We know that, in the past, some professionals feared debates on the Bill, I have been drawing to Ministers’ that addressing certain harmful cultural practices would attention the exploitation of adults—not elderly adults result in their being labelled politically insensitive. We who cannot help themselves through old age, but young also want to increase the number of referrals to the adults—by quacks and bogus counsellors. I rather hoped police to support investigations of FGM, in order to that the Solicitor-General and other members of the deter perpetrators and thus prevent this appalling crime Government would address that issue. I see that the from being committed in the first place. We believe that, Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, together with the Government’s wider work to tackle my hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire Moorlands FGM and alongside the introduction of statutory multi- (Karen Bradley), is present. She has experienced the agency guidelines on FGM, the new mandatory reporting distinct displeasure of having to listen to me going on duty will allow those changes to happen. about this, but I will continue to go on about it until a decision is made. Will the Solicitor-General update me Sir William Cash: I wish only to repeat, in a sense, on the Government’s thinking about the exploitation of what I have already said, namely that this measure will vulnerable adults who are brainwashed by those quacks not, in itself, deal with the problem of girls who are at and bogus counsellors to their emotional, psychological risk. and financial disadvantage?

The Solicitor-General: My hon. Friend has made his The Solicitor-General: I understand that the Government point again. We may well have to differ on the issue of are still considering that issue. The definition of “vulnerable” the threshold with which his amendment deals, but I may, of course, be something of a vexed question. It has will outline my arguments when I have heard all that he tended to apply to adults with learning difficulties, but I has to say. understand my hon. and learned Friend to be referring Amendment 10 relates to the new offence of sexual to it in the wider context in which people are brainwashed communication with a child, which was added to the or duped by cults and other organisations. It is not a Bill in Committee. While there was cross-party support straightforward issue, as I know he understands, but the for the new offence in Committee, there was some Government are giving consideration to it, so I am debate about whether it should be possible for a prosecution grateful to him for raising it. to be mounted in England and Wales in respect of With those remarks, I will draw my speech to a close. conduct engaged in abroad—that is, whether such conduct should be subject to extraterritorial jurisdiction. Mr Speaker: Well, I will not say the occurrence was Sir Paul Beresford (Mole Valley) (Con): Below unprecedented, but a lawyer finishing his speech earlier amendment 10—which, obviously, I support—on the than expected is certainly a rarity. amendment paper is my amendment 33. My hon. and learned Friend will recall the discussion that we had in (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab): I Committee. My amendment contains essentially the am very well aware of the pressure in respect of today’s same wording as before, applying extraterritorial jurisdiction business, and I know that many right hon. and hon. to the paedophile manual. Will he comment on that Members have signed amendments that they want to now? debate later. I will of course attempt to keep my remarks as succinct as possible, but we are dealing with a very The Solicitor-General: I thank my hon. Friend for the wide-ranging group of amendments on child protection work that he has done in ensuring that extraterritorial issues, ranging from FGM to mandatory reporting to a jurisdiction has been applied to a range of sexual offences. new offence of child exploitation, so I do not think I In a nutshell, our view is that the case for applying will be able to match the Minister’s brevity in setting out extraterritorial jurisdiction to the possession of paedophile the Government amendments. I will do my best, but it is manuals has not been made out. We do not expect it to important to recognise that this is an important grouping be generally applicable to that type of offence. We think that needs to be fully debated. 65 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 66

I shall deal first with Government new clause 8 and with drugs or alcohol. We should recognise that those Labour amendment (a), new clause 3 tabled by my hon. are all forms of child sexual exploitation. However, the Friend the Member for Stockport (Ann Coffey), and Government’s approach is to have an offence of child new clause 22, dealing with a new offence of child sexual exploitation involving payment or photography. exploitation and tabled by the Labour Front Bench. I Other forms of exploitation not covered by that specific certainly welcome what the Government are trying to offence would therefore need to be prosecuted under do with new clause 8, and I pay tribute to my hon. section 14 of the Sexual Offences Act for the general Friend for her work on this issue which has led to it offence of arranging or facilitating commission of a going high up the agenda. Her report on child sexual child sex offence. That is a complicated offence to exploitation highlighted the particular issue that children establish, however, because it relies on proving the and young adults were being ignored or seen as the commission of another sexual offence under the terms problem or even the instigator, when the truth was that of the Act. In 2012, the latest year for which I have they were being abused. One of the recommendations managed to find figures, there were just 32 convictions of the report was that our legislation needed to reflect for that particular offence, and there have been only the vulnerabilities of children and the fact that children 130 convictions in five years. There is therefore a problem cannot consent to being abused. A proposed step towards with the legislation: it is not working as effectively as we achieving this was to remove the terms “child prostitute” would all like it to. or “child pornography” from legislation to demonstrate That is why the Opposition have tabled new clause 22, that any children taking part in these sexual acts were which would create a specific offence of child exploitation not instigators and consenting participants, but were for the first time. There has been a lot of comment being abused. I am very pleased that my hon. Friend is about such an offence being put on the statute book. I in her place, and she has already paid tribute to the have heard people saying that it could criminalise a Minister for tabling the new clause. It is very helpful, parent for getting their teenage son or daughter to do but I want to highlight some issues relating to it, which the washing up, for example, because that could count is why I have tabled amendment (a). as child exploitation. However, the country’s leading In particular, I have concerns about the definition of expert in this area, Peter Carter QC, says that to use child sexual exploitation, which is defined by new clause 8 that kind of argument is to as a situation where a child “miss the significance of the word ‘exploitation’”. “offers or provides sexual services” The exploitation of children is, in and of itself, a to an adult. Let us be clear: this is about abused children. serious matter that should be recognised in legislation. It is about a child being abused. They are not providing New clause 22 covers all forms of exploitation, from sexual services to adults; they are being abused and children being forced into begging or into working on exploited, and our legislation should reflect the real cannabis farms to young girls being controlled by men nature of that relationship. Indeed, the purpose of the and forced to submit to their sexual advances and new clause is to ensure that the legislation reflects the abuse. It recognises that exploitation involves a wide fact that those subject to exploitation are victims, not spectrum, and the sentencing guidelines would reflect instigators. I do not think moving from the term “child the fact that some forms of exploitation are more prostitute” to children as providers of sexual services is serious than others. Crucially, it would recognise that correct, and amendment (a) would correct that by moving the exploitation of children is an offence in and of itself. to a definition of child sexual exploitation where a child engages in sexual activity with an adult. We would move The new clause is about asserting the right of the away from the concept of the child as the provider or child to a life free from exploitation. It is about saying instigator of sexual activity. The term “sexual activity” that we will not accept the exploitation of children, just is used extensively in the Sexual Offences Act 2003, so as we will not accept their abuse or their neglect. It adopting amendment (a) would mean we have consistent would address some of the many problems that are and well-established terminology which will make legislation preventing prosecutions under the Sexual Offences Act easier to apply. I hope the Minister will reflect on that by moving from a situation in which we look at the and consider this amendment. commission of individual offences to one in which we I would also like to raise with the Minister the wider look at people who control, manipulate and coerce consequences of new clause 8 in improving our children for their own ends. It would allow the police to understanding of child sexual exploitation and our step in where they could see an adult using controlling response to it. and coercive behaviour towards a vulnerable child, forcing them into situations involving sexual abuse, drugs, crime We will now have an offence of child sexual exploitation or forced labour. that will cover situations of child exploitation involving payment or photography, but those are just some of the Many prosecutions focus on particular criminal incidents, examples of exploitation. I also have real concerns such as rape or sexual assault, but for victims of sexual about the ancillary offences under sections 48 to 50 of exploitation, such incidents might be difficult to separate the Sexual Offences Act 2003. We will now have offences from the multiple assaults that they have endured. Such of arranging or facilitating sexual exploitation of a prosecutions might not give a true representation of the child, of controlling a child in relation to sexual exploitation abuse that had been suffered. One young person has and of causing or inciting sexual exploitation of a child, said: but none of those offences covers all child sexual “I was pressurised to go to court. There needs to be a sexual exploitation. They provide only for child sexual exploitation exploitation law. My charge was for rape, this was the wrong involving payment or photography. charge. So many times it happened.” I want to put to the Minister the example of a Cases often do not get prosecuted because the young scenario in which control is exerted through threats, person is considered an unreliable witness. That could intimidation or coercion, or in which a child is plied be because she was returning to perpetrators and found 67 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 68

[Diana Johnson] take action after the fact; we need to focus our efforts on prevention, which is why we need to work to tackle it difficult to break the contact with them. So practitioners some of the long-standing cultural context within which say that the effects of exploitation as a result of duration FGM takes place. of relationships, coercion and controlling behaviour are like the Stockholm syndrome, with which we are all Sir William Cash: Does the hon. Lady agree that it is familiar, but that is not being recognised in the current essential to ensure that girls at risk are also protected? drafting of offences, because they all focus on separate counts of rape or sexual assault. Diana Johnson: I absolutely agree with the hon. Separate exploitation offences with a focus on children Gentleman on that point. Research undertaken by Dexter will also enable the prosecution of cases where current Dias QC with survivors of FGM from around the legislation does not offer equal protection to all children country highlighted the need for measures to tackle the under the age of 18. For example, the Sexual Offences encouragement of FGM, whereby parents can be put Act 2003 establishes the age of consent as 16, and under extreme pressure to cut their girls. Not only are children aged 16 and 17 are afforded the additional parents told that their daughters will never get married, protection of the Act only if the person who commits but whole families can be ostracised and isolated as the sexual offence is a person in a position of trust in unclean. We need to support those seeking to change relation to them. Yet those in that age group are likely the culture in affected communities that they are part of to be victims of sexual exploitation. The Office of the and send out the message that this practice is against Children’s Commissioner for England report on sexual the law. That is why Labour has proposed adding a new exploitation by groups and gangs estimated that out of offence of the encouragement of FGM to this Bill. As I 16,500 children and young people who are experiencing say, it was tabled in Committee and we feel it is important or are at risk of child sexual exploitation 28% were aged that we have brought it back today. 16 and 16% were aged 17. David T. C. Davies (Monmouth) (Con): I agree with 5.30 pm what the hon. Lady is saying. Does she agree that, over Our approach would also enable prosecutions in respect the long term, one problem we have had is that we have of those children exploited in the course of human spent too much time listening to the self-appointed trafficking. Over the past two years, the police have “leaders” of minority groups and not listening to the identified more than 1,000 child victims of human women within those groups, who are often treated very trafficking, but when I asked the Government how unfairly by their so-called “leaders”? many prosecutions there have been they could not identify a single case where the victim was a child. The total Diana Johnson: I entirely agree that we need to listen number of prosecutions for all the human trafficking to young women, mothers and families, which is why it offences collated together was just 41 last year, so it has been so important that, over the past few years, should not have been hard to see whether any involved young women have felt strong enough to come forward children. Children often do not understand what is and champion the cause for themselves. happening to them when they are trafficked. They might not be able to identify who their traffickers were The Bill includes a number of vital measures, such as or the links between the trafficker and the exploitation. the FGM protection orders, a new offence of failing to That is why a huge coalition of charities and eminent protect a girl from FGM and anonymity of survivors lawyers support a specific child exploitation offence. for life. We welcome those measures and give them our Let me now deal with the amendments relating to full support. However, although they address the matter female genital mutilation. New clauses 16 and 15 propose of ways to respond when a girl is at immediate risk of a new offence of encouragement of FGM, and being cut or has been cut, they do not go far enough in encouragement warning notices and orders. The Labour helping to prevent the crime of FGM in the first place. Front-Bench team proposed these new clauses in The new offence would, for the first time, give parents Committee, ably led by my hon. Friend the Member for and girls the opportunity in law to challenge the public Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra). I am proposing encouragement of FGM. It has a stronger preventative them again on Report because of the importance of this effect than any other measure in the Bill, and it seeks to offence. Clearly, all Members want to end the practice change the culture and break the cycle. of FGM, and we want to do so within a generation. The The measures currently on the statute book are not measures already in the Bill, although important, are working. Thousands of girls in the UK are at risk, yet, largely reactive—the new offence of encouraging FGM since FGM was made a crime 30 years ago, there have is a preventive measure in the strongest sense. only ever been two prosecutions and no convictions. On 6 February, we had the international day for zero Our proposals will criminalise every published statement tolerance of FGM and there were renewed calls for or speech encouraging FGM, and will allow the police nations to do all they can to end FGM. Like colleagues to issue encouragement warning notices and to follow on both sides of the House, we have been meeting and up with encouragement warning orders, the breach of working with amazing young women in Britain who are which would be a criminal offence. This would be a leading the calls for change in the UK. We have not only proportionate response and would send out a message a moral duty, but a legal duty to end FGM under of zero tolerance of such violence against girls. It is international law. The practice can have devastating precisely the message that we need to send, as it makes a health impacts for girls, leading to a range of problems, clear statement that there is no cultural excuse for including urinary infections, a lifetime of pain and even violence against women and girls. I hope the Minister infertility. It is not enough simply to react to FGM—to will feel able to respond positively to those amendments. 69 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 70

New clause 2 was tabled by my hon. Friend the Front Bench to think again. Obviously, we cannot start Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) along with many the consultation during the period of purdah, but it other right hon. and hon. Members. I pay tribute to my will start immediately after the general election, as I hon. Friend for his work, for pursuing child abuse cases understand it. and for ensuring that the perpetrators are brought to justice. Labour Front-Bench Members are entirely Diana Johnson: It is disappointing that we have not sympathetic to his approach, and we think that it is been able to have that period of consultation, because absolutely the right thing to do. Perhaps the Minister the question of mandatory reporting has been around could comment on that new clause in his closing remarks, for considerably longer than the Serious Crime Bill. It and I hope that the Government will feel able to support has been raised by the shadow Home Secretary a number my hon. Friend. If they feel that the wording needs to of times over the past couple of years. It is a shame that be tidied up so that it flows a little better, there is an we are in the position we are in today, because we could opportunity to do that when the Bill returns to the have moved on the issue earlier. other place. New clause 11, which was tabled by the right hon. Let me move on to new clause 19, for which I pay Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd (Mr Llwyd), relates tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for to the protection that should be offered to 16 and (Sarah Champion). Those on the Labour Front Bench 17-year-olds. The Children’s Society has provided an are supporting her amendment, which will introduce informative brief about why 16 and 17-year-olds need child abduction warning orders, and I am sure that my that additional protection. Briefly, it recognises that hon. Friend will speak with great knowledge and passion 16 and 17-year-olds in other parts of the world have about the subject. I know that her experiences as a protections that we do not have in this country, which is constituency MP have shaped her view of the changes why we support the measure. she wants to see in the Bill. I will not go into the details of the new clause, but I hope that we will have an New clause 17 relates to mandatory reporting. We opportunity to test the opinion of the House on this as will be moving to a vote on this matter. An amendment it would give law enforcement an important tool for was moved in Committee, which dealt with a consultation tackling some of the exploitative actions of certain on mandatory reporting. We listened very carefully to members of our communities towards young people. what was said and feel that our new clause deals with some of the issues that the Government were concerned New clause 26 sets out special measures for victims of about, and we hope that they will support it today. sexual offences in recognition of the fact that they will almost certainly be afraid and distressed at the prospect of giving evidence in court. In particular, someone who Mrs Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham) (Con): has been subjected to domestic coercive control intended The hon. Lady may know that I have, in the past, to reduce their self-esteem and make them a virtual spoken up on behalf of Mandate Now and my constituent prisoner of the defendant will inevitably suffer fear and Mr Tom Perry. I am very keen on mandatory reporting, distress at the prospect of giving evidence about it and but having looked carefully at the proposed new clause, coming face to face with the defendant in a public I have found that under subsection (2)(a), she is permitting court. There can be no doubt that had the offences of undefined circumstances as a reason not to refer an coercive control existed at the time of the Youth Justice incident for independent assessment. In the view of and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, which the new clause Mandate Now, and in my opinion, that completely would amend, the authors would have included this undermines the concept of mandatory reporting. She provision. may be pressing the new clause to a vote, but those of us who believe in mandatory reporting will not be able The new clause is practical. Unless a complainant support it because it is badly flawed, and looks, I am can be given a guarantee from the start that they will afraid, like a rehash of some old wording. not have to give evidence face to face with the perpetrator, they might not have the confidence to proceed. If the best that can be said by others is that at some future Diana Johnson: I am sorry that the right hon. Lady stage they will ask a judge to grant special measures, feels that. Mandatory reporting is clearly complicated that might not reassure a vulnerable victim enough, and this is quite a technical area. We have proposed the which might be the difference between supporting a new clause on the basis of the best advice we have prosecution and getting a conviction and not doing so. received about how to do this, alongside advice and There is a public interest in prosecutions for this type of guidance from some of the children’s charities, and we offence as perpetrators of domestic abuse are often recognise that this is a difficult area. I am sorry that the serial offenders and other potential victims need to be right hon. Lady does not feel able to support us, but I protected, but a victim should automatically be entitled hope that those on the Government Front Bench will to protection in their own right. reconsider their view on mandatory reporting. We feel that it is a positive step that should be taken forward. Finally, Government amendment 10 builds on the work done by the hon. Member for Mole Valley (Sir Mrs Gillan: It is important that we take this seriously, Paul Beresford) over a number of years. The extraterritorial and having dealt with my constituent and these issues nature of the offence was mentioned in Committee and for some time I agree with the hon. Lady that mandatory I am pleased that the Government have moved on this. I reporting is essential. As I understand it, the Government pay tribute to the hon. Gentleman for the work he has will have a consultation on the process so that we get it carried out over many years in the House to improve absolutely right so it is a shame to force a vote tonight protection for children. on something that is flawed and that does not do the job. I ask the hon. Lady and her colleagues on the Several hon. Members rose— 71 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 72

Mr Speaker: Order. There is much interest in these The Bill currently does not state explicitly, despite the important matters and some sensitivity about subsequent intention that it should do so, that the order may be groupings. Therefore, if colleagues while of course applied for and/or granted in the event of a risk that a expounding with characteristic eloquence can do so genital mutilation offence may be committed. Although with exemplary brevity, that will be received heartily in some are arguing that there could be some difficulty the House. interpreting the words in relation to forced marriage orders, the fact is that it is apples and pears. 5.45 pm When we are dealing with forced marriage, we are dealing with people who are much older and with Sir William Cash: I am extremely glad that we have different circumstances. We are not dealing with five this opportunity to discuss FGM and wish to thank and six-year-old children who do not know what is those who have made the discussion happen. I have being done to them. The horror and brutality of FGM corresponded with the Home Secretary, the Secretaries must be dealt with. We cannot simply deal with the of State for Justice and for International Development circumstances by analogy, as has been suggested to me and the Leader of the House and met them to discuss by some technical advisers and lawyers. I am a lawyer all the matters to which I am about to refer. We have myself; I was shadow Attorney-General. I do not also had advice from some very capable and senior misunderstand the nature of questions of interpretation. barristers. Sir Keir Starmer, the former Director of We have to tailor the circumstances to the problem that Public Prosecutions, completely supports what I am we are faced with. We are faced with a massive problem about to say, as does Aileen McColgan of chambers. so it is essential that we deal with it. These matters have been pushed forward by the not-for- Some have said that guidance would be sufficient. profit organisation Justice for FGM Victims, and I The guidance, which everybody in the House can look would like to pay tribute to Sarita Bingeman for her at, does not deal with the specific problem of those at work on this over many months. risk. As I said, on the issue of notifying the police, that Amendment 20, which stands in my name, is simple would apply only where the mutilation had already and incredibly short—all it would do is leave out “the” taken place. These are small girls. The practice cannot and insert “a risk of”. As I have said repeatedly in be allowed to carry on. We must do something about it. interventions, it is not good enough simply to rely on If I may suggest it, everybody should vote with me on the fact that the act of female genital mutilation has this issue, including the Government. I ask the Opposition been carried out, for example when notifying the police to be good enough to vote with me as well. or dealing with guidance, which is quite vague and is Let me give an example. On 3 April 2014 the Department not specific enough to deal with the problem of girls for Education published updated statutory guidance on being at risk. safeguarding. It was called “Keeping children safe in I will briefly give the House some figures. About a education”. The guidance tells teachers how to identify decade ago the number of girls and women in England girls who are at risk or who have suffered FGM. It was and Wales who had undergone FGM was approximately e-mailed to every school in the country and on the same 66,000. Shockingly, that figure is now estimated to be day a letter from the Secretary of State was e-mailed 137,000. Equally worrying is the number of girls in to all head teachers, drawing their attention to the England and Wales under the age of 15 who are at risk guidance. The letter was e-mailed to 31,660 addressees of FGM, which over the same period has increased in 25,000 schools. As at 30 April only 43% of recipients from about 20,000 to an estimated 60,000. I am talking had opened the e-mail, and only 30% of recipients had about 60,000 girls under the age of 15 who are at risk. clicked through to the guidance on safeguarding. That That rise is further demonstrated by official figures is why the legislation is needed. recorded since the new reporting system was introduced Further statistics for each London borough show by hospitals in the UK last year. They show that 2,269 that the response rate was significantly worse in some girls and women who had undergone FGM were treated areas, including some where large numbers of girls were in hospitals in November 2014 alone, and of those 466 from communities that had traditionally practised were newly identified cases. That is very alarming and FGM. In Hackney, for example, only 25% of the 91 heads unacceptable, and there is an urgent need to prevent the had read the guidance, and in Lambeth and Southwark number growing further. This is an unforgiveable crime. the proportion who did so was only 34%, yet those girls It is beyond imagination that it is going on, and indeed are at risk. Other front-line workers have said that that it is increasing exponentially at the rate I have faced with the confusing number and breadth of described. guidelines, protocols and regulations that often appear I am glad that the Government have brought forward conflicting, they have turned to the legislation—the a power to make an FGM protection order. All I am Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003—to provide clarity asking for, on the best legal advice, is that the words “a for themselves. But as the shadow Minister said, only risk of” be included in paragraph 1(1)(a) of schedule 2, two prosecutions have taken place and neither was which is set out in clause 72. Sub-paragraph (1) would successful. What are we doing in this country? How are therefore read: we allowing FGM to happen? I appeal to Members to “The court in England and Wales may make an order (an vote for my amendment. “FGM protection order”) for the purposes of — A number of front-line professionals from the health, (a) protecting a girl against a risk of commission of a genital education and social services, including the child protection mutilation offence”, sector, were interviewed by Justice for FGM Victims. rather than simply All of them stated that they would welcome the guidance “(a) protecting a girl against the commission of a genital that would be provided if the amendment were accepted, mutilation offence”. but not otherwise. They believe that the explicit mention 73 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 74 of the requirement to apply successfully for a protection That went on year after year, and what did my order would support front-line staff and empower them constituent and other kids of 11 or 12 do? They ran to take action where they thought there was a risk of away. What happened when they ran away? They were FGM being committed against a young girl or woman. returned time and again to the same perpetrators by the police and the social workers, until one heroic social FGM is practised in secret. It is extremely difficult for worker rescued my constituent, unlike the other kids care professionals to know whether a person is at risk. living in that foster home, who were not rescued. He has Therefore as a deterrent and in order to catch the got on with his life and has spoken to nobody until he perpetrators, it is essential that the words “a risk of” are came to me. The report is being prepared in great detail included. This is not a small matter. It is a small and will go to the police. I do not know whether those amendment about a very, very big matter. Girls are who covered up for the school by falsifying its records being victimised, abused and terrorised by FGM, and it in saying he was there when he was not—the employer is happening on our watch. It must be stopped. and those working there alongside an 11-year-old, then a 12, 13, 14 and 15-year-old, during those years—are all John Mann (Bassetlaw) (Lab): I welcome various still alive; presumably some of them will be. There will sensible and positive suggestions. I shall speak to new be a major investigation. clause 2, which I trust the Government will accept. If That is just a single example; I have not mentioned not, we will give the House the opportunity to decide the other victims. If it happened in my constituent’s whether it should be accepted. I am sure, Mr Speaker, time, what about the kids before or the kids after? I that in today’s rather confused timetable you will indicate make a few discreet inquiries and vast amounts of the appropriate time at which to do so. things immediately come out that people know about—a I wish to make three substantive points in relation to huge web. This was just one foster family among many. the new clause. I thank those in every part of the House It was horrendous, systemised abuse. The system was at who have added their name to it. The abuse in Rotherham fault, and everyone within it, because these kids were has been described as the tip of the iceberg. It is a rather regarded as commodities. They were to be sold, and easy phrase to use. I do not think that the majority of they were sold—in this case, into actual, technical slavery. people out in the country, if they have thought about It was a money-making activity. the language used, believe that that is true. They think 6pm they have seen the bad side and that there may be a bit more of it, but that it cannot get worse than that. My It is vital that we get on top of the responses needed experience is that Rotherham is no different from anywhere for the future, for now—because of course this kind of else, except that it has had a detailed inquiry which has thing, in different ways, still goes on—and for the past. quantified the problem better than in other places. There What is absolutely clear to me is the volume of people are some specific and uncomfortable elements to the directly affected and the number of lives blighted. Many problem there that certainly differentiate it from my of these people cannot come to me, or anybody else, area, but I know that my area is no worse than anywhere because they are dead, or beyond being able to explain else. anything even though they are still technically alive. Some of those who come to see me can say nothing at When I have used the opportunities I have in my all because what has happened has so traumatised and weekly newspaper columns to suggest to victims, current affected their lives. or past, that they should come forward, I expected a few That is a microcosm, but it goes deeper. Rampton people to come forward. What I did not expect is special hospital is the only secure psychiatric unit for somebody new to come forward every week. I did not women in this country. Let us look at the conclusions of expect people to fly back to my constituency from the research about every single woman in there—they across the world, as they have done and as more wish to have all committed the most horrendous of crimes; that do, to give me precise evidence that they have given to is why they are in there—and see what happened to nobody in 30 years. They know that that will never lead them in their young lives. There is a causation—a direct to a prosecution, but when they spoke out before they link. We talk about early interventions in dealing with were not believed. They speak of individual, specific, some of the most horrific, terrible things that we hear single incidents of sexual violence, on different scales, about and sometimes have to deal with. Those things do of differing natures, yet every week new people—my not just come from nowhere. That is why it is so vital constituents—are coming forward. that there are no no-go areas in what is looked at. It is almost as if the process began with the easier The new clause is about only one small aspect. Prominent cases—easier in the sense that the people were more people are not the majority in these cases. Only one of prepared, and the cases were more specific, more identifiable the many people in my constituency who have come and more prosecutable—and, as the weeks go by, the forward—a Savile victim—has named so-called prominent bigger ones come. I have a brand-new case now. People people, so that is not the problem in my area. However, do not make up such allegations. One cannot make up there is a problem about how a number of investigations what I was told by somebody younger than me. The have been curtailed. In 1988, I gave evidence to the sexual violence and other violence is not even the most police on corruption in relation to buildings in Lambeth. horrific part of it. At the age of 11, that person was put A blockage was put on that investigation for no good into slavery in a workplace and location that I can reason. I now find from a police officer who served in identify. I am not going to name it as that is the later years that seven years later the wine bars I had prerogative of the person involved. I think he will name identified for all sorts of malpractice were referred to it, then everybody in my area will be able to identify it. the police again for similar activities. Yet there was no He mentioned witnesses whom he could identify and police investigation; each time, it was blocked. I have names that I know. my suspicions regarding that case. 75 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 76

It would be tempting to name the prominent people—one to me, in particular, for no particular reason? That tells would get plenty of headlines—but it would be highly me that there are many more people out there who inappropriate. Some of the names floating around were know what was going on and why he was given protection. undoubtedly blackmailed as opposed to being perpetrators. This question has to be answered. Passing the new One of the problems is deciding who was the perpetrator clause will mean that these people will come forward, as and who was the victim. One of the ways of covering some say they will. That will help to provide some tracks is to try to spread things around, and that is a justice for the victims, help with some prosecutions, danger. That is all the more reason why one kind of and, crucially, help the truth to come out. evidence that has not been made available should be made available. I have spoken to someone in an appropriate Several hon. Members rose— position who saw the Dickens dossier. I have a good idea of what is in it, but they will not tell me because of Mr Speaker: All of a sudden, a sprouting. I call the restrictions of the Official Secrets Act. It would be Nicola Blackwood. helpful to the inquiry and to the police for that information to come out. In 1980, special branch closed down Nicola Blackwood (Oxford West and Abingdon) (Con): investigations into Coronation buildings in south Lambeth, There is much to debate in this group of amendments again with no explanation, although plenty of people and I particularly welcome new clauses 8 and 9, but for were involved. Knowing why these things happen would the sake of brevity I will stick to my new clause 27 and be important to the inquiry and to ongoing police the associated clauses, which seek to resolve the much investigations. debated problem of child abduction warning notices The Don Hale files are a set of minutes from the applying unequally to children in care and those out of Home Office—I think they are its detailed investigations care. into the Dickens dossier—that were seized by special New clause 27 is a probing amendment, so I shall not branch. I am not interested in Mr Hale’s recollection of press it to a vote, but I would like to emphasise my the names—he did not take a copy—but I am interested disappointment that the Government have not found a in the fact that a lot of people saw those files. The way to resolve the problem. There has been plenty of Dickens dossier was copied 20 times. The person who time to do so and the issue has been debated extensively told me that they had seen it was at a meeting when it at all stages. It is a relatively contained problem. The was there, and the copies were then collected in. Lots of fact that police can only use CAWNs to protect victims people have seen these things. Lots of police officers— up to the age of 16 if they are living at home, and not special branch and others—have information about those up to the age of 18 if they are in care, is a them. real-world problem created by the fact that these Individuals have said to me, and some have informed administrative orders are reliant on two separate pieces me anonymously, that the restrictions of the Official of legislation. It should be perfectly possible to resolve Secrets Act are holding them back. Some fear prosecution. the situation if we put our minds to it. More, I think, fear that they will lose their pension A number of solutions have been proposed to the because of the technicalities of breaching the Act. The Government during the Bill’s progress, including putting new clause would create a defence against prosecution. CAWNs on a statutory basis, which would also create a Its wording is drawn up not by me but by people who penalty on breach, as suggested by the hon. Member for know how to draw up such things—the experts in this Rotherham (Sarah Champion); amending the offence building. Creating such a defence would allow those of child abduction so that it applies to children up to people to give information, not to me or my friends in the age of 18; and my new clause 27, which would create the media, but to the relevant investigating authorities. a secondary offence, under the Child Abduction Act Indeed, they would have an obligation to give it, because 1984, of abducting a child aged 16 to 18. All of those they would have the protection and the guarantee given proposals have been rejected by the Government because by us in statute. That would have a huge and significant they say that they are unnecessary, that they would impact in sorting out who did what, who of those still create additional bureaucracy and that they would risk alive should be prosecuted, and which of those whose creating unintended consequences for prosecutors in names are circulating are entirely innocent and may relation to consent. well be victims themselves. From what I have seen and The first point has no merit. The reforms have been heard over the years, I believe that some of the prominent requested directly by serving police officers, social workers names that circulate are victims as opposed to perpetrators. and parents who are battling child sexual exploitation The perpetrators who are still alive could then be on the front line and who have found that the inability more easily prosecuted with additional and significant to use CAWNs to protect children aged 16 to 18 living evidence. at home is a gap in their armoury as they wage an My final point is about . There is no already incredibly challenging battle against abusers. problem in naming Cyril Smith; he has been named Ministers have said that the new risk of sexual harm many times before. Police officer after police officer, orders will address that gap, but they will not. As the and special branch officer after special branch officer, MP who led the campaign to reform the old civil has said to me and to others that they were stopped prevention orders and replace them with the current from arresting and prosecuting Cyril Smith, and no one orders under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and has answered the question why. Why was Cyril Smith, Policing Act 2014, I welcome them wholeheartedly, but for a significant period, given immunity from prosecution for police to obtain a ROSHO they must prove the given that a significant number of people, including sexual element of risk to a criminal standard of evidence many police officers, have come forward about it, to me in court. As administrative orders, CAWNs do not never mind anybody else? Why would they come forward require either that evidential threshold or the proving of 77 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 78 the sexual element. Police officers and others have told 6.15 pm me that that is precisely why CAWNs are so successful I do not for a moment believe, however, that that is in disrupting child sexual exploitation where the sexual the only way to solve the problem and I really do not abuser may not be the individual who is transporting or care whether my proposal is accepted or a non-legislative controlling the victim and therefore sexual risk may be solution is found, provided that the Minister makes two indirect. clear commitments. The first is to work with Members It is unquestionably true that ROSHOs, gang injunctions from across the House, children’s charities and practitioners and trafficking orders have significant roles to play in to find a way to close the gap in CAWNs so that they disrupting grooming, but, as statutory orders that require apply equally to children in care and those out of care judicial oversight, none of those can replace the CAWN up to the age of 18, preferably by the time this Bill in the architecture of powers available to police for reaches the other House. The second commitment is to disrupting CSE. They simply do not have the immediacy commission, as a matter of urgency, guidance on the or the simplicity I have described. new architecture of civil prevention and administrative orders, specifically the way in which they relate to the For that reason, I am not convinced that putting the protection of children from serious organised crime. orders on a statutory footing is the best solution. The Government have said that that would create additional These are despicable crimes committed against the bureaucracy, which is not the best turn of phrase, most vulnerable of victims and no stone should be left because it sounds like there would just be a bit more unturned in equipping the police and other agencies to paperwork. That is not the concern that has been raised protect victims and prevent abuse all the way up to the with me by senior police officers. If CAWNs were put age of 18, no matter where those people happen to live. on a statutory footing, they would become a civil order, like the ROSHO, which, rightly, has an evidentiary Sarah Champion (Rotherham) (Lab): Thank you for threshold and judicial oversight. That very process of removing the time limit, Mr Speaker, not only because having to apply through the courts and gather increased the voices of victims and survivors do not get enough evidence risks creating an inappropriate situation not air time in this place, but because, as those who have only of fewer CAWNs being sought, but of the CAWN spoken before me have shown, there is a lot of passion losing its unique place in the policing toolbox as a quick about this topic and an awful lot of commitment to it. response tool that can be applied as a deterrent and disruption device that is also valuable in establishing I welcome new clauses 8 and 3 and Government association and bad character in prosecution. amendments 13 to 17, which aim to remove the term “child prostitution”from legislation. Victims and survivors Although I understand that the value of introducing I have met say that the term makes them feel incredibly a statutory basis would be to bring in a penalty on dirty and as though they colluded in the crime in some breach, that aspect is already covered by the statutory way. However, the amendments remove the term from civil prevention orders—from ROSHOs to trafficking only three of the 16 relevant pieces of legislation. If I orders—which all involve penalties on breach. Of course, pass the list to the Solicitor-General, will the Government most of those orders, in their current form, are new and make a serious, long-term commitment to remove the I urge the Government and the College of Policing to term from each of those pieces of legislation? I would develop guidance on how they should operate as a be very grateful for that. progressive and interrelated set of powers now available to police to deter, disrupt and prevent serious organised I want principally to speak to new clause 19 and crime against children in particular. However, if filling follow on from the contribution of the hon. Member in the gap in CAWNs is necessary but making CAWNs for Oxford West and Abingdon (Nicola Blackwood), statutory is not the answer, then what is? who spoke eloquently and has done most of the preparatory work. I have met the Solicitor-General, spoken at As we have heard, CAWNs for children living at Committee stage and exchanged letters with him. He home have their legislative basis in section 2(1) of the has expressed the view that, if child abduction warning Child Abduction Act 1984. The Government object to notices were to become statutory, that would cause an changing the age limit for that offence of abduction unnecessary replication of sexual risk orders, which are from the legal age of consent of 16 to 18 on the grounds being introduced by the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime that it would risk the victims, even those under the age and Policing Act 2014. However, given that the legislation of 16, being challenged by defence barristers on questions has not yet been enacted and guidance not yet published, of consent. I accept that we have fought too many I cannot be entirely satisfied that SROs will close the battles to improve protections for vulnerable witnesses gap that has been identified in child protection. against aggressive cross-examination in court to want to One concern is that the application of SROs to do anything to weaken a prosecutor’s arm, especially on low-level grooming activities seems to depend on an questions of consent, and that is why I tabled new officer taking a very wide interpretation of an clause 27, proposing a secondary offence, with a higher threshold, of abduction of 16 to 18-year-olds. “act of a sexual nature”. I do not believe that would compromise the integrity Unless the guidance is very specific and the training of the current child abduction offence for under 16-year- given to police very thorough, I am not convinced that olds, but it would offer a legislative basis to close the officers will feel confident to use SROs on, for instance, current gap in CAWNs and give the police the power to a 20-year-old who is hanging around with a 14-year-old. intervene quickly and effectively to protect 16 to 18-year-olds My cross-party inquiry with Barnardo’s last year who we know remain at high risk of child sexual found that police officers were clearly familiar with the exploitation where grooming gangs are operating, whether use of child abduction warning notices, and everyone they happen to be living at home or not. we interviewed asked that they be made statutory. My fear 79 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 80

[Sarah Champion] Children is absolutely right. A law that depends on somebody being “aware” is drafted in a dangerously is that, rather than reducing bureaucracy, the Solicitor- vague way. It will not catch most cases. The hon. Lady General will create more by having another power, as should therefore consider using the phrase that a person opposed to strengthening the existing one. must act on “reasonable grounds of suspicion”. Such a change would improve the drafting of her new clause 17. Mr Speaker: I thank the hon. Lady for her extreme Similarly, the exemption in subsection (2)(a) permitting succinctness. undefined circumstances as a reason not to refer an incident for independent assessment totally undermines Several hon. Members rose— the concept of mandatory reporting. When might it be in the interests of a child to be harmed and for those Mr Speaker: What a delicious choice. I call Mrs Cheryl who know or suspect to do nothing about it? Such a Gillan. situation needs to be made explicit. Subsection (2)(b) is almost a facsimile of the current Mrs Gillan: I want to continue my challenge to new and porous position. In complying with current non- clause 17, specifically on behalf of MandateNow, which mandatory reporting clauses in institutional child protection was set up by my constituent Tom Perry and seeks to procedures, personal liability seems to be avoided. The introduce a new law making it mandatory for people proposal continues a failed narrative in which reporting working in regulated activities to report their suspicions to the local authority for independent assessment is to the local authority. reliant on what the person responsible for reporting I am delighted that the Opposition support mandatory believes. For example, if a member of staff refers a case reporting, but I am disappointed with the flaws in their to the head teacher as the designated person and nothing new clause. I believe that mandatory reporting is inevitable, happens, because the head believes it is not in the child’s but its design will be critical. It is not a law that, as interests to refer it or follows the inadequate professional MandateNow says, guidelines—as it happens, they are discretionary—then “can be lifted from a shelf, applied and switched on.” the new clause will produce no change. As MandateNow It is a complicated and nuanced subject and such a law has stated, the exceptions in subsection (2) undermine needs very careful construction, as I am sure the hon. the already underpowered provisions in subsection (1). Member for Kingston upon Hull North (Diana Johnson) As the hon. Lady will know, an earlier amendment appreciates, particularly having adopted the position on mandatory reporting was moved in the other place, that Opposition Front Benchers have taken up recently. but was withdrawn on an assurance from the Government The hon. Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) struck that they would start a consultation on mandatory a chord with me when he said that there should be no reporting. She and I know, as does the Solicitor-General, no-go areas, which is absolutely right. I am worried that that the terms of reference for the consultation have not new clause 17 would create such no-go areas, and yet been drawn up. protect and enshrine them in a flawed law. We are approaching something called the general It appears from new clause 17(1)(c) that the duty to election, so there is purdah. I have a proposition to report would apply only when harm is caused in the make to both Front Benchers: it would be good to work setting of a regulated activity. As I understand it, children on this matter on a cross-party basis. It should not be a who are abused at home would remain outside its scope. political subject, but something on which we agree. Multiple concerns, or even any concern about any child, Rather than putting new clause 17 to a vote, it would be brought to the attention of staff—for example, at their good if they met behind the Chair and agreed to the school—would not necessarily be caught by the provision Government drawing up the terms of reference with the as currently drafted. Opposition and publishing them as soon as possible during the period of purdah before the general election. In that way, all the victims and people relying on this Diana Johnson: The right hon. Lady and I have place to improve the situation for our all future children, already had an exchange on this issue. What happens in and to learn from the history faced by many of our a school is obviously a regulated activity, so my constituents, would have a lot more confidence that we understanding is that if teachers working in the school are doing our job correctly. become aware of the issue, that would be covered by the new clause. Sir Edward Garnier: In dealing with subsection (2) of new clause 17, my right hon. Friend alights on one of Mrs Gillan: MandateNow’s understanding is that the problems. An awful lot of well-motivated proposals such a situation would not be covered. If abuse occurs are brought forward in relation to such Bills, but her outside one of the regulated activities, but is brought to point demonstrates that we must be careful not to the attention of someone involved in a regulated activity, legislate without thinking very carefully about what is there appears from the drafting of subsection (1)(c) to intended. It is not clear to me that having be a possibility that the abuse would not be a mandatorily reportable incident. “acted in the best interests of the child” is demonstrated on the subjective basis of the person Subsection (1)(c) would require that a person who believes they have so acted, or is to be tested “becomes aware that a child has been harmed”. against what a reasonable person believes from looking That requirement is problematic. So often with sexual at how that person has acted. If we agree to the subsection abuse, it is very difficult to suspect it, let alone to know without analysing that, we will get into trouble. I urge about it. MandateNow’s challenge to the proposal from her to ask the two Front Benchers to talk about that if the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to they meet behind the Speaker’s Chair. 81 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 82

Mrs Gillan: My hon. and learned Friend is absolutely over the victim, if the perpetrator was a relative of the right. He reinforces the position spotted by the victim, or if the perpetrator was or had been married to commentators at MandateNow about the drafting of or been the civil partner of a parent of the victim. If new clause 17. As I say, I want the matter to be non-party found guilty under the new clause, a perpetrator could political—it should be irrespective of politics—so it face up to 10 years in prison on conviction or indictment, would be good if we showed the House doing its best by or six months in prison on summary conviction. coming together, with the Government and the Opposition I believe that this change would send the important working together on the guidelines for the consultation message that 16 and 17-year-olds can be every bit as and getting them out as soon as possible. vulnerable as their younger counterparts and that they MandateNow’s membership base is 114 survivor charities deserve our protection or, rather, the protection of the in England, eight in Scotland and 10 in Wales, so there law. Because the existing law disregards them, I would is a substantial body of opinion behind its views. I very argue that 16 and 17-year-olds are in some ways more much hope that both Front Benchers will take them vulnerable to neglect than younger children, since there seriously and not force us through the Lobby against is the perception that they can make it on their own. new clause 17. I believe in the concept, but I cannot vote According to the Children’s Society, approximately for the new clause because of its quite obvious flaws. 16,000 16 and 17-year-olds were at risk of homelessness last year as a result of a breakdown in their relationship Mr Elfyn Llwyd (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC): About with their family. It is therefore no surprise to learn that an hour ago, Mr Speaker, you expressed your pleasant 35% of all those who are reported missing are aged surprise at the Solicitor-General’s brevity, and I hope between 15 and 17. Last year in England, 42,000-plus that I do not revert to type. I, too, shall keep my remarks 16 and 17-year-olds became children in need, 24,000-plus short. of whom were identified as being at risk of abuse or I welcome new clauses 8 to 10, which relate to the neglect. Distressingly, the Office of the Children’s language applied to young children who are victims of Commissioner has estimated that 7,260 16 and 17-year-olds sexual exploitation in the FGM provisions and so on. I are at risk of child sexual exploitation. am fully in sympathy with the very powerful speech I hope that the House will recognise the severity of made by the hon. Member for Stone (Sir William Cash). this issue. I am sure that those who oppose this change I support new clause 2, and the hon. Member for will argue that the laws of common assault, kidnapping Bassetlaw (John Mann) also made a powerful speech. and sexual exploitation already apply to this age group. The provisions in part 5 relating to the new offence of However, the fundamental point is that child cruelty child cruelty are of fundamental importance and should laws are different, in that they acknowledge the breach be welcomed. The new offence balances both physical of trust between the parent or guardian and the child. and psychological harm, because psychological abuse has a responsibility to protect and care can have such a debilitating impact on children. However, for the children who live with him or her. I see no reason my new clause 11 reflects my concern, and that of why 16 and 17-year-olds should be denied the legal organisations such as the Children’s Society, that the protections that are afforded to those younger than Government have not taken the opportunity presented them. We should keep it in mind that 90% of 16 and by the Bill to offer protection to 16 and 17-year-olds at 17-year-olds live with their families—a number that is risk of cruelty and neglect. After all, the United Nations unlikely to decrease in the current fiscal climate. I urge convention on the rights of the child and the Children the House to support new clause 11. Act 1989 both define a child as a person under 18. In I also support new clause 27, which was tabled by the Committee, I sought to amend the Bill by redefining a hon. Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Nicola child as a person under 18, and I made the case for Blackwood). It seeks to create an offence of child extending the legislation on child abduction to 16 and abduction that pertains to 16 and 17-year-olds. It is 17-year-olds. Unfortunately, I was unable to persuade important to note that 16 and 17-year-olds who are the Committee of the merits of my amendments, so I taken into care by their local authority are already withdrew them. My intention in retabling them today is protected by child abduction warning notices under to highlight the issue once more. section 31 of the 1989 Act. However, that represents New clause 11 would amend the Children’s Act 1933 only a tiny proportion of the children who are looked by inserting a new section on cruelty to a person aged after by local authorities. Last year, for example, 190 children 16 or 17. The new section would ensure that anyone in that age bracket were taken into care, but 4,510 young aged 18 or over who wilfully assaulted, ill-treated, neglected, people in that age bracket had become looked after. abandoned or injured a 16 or 17-year-old would be Equally, 4,000-plus 16 and 17-year-olds left care last guilty of an offence. Crucially, the new clause acknowledges year, many of whom will have gone on to live in supported that ill treatment can be both physical and psychological. accommodation, leaving them still very vulnerable, I am afraid. 6.30 pm People in this age group who approach their local When I first made the point in Committee that the authorities for help with housing as a result of homelessness definition of a child in this provision should include 16 are usually given housing support, rather than being and 17-year-olds, concerns were raised about the implication taken into care. According to the Children’s Society, at for young people of those ages who live independently. least 12,000 16 and 17-year-olds seek such help with For that reason, an adult may be found guilty of an homelessness every year. At present, the authorities offence under new clause 11 only if they are proven to cannot protect them with a child abduction warning be “personally connected” to the victim—that is, if the notice. As I have said, 42,260 16 and 17-year-olds victim and perpetrator were living together at the time became children in need last year. Under the current of the offence, if the perpetrator had parental responsibility provisions, the police are unable to use a child abduction 83 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 84 warning notice to protect them by taking them away successful with other bits of legislation. However, it was from an exploitative adult who could abduct them from indicated clearly in the opening speech that it will not their parents. apply to this provision. New clause 27 would extend the protections that are It is probably pointless to push the Solicitor-General afforded to those who are under 16 to the 2,330 16 and on that issue at this point. [Interruption.] He is nodding 17-year-olds who are registered as in need in Wales, the with a smile on his face, which is not particularly thousand 16 and 17-year-olds who are looked after by helpful. I would love to push the issue, but I will not. local authorities in Wales and many more young people However, I will reflect on where I have made mistakes who are housed by their local authority under homelessness between Committee stage and this stage, gather my legislation. ammunition and knock on his door as I move on to In 2012, the all-party parliamentary groups for runaway ten-minute rule Bills and the next Home Office Bill and missing children and adults and for looked-after to try to add it. For tonight, I am sitting tight, but the children and care leavers held an important inquiry on warning is there: I will be back. children who go missing from care. The report drew attention to how frequently children’s homes are targeted Steve McCabe (Birmingham, Selly Oak) (Lab): I will by exploitative individuals, yet the law protects only a concentrate on new clause 17. I assume that the Solicitor- tiny minority of the 16 and 17-year-olds who are vulnerable General will not accept the proposal, but I hope he will to such exploitation and abduction. tell the House where he is with the 12-week consultation. I join the right hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham I urge the House, if there is a Division, to vote for (Mrs Gillan) in asking that we try to hammer out a new clause 27, which stands in the name of the hon. sensible agreement on the issue—preferably between all Member for Oxford West and Abingdon. parties and before the election—so that we get something done in the interests of children. Sir Paul Beresford (Mole Valley) (Con): The Sexual I assume that most of us here want children to be Offences Act 2003 greatly strengthened the legislation protected and that the vast majority of decent people that deals with paedophiles. Year by year, some of us who choose to work with children want to protect them. have used various Home Office Bills to put little baubles However, I do not want people to be driven into some and bangles on it and there has been a huge number of kind of defensive posture whereby they are more concerned changes. One result has been that persistent predatory about protecting themselves than using their professional paedophiles in this country have often moved overseas. judgment because of a badly framed mandatory reporting Many of them moved to south-east Asia until the rule. No one who has looked at Rotherham or at any of south-east Asian nations tightened up and now many of the other scandals can fail to have a sense of revulsion them are moving to Brazil. I have a particular interest in at those senior staff who turned a blind eye, those who the situation in Brazil. did not want to know when they should have been Some of the ammunition has come from the fact that asking serious questions of the more junior staff, and much of our paedophile legislation is extraterritorial, so those who blamed the victims who they should have when individuals from this country go to other countries, been protecting. do their dastardly deeds and come back, we are able to We need a measure of mandatory reporting that deal with them under our legislation when we have the prevents people from evading their responsibilities, and evidence, perhaps provided directly by the security or ensures that there is no, “I didn’t know; they didn’t tell police forces in the other countries. The effect of that me” get-out clause, and no opportunity for institutions has been a move away from south-east Asia, mainly to or individuals to view reputational damage as an excuse places such as Brazil. People are picking on Brazil to sweep things under the carpet. That kind of mandatory because of the big sports events. We saw that recently reporting could be useful in helping the rest of us to with the World cup. A group in my constituency has protect children. I therefore hope that the Minister will been fighting for street children and it had a big campaign tell the House what his intentions are and where he is called “It’s a penalty”. It explained to people from this with the consultation and that, in the spirit of cross-party country who were flying to Brazil that if they had sex support, he will consider the offer from me and the right with children out there, they could be prosecuted here. hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham. In Committee, Members on both sides were congratulating ourselves on getting two new offences Mr Speaker: The hon. Gentleman finished just before on contact with a child and on predatory paedophile I expected him to and the Minister will now wind up manuals. In the middle of all that, one of us suddenly this group of amendments. There has been considerable noticed that we were taking away the extraterritorial demand to contribute to the separate groupings, so aspect of both offences. Not too surprisingly, there was perhaps I can say publicly what I would otherwise have a faint squawk. said privately, namely that if the Minister is able to wind up on behalf of the Government so that it is possible We have had a decent response on one issue. Amendment for us to move on by 7 o’clock—perhaps even earlier—we 10 will bring back the extraterritorial aspect for contact will dance round the mulberry bush in joyous appreciation with a child, but not for predatory paedophile manuals, of his efforts. as I brought to the attention of Front Benchers. If we are going to prosecute individuals in this country because they have predatory paedophile manuals, why should The Solicitor-General: Best endeavours, Mr Speaker, we not penetrate overseas to catch them doing exactly best endeavours. the same thing? Logic tells me that if it is good enough I thank all right hon. and hon. Members for taking to do it here, it is good enough to apply it to predatory part in this wide-ranging debate. I am grateful to the paedophiles in other countries. That has been very hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Steve McCabe) 85 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 86 for a thoughtful contribution. The Government have sexual activity has no place in the law of England and committed to a full 12-week consultation within 18 months Wales. Let me reiterate my point: we are making progress of the Bill receiving Royal Assent. We are coming to the and there will be a consultation as soon as possible. I end of this Parliament and into purdah, and practical therefore urge the hon. Lady and Opposition Members issues arise, as my right hon. Friend the Member for not to divide the House on the new clause. Chesham and Amersham (Mrs Gillan) said. However, On new clause 2, I listened carefully to the impassioned the Government are committed to moving on a consultation speech of the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann). as soon as practical obstacles are removed—we cannot It was the sort of speech that we need to hear in this be clearer than that. With respect to Labour Members House because it reiterated not only his determination I am somewhat puzzled about their undue haste to to uncover child abuse—whether historical or current—but move their new clause. My right hon. Friend has already the determination that we should all have to follow mentioned some deficiencies that she has found in the evidence wherever it may lead without fear or favour. provision, and I will not reiterate her points. I say simply that we need a proper consultation on the issue As we know, the Official Secrets Act is intended to and for all voices to be heard. For FGM and mandatory protect certain classes of particularly sensitive information reporting provisions we held a consultation that gave us such as security and intelligence matters, and it provides clear evidence to act, and to create and change the law for a number of offences that prevent current or former on mandatory reporting. We must do exactly the same Crown servants or Government contractors from disclosing for child abuse. certain information without lawful authority. It does not prevent protected information from being disclosed We all agree that these issues are sensitive, important, to an officer of an official investigation or inquiry into and involve new obligations on professionals who work historical child abuse. In particular, information may be in this difficult field, and we must approach them carefully disclosed where the disclosure is made in accordance and with evidence. I therefore strongly urge Opposition with that person’s official duty or is otherwise authorised. Members to consider the matter carefully before dividing Departments and Ministers can permit current and the House or supporting the new clause. With great former civil servants and Government contractors to respect the provision is premature, bearing in mind that share knowledge and documentation with an inquiry. a consultation will occur as soon as possible. As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary made clear in her statement to this House on 4 February, Mrs Gillan: Will my hon. and learned Friend comment official authorisation would be given for the Goddard on my suggestion that those on the two Front Benches inquiry. should work together on drawing up the terms of reference for the consultation, because I am sure that would help On the historical institutional abuse inquiry in Northern speed up the procedure? It may not be possible to bring Island, the Attorney-General has already made a public something out before the election, but at least working undertaking that no evidence given by a person to the together would show that it is a cross-party effort and inquiry will be used as evidence against them in any give great comfort to those watching this debate. criminal proceeding, including any offence under the Official Secrets Act. Indeed, the Attorney-General would 6.45 pm be ready to consider any similar request from Justice Goddard if one were made. I assure the hon. Member The Solicitor-General: I am interested in suggestions for Bassetlaw that the Government are committed to from any quarter about the terms of reference for a assisting Justice Goddard’s inquiry and all other inquiries consultation. I want it to be meaningful and comprehensive, into child abuse. We are satisfied that the Official Secrets which is why there will be a full 12 weeks to allow many Act is not, will not, and should not be a bar to evidence people to make submissions. I am open to all constructive being provided, but I am grateful to him for raising that suggestions, wherever they come from. As my right hon. important issue. Friend said, this issue is about much more than mere Let me turn to new clause 11, in the name of the right party politics, and I hope that that gives her the assurance hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd (Mr Llwyd). As she seeks. he said, this has been covered in Committee. I reiterate Diana Johnson: I am listening carefully to the Minister, that anomalies will inevitably exist when it comes to and of course we all want to get this issue right. I am how we classify children and young people in law. I am struck by the fact that the Government managed to afraid there is no one age division to fit all circumstances. have a consultation on the reporting of FGM, and the Despite the fact that, with his usual cunning, he has Bill now contains amendments to take that forward. It come up with a slightly different way of dealing with seems to me a missed opportunity that we are not able some of the mischiefs I mentioned in Committee, I am to do that with mandatory reporting at the same time. still concerned that, in genuinely attempting to correct one anomaly, we might end up creating another. We still The Solicitor-General: I hear what the hon. Lady says believe that in this area of the law we need to focus on and take her remarks in the spirit that I know she the protection of children and young persons under the intends. We are moving on these issues, and much has age of 16. been achieved in the past few years in acknowledging In that spirit, I will come on to new clause 27, which that we are dealing with children and can no longer was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford have a sort of double standard when it comes to their West and Abingdon (Nicola Blackwood). Her tenacity protection. In Committee we debated so-called “ostensible knows no bounds. She has done a lot of work to expose consent”, which at one time was in sentencing guidelines. the scourge of child sexual exploitation in both her That has gone from the law—indeed, a case I conducted local area and nationally. I am grateful to her for once in the Court of Appeal last week made it absolutely again raising this issue. We need to have the correct clear that for young children the concept of consent in balance between additional protection, and recognition 87 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 88

[The Solicitor-General] The Solicitor-General: I will put on the record the assent of the hon. Lady. I am grateful to her for all her of relevant rights and responsibilities of young people work on this matter. in this age group. We have given much thought to this I will move on briefly to the proposals in new clauses 15 matter. The key question for the Government is whether and 16 to tackle the encouragement or promotion of we think the police have sufficient powers to replace FGM. In Committee, the hon. Member for Feltham restrictions and prohibitions on people who pose a risk and Heston (Seema Malhotra) rightly said: to vulnerable young adults aged 16 and 17. We think “encouragement to commit an offence is not an issue of free that the new sexual risk orders—I will come on to them speech.”––[Official Report, Serious Crime [Lords] Public Bill in a moment—will provide the police with the powers to Committee, 20 January 2015; c. 157.] tackle predators. Breach of such an order will carry a sentence of up to five years imprisonment. We think the However, we need to distinguish between actual active right balance is being struck with the combination of encouragement and the expression of a distasteful opinion. child abduction warning notices and sexual risk orders. As the law stands, there must be some direct connection We therefore do not think that we need to change the between the encouragement or assistance and the principal law on child abduction at this stage. That allows me offence. We believe that that is the right approach. It is neatly, I hope, to deal with new clause 19, tabled by the settled law that applies to a whole range of criminal hon. Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion). offences. We are not convinced of the need to go beyond that and create an offence or introduce civil measures that prohibit any or all encouragement, regardless of Nicola Blackwood: Will the Minister give way? the intention behind it. It is too general, in our view, and there will be evidential difficulties. Members of this The Solicitor-General: I will give way very briefly. House and practitioners in the field are familiar with the term FGM, but it is not, of course, a term that would necessarily or colloquially be used by those who Nicola Blackwood: The Solicitor-General is aware support, or have sympathy with, that form of abuse. We that the combination of child abduction warning notices therefore need to think about the practicalities and the and risk of sexual harm orders leaves a gap for 16 to realities of seeking to prove such a general offence in 17-year-olds where it is impossible to prove sexual risk the field. I am not convinced, with respect to those and where there is a need for immediate action without who moved the new clauses, that they would achieve going to court. their aim. Amendment 20 was tabled by my hon. Friends the The Solicitor-General: I remind my hon. Friend that Members for Stone (Sir William Cash) and for Mid other mechanisms and other types of order exist, and Derbyshire (Pauline Latham). We heard a characteristically ask her to bear it in mind that the law was reformed by impassioned speech from my hon. Friend the Member the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, for Stone. I remind him that it is a passion we all share. which is just coming into force. There are other tools A large number of Members—including the Under- available to the police and enforcement authorities. Secretary of State for Health, my hon. Friend the We have to be careful not to seek to be over-reliant on Member for Battersea (Jane Ellison), who will be speaking one particular type of order. Reading carefully the to a later group of amendments, myself and others—all recommendations and observations made by Louise share his passion to see an end to FGM. With respect, Casey in the Rotherham report published only two weeks the test that would be applied in his amendment would ago, there are certain concerns about an over-reliance not help. The phrasing and terminology of FGM protection on child abduction warning notices, as opposed to orders replicates provisions we already have in law in taking more direct action that has the force of statutory relation to forced marriage protection orders. It is clear breach and criminal sanction on breach. that we are talking about prevention and the protection New clause 19 was tabled by the hon. Member for of young women and girls from FGM. Therefore, and Rotherham. I am grateful to her for providing information with respect to him, references to risk are wholly otiose. she wished me to consider. I confirm that we plan to implement the new sexual risk orders before the end of Sir William Cash: Will the Minister give way? this Parliament. As we all know, that is a very short space of time indeed. I reassure her that we will publish The Solicitor-General: I would like to give way, but I guidance on their use and we will work with the police am afraid I am going to stick to the Speaker’s exhortation to review their effectiveness, including in the context of and stick to time. how child abduction warning notices are used. As a result of our productive meeting, Barnardo’s will be It is not only the proposed legislation, but as a result consulted as a part of that process. of a significant public awareness programme being— The hon. Member for Stockport (Ann Coffey) made a point about references to the phrase “child prostitution” Sir William Cash: Will the Minister give way? in a number of other Acts and regulations. The Government’s amendments to schedule 4 pick up the The Solicitor-General: I am afraid I cannot give way references to child prostitution in primary legislation, to my hon. Friend. and we have a power in clause 79(2) to amend secondary Coupled with a widespread public awareness programme, legislation. That should help to clean up and clear up the provision will deal with the mischief my hon. Friend references to child prostitution in a number of regulations. rightly talks about without unnecessarily complicating the Bill by otiose references to risk. It is simply not Ann Coffey indicated assent. necessary. 89 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 90

The Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for (4) The second case is where— Kingston upon Hull North (Diana Johnson), tabled (a) the person observes physical signs on the girl appearing amendment (a) to Government new clause 8. I entirely to show that an act of female genital mutilation has understand the spirit with which she wishes to move her been carried out on her, and amendment. The Government’s aim is to replicate the (b) the person has no reason to believe that the act was, or offence in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 in a way that was part of, a surgical operation within section removes the offending phrase “child prostitution”. What 1(2)(a) or (b). we do not seek to do is widen or create a new offence. (5) An FGM notification— The danger of her amendment is that it would involve a (a) is to be made to the chief officer of police for the area substantive change in the law. For that reason, we do in which the girl resides; not support it. (b) must identify the girl and explain why the notification is made; Briefly, on new clause 22 with regard to child exploitation, (c) must be made before the end of one month from the the Modern Slavery Bill will deal in large measure with time when the person making the notification first the abuse identified by all corners of the House. We do discovers that an act of female genital mutilation not think—this is supported by the Director of Public appears to have been carried out on the girl; Prosecutions, the National Crime Agency, the National (d) may be made orally or in writing. Policing Lead for Modern Slavery and the independent (6) The duty of a person working in a particular regulated Anti-Slavery Commissioner—that the new offence would profession to make an FGM notification does not apply if the add anything other than confusion to the existing legislative person has reason to believe that another person working in that position. profession has previously made an FGM notification in I hope I have already answered my hon. Friend the connection with the same act of female genital mutilation. Member for Mole Valley (Sir Paul Beresford) with For this purpose, all persons falling within subsection (2)(a)(i) regard to amendment 33. I listened to him carefully. We are to be treated as working in the same regulated profession. have made progress. We think the most likely scenario (7) A disclosure made in an FGM notification does not involving paedophilic manuals and individuals who travel breach— abroad is that they will come into possession of such a (a) any obligation of confidence owed by the person manual either in this country by downloading it or by making the disclosure, or bringing it in to this country. We therefore think that (b) any other restriction on the disclosure of information. some of the problems he rightly talks about will be (8) The Secretary of State may by regulations amend this covered. section for the purpose of adding, removing or otherwise altering the descriptions of persons regarded as working in a “regulated 7pm profession” for the purposes of this section. (9) The power to make regulations under this section— In the light of the explanations I have given, I hope Members will not press their amendments and new (a) is exercisable by statutory instrument; clauses. I commend the Government’s amendments to (b) includes power to make consequential, transitional, the House. transitory or saving provision. (10) A statutory instrument containing regulations under this Question put and agreed to. section is not to be made unless a draft of the instrument has New clause 8 accordingly read a Second time, and added been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of to the Bill. Parliament. (11) In this section— “act of female genital mutilation” means an act of a New Clause 9 kind mentioned in section 1(1); “healthcare professional” means a person registered DUTY TO NOTIFY POLICE OF FEMALE GENITAL with any of the regulatory bodies mentioned in MUTILATION section 25(3) of the National Health Service Reform ‘After section 5A of the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 and Health Care Professions Act 2002 (bodies (inserted by section 72 above) insert— within remit of the Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care); “5B Duty to notify police of female genital mutilation “registered”, in relation to a regulatory body, means (1) A person who works in a regulated profession in England registered in a register that the body maintains by and Wales must make a notification under this section (an virtue of any enactment; “FGM notification”) if, in the course of his or her work in the “social care worker” means a person registered in a profession, the person discovers that an act of female genital register maintained by the Care Council for Wales mutilation appears to have been carried out on a girl who is aged under section 56 of the Care Standards Act 2000; under 18. “teacher” means— (2) For the purposes of this section— (a) in relation to England, a person within section (a) a person works in a “regulated profession” if the 141A(1) of the Education Act 2002 (persons person is— employed or engaged to carry out teaching (i) a healthcare professional, work at schools and other institutions in (ii) a teacher, or England); (iii) a social care worker in Wales; (b) in relation to Wales, a person who falls within a category listed in the table in paragraph 1 of (b) a person “discovers” that an act of female genital Schedule 2 to the Education (Wales) Act 2014 mutilation appears to have been carried out on a girl (anaw 5) (categories of registration for in either of the following two cases. purposes of Part 2 of that Act) or any other (3) The first case is where the girl informs the person that an person employed or engaged as a teacher at a act of female genital mutilation (however described) has been school (within the meaning of the Education carried out on her. Act 1996) in Wales. 91 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 92

(12) For the purposes of the definition of “healthcare professional”, hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate (Mr Burrowes), the following provisions of section 25 of the National Health upon which I undertook to reflect. In seeking to ensure Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002 are to be an opportunity to speak and possibly vote on matters ignored— appertaining to abortion, he asked whether I would (a) paragraph (g) of subsection (3); consider conflating groups 2 and 3, or eliding group 3 (b) subsection (3A).”’ —(Mr Buckland.) into group 2, for that purpose. As I hope he will This New Clause requires persons working in a “regulated understand, it would be a very unusual thing to do, so profession” (healthcare professionals, teachers and social care rather than elide one group into the other, as he suggested, workers) to notify the police if they discover in the course of their I think there might be good will across the House to work that an act of female genital mutilation appears to have been carried out on a girl under 18. ensure that both groups are spoken to and, as appropriate, voted upon. I am hoping, therefore, that we can keep Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added the groupings as they are and that the debate on the to the Bill. second group will run for no more than approximately an hour—preferably not later than 8 o’clock—so that New Clause 10 there is an opportunity to address the third group. It is what is ordinarily known as an old-fashioned British GUIDANCE ABOUT FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION compromise. However, it is not in my hands—it is my ‘(1) After section 5B of the Female Genital Mutilation Act will, but it is not in my hands—and it depends upon the 2003 (inserted by section (Duty to notify police of female genital co-operation of the House. I hope the hon. Gentleman mutilation) above) insert— is satisfied. I am afraid it is all I can offer him tonight. “5C Guidance (1) The Secretary of State may issue guidance to whatever Sir William Cash: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I persons in England and Wales the Secretary of State considers wish to confirm that my amendment 20 will be pressed appropriate about— to a vote. (a) the effect of any provision of this Act, or (b) other matters relating to female genital mutilation. Mr Speaker: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. (2) A person exercising public functions to whom guidance is Given that the point has been raised, I should say that given under this section must have regard to it in the exercise of separate Divisions on any non-Government new clauses those functions. will come at 9 pm. I have shortly to leave the Chair, but I (3) Nothing in this section permits the Secretary of State to shall return at, or shortly after, 9 o’clock, and it is my give guidance to any court or tribunal. very strong wish that the many discrete issues should be (4) Before issuing guidance under this section the Secretary of tested through the division of the House. If Members State must consult— want to test the will of the House, within reason there (a) the Welsh Ministers so far as the guidance is to a body should be that opportunity. He can therefore rest content exercising devolved Welsh functions; for the next couple of hours that the opportunity of a (b) any person whom the Secretary of State considers Division upon his important matter will come erelong. appropriate. I hope he is now happy. (5) A body is exercising “devolved Welsh functions” if its functions are exercisable only in or as regards Wales and are New Clause 23 wholly or mainly functions relating to— (a) a matter in respect of which functions are exercisable THROWING ARTICLES INTO PRISONS by the Welsh Ministers, the First Minister for Wales After section 40CA of the Prison Act 1952 (inserted by or the Counsel General to the Welsh Government, or section 75 above) insert— (b) a matter within the legislative competence of the “40CB Throwing articles into prison National Assembly for Wales. (1) A person who, without authorisation, throws any article or (6) The Secretary of State may from time to time revise any substance into a prison is guilty of an offence. guidance issued under this section. (2) For the purposes of subsection (1)— (7) Subsections (2) and (3) have effect in relation to any revised (a) the reference to an article or substance does not guidance. include a reference to a List A article, a List B article (8) Subsection (4) has effect in relation to any revised guidance or a List C article (as defined by section 40A); unless the Secretary of State considers the proposed revisions of (b) the reference to “throwing” an article or substance into the guidance are insubstantial. a prison includes a reference to doing anything from (9) The Secretary of State must publish the current version of outside the prison that results in the article or substance any guidance issued under this section.” being projected or conveyed over or through a boundary of the prison so as to land inside the prison. (2) Consultation for the purposes of subsection (4) of section 5C of the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 (inserted (3) In proceedings for an offence under this section it is a by subsection (1) above) may be, or include, consultation before defence for the accused to show that— the coming into force of this section.’—(Mr Buckland.) (a) he reasonably believed that he had authorisation to do the act in respect of which the proceedings are This New Clause confers a power on the Secretary of State to issue brought, or guidance about the effect of any provision of the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 or about other matters relating to female (b) in all the circumstances there was an overriding public genital mutilation. interest which justified the doing of that act. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added (4) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) is to the Bill. liable— (a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a Mr Speaker: Before we move to the second group, it term not exceeding two years or to a fine (or both); might be for the convenience of the House to know (b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term my response to the point of order raised earlier by the not exceeding 12 months or to a fine (or both). 93 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 94

(5) In this section “authorisation” means authorisation given there is reason to believe that giving notice under this for the purposes of this section; and subsections (1) to (3) of paragraph might seriously prejudice a criminal section 40E apply in relation to authorisations so given as they investigation; and apply to authorisations given for the purposes of section 40D.”” (d) comply with any other provision, including as to —(Karen Bradley.) timing, made by rules of court. This New Clause creates a new offence of throwing any article or (4) A judge may give permission under this section only if substance into a prison without authorisation (so far as not already satisfied that— prohibited under the Prison Act 1952). The offence would be (a) the grant of the authorisation or the giving of the triable either way with a maximum penalty (on conviction on notice is necessary for the purposes of the prevention indictment) of two years’ imprisonment. or detection of serious crime; Brought up, and read the First time. (b) obtaining the data in question by the conduct authorised or required by the authorisation or notice The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the is proportionate to what is sought to be achieved by Home Department (Karen Bradley): I beg to move, That so obtaining the data; and the clause be read a Second time. (c) it is right to give permission, having regard to the importance of the public interest in— Mr Speaker: With this it will be convenient to discuss (i) protecting the confidentiality of journalists’ sources; the following: (ii) maintaining legal professional privilege; or Government new clause 24—Codes of practice about (iii) protecting the confidentiality of personal information investigatory powers: journalistic sources. in the circumstances specified in section 22(5E)(b). (5) It is an offence for a person who is given notice of an New clause 4—Investigation of crime: journalistic and application under this section to conceal, destroy, alter or dispose privileged material— of the material to which the application relates except with the ‘(1) After section 22(5B) of the Regulation of Investigatory permission of a Circuit Judge; and Powers Act 2000 (obtaining and disclosing communications (a) this subsection ceases to apply if the application is data) insert— dismissed or withdrawn or if an authorisation or “(5C) An authorisation granted or notice given under notice granted or given in reliance on this section has subsection (3), (3B) or (4) for the purpose of preventing or been complied with; and detecting crime may not authorise or require any activity which is (b) a person who is guilty of an offence under this likely to result in journalistic source information or privileged subsection is liable— information being obtained or disclosed, unless a judge has (i) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a permitted the grant of the authorisation or the giving of the term not exceeding two years, to a fine or both; or notice in accordance with section 22A. (ii) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the (5D) For the purposes of this section “journalistic source statutory maximum.”’ information” means information which identifies, or might This Clause would provide for judicial oversight for police and reasonably be expected to lead to the identification of, the source other authorities’ access to communications data which might of confidential journalistic material, within the meaning given by involve the identification of journalist sources, as recommended by section 100 of the Police Act 1997. the Interception of Communications Commissioner. It provides the (5E) For the purposes of this section “privileged information” same level of protection for legally privileged and medically means— privileged communications and for communications between people (a) information amounting to or contained in matters and their ministers of religion or their MP. subject to legal privilege within the meaning given by New clause 5—Code of practice on investigatory powers: section 98 of the Police Act 1997; and journalistic and privileged material— (b) confidential personal information, within the meaning ‘(1) The Secretary of State must ensure that any code of given by section 99 of that Act, acquired or created in practice under section 71 of the Regulation of Investigatory the course of, or otherwise obtained in connection Powers Act 2000 that deals (expressly or otherwise) with the use with, a person‘s acting as a minister of religion, as a of powers under that Act in relation to the prevention or healthcare professional or as a Member of the House detection of serious crime, includes provisions designed to of Commons.” protect the public interest in— (2) After section 22 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (a) the confidentiality of journalists’ sources; Act 2000 insert— (b) legal professional privilege; and “22A Judicial protection of journalistic and privileged (c) the confidentiality of personal information obtained in material connection with a person’s acting as a minister of (1) This section applies where— religion, as a healthcare professional or as a Member (a) a person wishes to grant an authorisation or give a of the House of Commons. notice under section 22(3), (3B) or (4) for the purpose (2) In complying with subsection (1) the Secretary of State of preventing or detecting crime; and must— (b) the authorisation or notice is likely to result in journalistic (a) consult the Interception of Communications Commissioner source information or privileged information (as defined appointed under section 57(1) of that Act; and in section 22(5D) and (5E)) being obtained or disclosed. (b) have regard to any relevant report of an inquiry submitted (2) The person may apply to a Circuit Judge for permission to by that Commissioner to the Prime Minister.’ grant the authorisation or to give the notice. This new Clause provides that the RIPA Code of Practice includes (3) The application must— provisions which protect the public interest in the confidentiality of (a) be in writing; journalists’ sources and the other privileged communications. (b) set out the grounds on which it is made; New clause 18—Excluded persons (involvement in (c) be made on notice to any person to whom the serious crime): publication of names— authorisation or notice would be granted or given or ‘(1) Where the Secretary of State has exercised prerogative who might reasonably be expected to be required to powers to exclude from, or deny entry into, the United Kingdom comply with it, unless the applicant certifies that any foreign national on grounds of a reasonable belief that the 95 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 96 named person has benefited from, or has a material connection (2) This section does not apply to alcohol, tobacco, or any to or involvement in, one or more serious crimes, including but drug currently scheduled under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 or not limited, to the commission of— the Medicines Act 1968 or any substance, product or foodstuff (a) an act or acts deliberately undertaken to foster extremism specified by the Secretary of State following consultation with or hatred; the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. (b) an act or acts deliberately undertaken to facilitate, (3) A person guilty of an offence under this Part of this Act contribute to, support, encourage or promote terrorism; shall be liable— (c) an act or acts of torture or any other international (a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term crime or serious violation of international human not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding rights law; or the statutory maximum, or to both such imprisonment and fine; (d) a money-laundering offence or any other offence relating to serious or organised crime or more than one such (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a offence, term not exceeding three years.’ the Secretary of State shall, subject to subsection (2), publish New clause 28—Proceeds of Crime: detection and the name of each such person, and the ground or grounds for prevention of money-laundering measures— exclusion, within one month of the exclusion coming into effect. ‘The Proceeds of Crime Act is amended as follows— (2) The publication of the name of an excluded person under “(6A) Where the National Crime Agency has reasonable grounds subsection (1) may be deferred by the Secretary of State, where to believe that— there are reasonable grounds for believing that such publication would present a risk to— (a) activity that gave rise to a Suspicious Activity Report is related to money-laundering; and (a) national security or public safety; (b) there is a realistic prospect of investigating the case (b) enable suspects in a United Kingdom criminal investigation effectively, to avoid arrest, or the Agency may seek an order from the court for an extension, (c) materially reduce the prospects of a conviction in an for a period of up to a further 31 days, of the moratorium period existing criminal prosecution in the United Kingdom, under section (6). for no longer than is required to materially mitigate the risk or risks identified in this subsection and, in any case for no longer (6B) An order under subsection (6A) may be granted where than up to a maximum of six months. the court is satisfied that that criteria in that subsection have been met.”’ (3) In the case of a deferred publication of the name of an excluded person, the Secretary of State shall, on publication of Government amendments 1 and 23 to 31. such a deferred name, also publish a statement identifying which risk, or which of the risks, identified in subsection (2) applied in Karen Bradley: In the interests of brevity, I will making the decision to defer publication. concentrate on new clause 24 and the related amendments, (4) This section shall apply to persons already excluded from, and I will look forward to hearing from right hon. and or denied entry into, the United Kingdom, on grounds included hon. Members during the debate. in subsection (1), from the date on which it comes into force.’ New clause 24 relates to the use of powers under New clause 20—Prevention of firearms offences— part 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act ‘In the Firearms Act 1968 insert— 2000—RIPA—to identify journalists’sources. New clauses 4 “28B Assessing public safety and 5, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (Dr Huppert), cover the same ground. I do (1) When assessing the threat to public safety under sections 27, not believe there is any issue of substance between him 28, 30A, 30B or 30C the Chief Police Officer must ensure that a range of background checks are performed. and his supporters and the Government on this topic. Indeed, I venture to suggest that the whole House is (2) Where these checks uncover substantiated evidence of violent conduct or domestic violence, the Chief Police Officer united on the underlying issue: a free press is fundamental should refuse the licence application unless exceptional evidence to our democracy, and nothing should be done that can be brought forward by the applicant as to their suitability to might endanger that. possess a weapon. For that reason, when the independent interception (3) When assessing public safety within this section the Chief of communications commissioner issued a report earlier Police Officer must follow any guidance issued by the Secretary this month recommending judicial authorisation of requests of State. for communications data intended to establish the source (4) The Secretary of State must ensure adequate resourcing of of journalistic material, the Government immediately licence applications and consult with Chief Police Officers to accepted the recommendation in full. In conducting his ensure the level of fees collected by the Police under sections 32 inquiry into access to journalistic material, the commissioner and 35 are sufficient for the Police to recoup the costs they incur did not find widespread or systemic abuse. In fact, the through the administration and assessment of firearms licences issued or applied for under this Act.”’ inquiry found very few cases in which police forces had sought to obtain communications data for the purposes New clause 21—New psychoactive substances— of determining journalists’ sources. The commissioner ‘(1) It is an offence for a person to supply, or offer to supply, a stated that synthetic psychoactive substance, including but not restricted “police forces are not randomly trawling communications data to— relating to journalists in order to identify their sources”. (a) a powder; Nevertheless, the commissioner found some cases where (b) a pill; insufficient care and attention had been given in applications (c) a liquid; or and where there was not due consideration of the (d) a herbal substance with the appearance of cannabis, implications for freedom of expression. which he knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, to be so Primary legislation is required to give effect to the acting, that the substance is likely to be consumed by a person for commissioner’s recommendation relating to judicial the purpose of causing intoxication. authorisation. The issue for the House is how best to 97 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 98 give effect to that recommendation. It is an issue that forward the revised code as soon as possible. It will many right hon. and hon. Members feel strongly about, require the approval of both Houses of Parliament and I welcome this opportunity to pay tribute to the before it comes into effect. hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), I recognise, however, that we should do more to give who has been tenacious on behalf of the parliamentary rapid effect to the commissioner’s recommendation. branch of the National Union of Journalists. Accordingly, we will require law enforcement agencies We have to accept, however, that we are coming to the to use production orders, which are judicially authorised end of this Parliament and that the legislative options under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984—or are limited. The Bill is concerned with serious crime, the equivalents in Scotland and Northern Ireland—for and amendments are therefore necessarily constrained applications for communications data to determine to that subject. For that reason, I cannot accept new journalistic sources. I hope that this will provide welcome clause 4. Under RIPA, the police and others can acquire reassurance. communications data in relation to the prevention and Nevertheless, this is not a long-term solution. PACE detection of all crime, as well as for other purposes, applies only to indictable offences, is for evidential, such as in the interests of public safety. Were we to rather than intelligence purposes, and has specific accept the new clause, the police would be permitted access considerations. The ultimate solution, therefore, to identify a journalist’s source only in a serious crime is legislation that will give full effect to the commissioner’s case. As such, it would not be possible to provide in the recommendation. Regrettably, that will have to wait Bill for judicial authorisation of the acquisition of until after the election, but the Government have today communications data for the purposes of determining published a draft clause for that purpose so that there the source of journalistic information in a non-serious can be no doubt about how we intend to proceed as crime case. soon as the opportunity arises. I hope that the combination Under RIPA, a serious crime is one for which an of the requirements imposed by new clause 24, the adult with no previous convictions could expect to interim use of production orders and a firm commitment receive a custodial sentence of three years or more. This to future legislation will reassure those who are concerned, rules out legislating in the Bill on applications for and that on the basis of what I have said my hon. Friend communications data to identify a journalist’s source the Member for Cambridge (Dr Huppert) will not press relating to investigations for relevant offences under, for new clauses 4 and 5. example, the Official Secrets Act 1989, the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Computer Misuse Act 1990. The Dr Huppert: Will the Minister say something about commissioner referred specifically to investigations under the time scale? As of when will production orders be the Computer Misuse Act in paragraph 7.3. It would required, and will the secondary legislation on the code not be satisfactory to create such a situation, and nor of practice be in place before the election, so that we would we be acting on the commissioner’s recommendation can pass it in time? were we to do so. Karen Bradley: If my hon. Friend does not mind, I Dr Julian Huppert (Cambridge) (LD): Will the Minister will come back to those points when I have heard all his give way? comments. I will respond to all his concerns together, if that is acceptable to him. Karen Bradley: I hope my hon. Friend will understand if I do not, given the limited time frame and because New clause 23 would create a new offence of throwing I know he will make a contribution later. I hope I will an article or substance into a prison without authorisation. cover his concerns in my remarks, and I look forward to It is designed to address the significant and increasing hearing his comments. problem of the presence of new psychoactive substances in our prisons. In applying to any article or substance, Our solution is new clause 24, which I freely confess the new offence will also capture wider threats to prison is modelled on my hon. Friend’s new clause 5. It provides security and good order. It will add to the existing that any code of practice issued under RIPA dealing criminal offences in the Prison Act 1952, which make it with the use of RIPA investigatory powers in relation an offence for a person to convey into a prison certain to the prevention or detection of serious crime should specified items, including controlled drugs, alcohol or include provisions protecting the public interest and the mobile phones without authorisation. The maximum confidentiality of journalists’ sources. It also requires penalty for the new offence will be two years’imprisonment, the Secretary of State to consult the commissioner and sending a clear message to would-be traffickers. to have regard to any relevant reports that he has made. As hon. Members might know, we launched a Sir Edward Garnier: What will the new clause add to consultation last November on a draft RIPA acquisition what is already in law? of communications data code. We received more than 300 responses, and I am grateful to everyone who took the trouble to submit a response. The draft code included Karen Bradley: We feel that it is important to have the new wording about the requirement for extra consideration ability to deal with the problem in criminal law. We have to be given in cases involving the communications data identified it as a problem, and we want to ensure that we of journalists and those in other sensitive professions. can deal with it. However, we were clear that we would not finalise the Government amendment 1 does not require much code until we had had time to consider the consultation explanation. It is a technical amendment to the provisions responses fully and, equally importantly, had been able in part 4 of the Bill relating to the seizure and forfeiture to consider the commissioner’s recommendation. I can of substances used as drug-cutting agents. It simply assure the House that we are keen to finalise and bring provides that in Scotland, applications to a sheriff under 99 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 100

[Karen Bradley] legal highs could be controlled in the same way as solvents, making it much easier to prosecute and close clauses 60, 61, 63 and 64 must be made by summary down sellers and prevent them from using the excuse application, as distinct from other forms of application that a substance is not for human consumption. A such as an initial writ or small claim. similar approach has been adopted in Ireland, and the I commend the Government amendments and new number of head shops there has fallen from 100 to six. clauses to the House. I look forward to hearing what The new clause was drafted in conjunction with the right hon. and hon. Members throughout the House Angelus Foundation, and we also took advice from have to say about their new clauses, and to responding the UK Drug Policy Commission. to them.

Diana Johnson: The Opposition support Government 7.15 pm new clause 23. I want to make some brief comments I know that there have been some attempts to close about Government new clause 24 and new clauses 4 and down sellers through trading standards legislation, but 5, which, as the Minister said, all relate to how the most attempted prosecutions have failed because sellers Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 is being use a loophole in the law to avoid prosecution by used to access journalists’ source material or materials labelling their products as plant food or bath salts, or by subject to legal privilege. saying that they are not fit for human consumption. We The issue has been around for a while, and Labour believe that new clause 21 could deal with that. called for, and got agreement from the Government on, New clause 20 deals with firearms and would strengthen a broader review of RIPA by the independent reviewer police decision making about the issuing of a firearms of terrorism legislation. In the meantime, the interception licence. The Government have said that they are committed of communications commissioner has published a report to the general principle of full cost recovery across the containing two recommendations: first, that access to public sector, including for passports and driving licences. journalistic source material should require prior approval However, a fishing licence application, which involves from a court, and secondly, that when communications no background check at all and is required by nearly data are sought, they should not relate to an investigation half a million anglers each year, costs at least £27, to determine a source of journalistic information when, whereas a shotgun licence costs £50 for five years. The for example, the journalist is a victim of crime or is Government’s attempt to introduce full cost recovery suspected of committing a crime unrelated to their should be extended to gun licences, which should not be occupation. It was recommended that chapter II of subsidised by funds allocated to policing. part I of RIPA may be used, so long as the designated Finally, I wish to comment on new clauses 18 and 28. person gives adequate consideration to necessity, New clause 18 is intended to facilitate the publication of proportionality and collateral intrusion, including the the names of those who have been excluded from the possible unintended consequences of the conduct. The UK, and is motivated by the legitimate concerns that revised code contains very little guidance about what the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Mr Raab) those considerations should be, and that absence needs holds about what we are doing to ensure that those to be addressed. As I said, Labour called for the connected to torture and undesirable regimes are kept fundamental review of RIPA by David Anderson QC, out of the country. New clause 28 would introduce new and it has consistently called for the intelligence powers to tackle illegal money flows connected to a commissioners to be given a more prominent role. We range of crimes and terrorism. We know only too well therefore welcome the interception of communications that ISIL is estimated to be making £3 million a day commissioner’s report and accept his recommendations. through flows of money. That is an example of the role that the commissioners should be playing. As the time available is limited, and because I do not want to pre-empt the hon. Gentleman’s comments about New clauses 4 and 5 are intended to implemented the the new clauses, I will be brief. We have concerns that commissioner’s recommendations. New clause 5 demands there may be unintended consequences of how they are that a new code of conduct be written, in consultation drafted. We will want to listen to what he has to say with the interception of communications commissioner. about them. The Government have essentially accepted that point in tabling new clause 24. New clause 4 would amend RIPA to introduce judicial oversight. However, as I understand Mr Dominic Raab (Esher and Walton) (Con): It was it, and as the Minister indicated, it has been limited by widely trailed in the media, when the leader of the what can be included under the scope of the Bill. It Labour party had dinner with the Clooneys, that the would therefore apply only when data were sought for Labour party would get behind a UK Magnitsky Act. the purposes of preventing or detecting a crime, which New clause 18 is the most modest step in that direction. is only one of eight justifications for accessing data. Is it the Labour party’s position to say one thing after a Essentially, the limitations of the Bill mean that we cannot glitzy Hollywood dinner, and then do something entirely fully implement the commissioner’s recommendations. different when it comes to having the courage of its I would be grateful if the Minister could explain why convictions? the Government did not seek the leave of the House to extend the scope of the Bill—as I understand it, they Diana Johnson: I will be interested to hear what the could have done so by tabling a motion of instruction. hon. Gentleman has to say about new clause 18, because New clause 21 is about new psychoactive substances. it will be helpful to have the details. What I am saying to We have tabled it to enable effective action to be taken him is that we have concerns about the drafting of it. against the sellers of legal highs. It would mean that We support the principle of it. 101 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 102

Stephen Barclay (North East Cambridgeshire) (Con): grateful if she could make it absolutely clear that the I find the shadow Minister’s response to my hon. Friend code of practice will not be delayed, because we need quite staggering. She made the same point about new to act. clause 28, which I have tabled. Is it seriously the Opposition’s case that 31 days is sufficient time to investigate Karen Bradley: We hope that the code will be in place multimillion-pound suspicious activity reports such as before the general election, but that will obviously be that in the case of OPL 245? subject to parliamentary approval.

Diana Johnson: I want to hear the comments that the Dr Huppert: I thank the Minister, and I will hold her hon. Gentleman and the hon. Member for Esher and to at least seeking parliamentary approval in time. I Walton will make about their new clauses. Time is accept that she cannot guarantee that both Houses will limited, and on the instructions of Mr Speaker I am vote for the code, but I should be very alarmed if trying to keep my comments short. I am pointing out Parliament were not keen to ensure that journalists that there may be unintended consequences of how the were included. clauses are currently drafted. The Minister also spoke about the requirement for Dr Huppert: It is a pleasure to speak in the debate. I production orders to be used in the meantime. That is shall confine my comments to the proposal for journalists welcome, because the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to be protected under the Regulation of Investigatory 1984 currently protects journalists so that their sources Powers Act 2000, because I think that is very important. cannot be sought without judicial authorisation, but may I ask the Minister whether the use of such orders is I know that we have to proceed fairly quickly, but it is a policy requirement as of today, whether it will require worth my setting out the facts. There was a great deal of legislative change, and what time scale will be involved? public concern when it became clear that Met police I hope she will confirm that she has made a policy had been using RIPA to look into journalists’ sources announcement that will take immediate effect. She does during Operation Alice. For instance, they examined not seem to wish to intervene at the moment, but I hope the phone records of Tom Newton Dunn, political that she will give answers to those questions by the end editor of . Kent police also obtained records of the debate, so that I can decide whether any amendments during Operation Solar. According to a report by the or new clauses need to be put to a vote. interception of communications commissioner, 19 forces made more than 600 requests for information about The Minister said that legislation would not be possible journalists’ phone records to try to identify their sources., until the next Parliament. She was right to identify a and that has had a very large-scale and worrying effect. technical drafting issue. The hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull North (Diana Johnson) was also right to say I pay tribute to, in particular, the Press Gazette and that the Government could have fixed that had they the National Union of Journalists, which launched the really wanted to, but we are where we are, and I accept Save Our Sources campaign. They were right to do so, that, as things are, we will be leaving serious crime to be because this is a fundamental issue. If police and other treated differently from other issues. I hope that the authorities can gain access to journalists’ records, how Minister will confirm that the draft clause—of which I can anyone feel safe when contacting a journalist to have been handed a copy—will be published so that the blow the whistle, in the knowledge that their information whole House has a chance to look at it. It is a welcome may simply be passed on? People would need have to step, but it does not seem to be clear about article 10 feel an immense amount of trust to do that. rights, and I think that it will need to be improved in I am pleased that we are making some progress on that regard. this important matter, but the extent of the progress I hope that the Minister make the time scale clear, so that has been necessary has been frustrating. My party that the House can make the right decision. It is important has had policies to ensure that we get this right since last for us to protect journalists, and I pay tribute to those year, when my Liberal Democrat colleague Lord Strasburger who worked so hard to ensure that that could happen. I tabled amendments which were rejected by the Conservative hope that we can take a full step now, rather than a Minister Baroness Williams—not Shirley, but Susan. slightly small, grudging step. We made a number of other attempts, and Conservative Ministers said that they wanted to act, but unfortunately it was not until we tabled new clause 5 that we forced Mr Raab: New clause 18 was tabled by me and by something to happen. Not until the Deputy Prime 21 other members of the three main parties, including—I Minister spoke out in favour of the new clause and we am not sure whether this is a first—seven Select Committee managed to persuade three Select Committee Chairs to Chairmen. It would inject some transparency into the support it—the Chairs of the Home Affairs, Justice and Government’s exercise of powers to impose visa bans or Culture, Media and Sport Committees—did we secure deny entry, all of which are non-statutory, in relation to some partial agreement. Nevertheless, I am pleased that people involved in serious international crimes such as the Government have given way on the new clause, torture, terrorism and other kinds of organised crime. It although, as is their wont, they have slightly rewritten it. would give the public the right to know whom we are I welcome what the Minister said about the code of banning from setting foot on British soil, and, by practice, but will she tell us when it will be introduced? implication, whom we are not. Can she give a clear assurance—I did not hear her give The new clause was inspired by the this House’s one earlier, although there is such an assurance in the unanimous resolution in March 2012—nearly three years letter that has just been passed around—that it will ago—following a debate that I sponsored, along with definitely be in place before the end of this Parliament, the former right hon. Member for South Shields. We having been approved by both Houses? I should be called on the Government to introduce a British Sergei 103 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 104

[Mr Raab] talked about drafting. It seems to me that Home Office officials are burying their heads in a comfortable secrecy Magnitsky law. There is one in the United States, and and lack of transparency. Why should the public not be other models are being touted around the world. Such a told? law would impose mandatory visa bans and asset freezes In any case, the policy is routinely flouted by the on any individual linked to the torture and murder of Home Office itself. When they want to make a show of Sergei Magnitsky, or similar such international crimes, banning characters who have been deemed offensive—for in Russia and beyond. instance, the American radio host Michael Savage, and As the House will recall, Sergei Magnitsky was the rappers such as Snoop Dogg—it is trailed liberally in lawyer for a British businessman, Bill Browder, and was the media. Incidentally, both those cases occurred under brutally killed on orders from the Kremlin for disclosing the last Home Secretary. At the moment the public may the $230 million tax fraud—the biggest in Russian be told if someone who is offensive gets banned from history—that had been committed by President Putin coming here, but not those linked to crimes such as and his associates. To my regret, the Government have torture or terrorism. There is absolutely no explanation not produced legislation, but I should add, in fairness, or justification for that double-standard. Equally there that they did affirm a policy of refusing visas to individuals is evidently no legal or principled reason not to introduce who were suspected of such links. Unfortunately, owing transparency for those linked to such serious crimes. to a long-standing policy in successive Administrations, That would explain why the Select Committee on Foreign we are not told who is banned from coming to the Affairs has recommended that the identity of those United Kingdom when such decisions are made, so we denied entry on human rights grounds should be made have no way of confirming the extent to which those public. important powers, and the new policy that was announced by the Government in about 2012, have been exercised 7.30 pm in practice. There are legitimate fears—which I have raised I understand the shadow Minister made some points with Ministers, and with different arms of Government, about drafting. I want to briefly say that this amendment on a number of occasions—that such heinous people has been checked by external counsel. It has also been may be making visits to Britain. cleared with the Public Bill Office and the Clerks to What has been the aftermath of the House’s call for a make sure it is in shape so that it is workable. So if the UK Magnitsky Act in 2012? Sergei Magnitsky was shadow Minister wants to fall back on the easy and, posthumously prosecuted by the Putin regime, and Bill frankly, if I may say so, slightly lazy “We agree with you Browder himself has been the subject of various legal in principle but not in practice” position, I urge her to attacks by the Russian Government. There are reports, explain precisely what is wrong with it, because we which were documented in the BBC’s “Panorama” in looked at this drafting very carefully. Again, I would 2013, that UK companies are being used to launder make the point to her that the leader of her party has money related to the Magnitsky murder and other made a big song and dance in the media about being mafia-related crimes. Meanwhile, Putin has annexed a behind a UK Sergei Magnitsky Act, and yet when it slice of Crimea and established himself as a regional comes to this very small piece of the jigsaw puzzle, and menace, and is now directing his gaze to the Baltic when push comes to shove, the Labour party is hiding states. behind drafting technicalities without giving any detail on it. Here in the UK, we have seen the mysterious and unexplained deaths of two Russian businessmen, Alexander Diana Johnson rose— Perepilichny and Boris Berezovsky, who had fallen out of favour with Putin—not to mention the public inquiry Mr Raab: I will gladly take an intervention from the into the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, which Ben shadow Minister. Emmerson QC told the inquiry was an “act of nuclear terrorism” on British soil. Diana Johnson: I am very flattered to be the focus of such attention from the hon. Gentleman, but perhaps it I do not know for sure, but I fear that some of those would be wiser at this stage if he were to direct his linked to President Putin’s nefarious activities—the comments more to his own Front-Bench colleagues as persecution of Sergei Magnitsky and other dissidents, they are in government and can bring forward legislation, or his wider bankrolling by the mafia—may be slipping which clearly we as shadow Ministers in the Opposition through the net and using London as a comfortable cannot. haven, a place free of the perils of living in Russia where they can enjoy their illicit profits in quiet, in peace and Mr Raab: I welcome the shadow Minister’s intervention in secret. I also believe that, in the 21st century, the and she has got half a point, but the thing is that I have British public have a right to know whether the henchmen been nailing those on my Front Bench on this for three of despots like Putin—or, indeed, any other international years and the difference is that they have stuck to their dictator or outlaw—are being granted a free pass to line fairly consistently whereas literally in the last month come to this country. The Home Office has stuck to its the leader of the Labour party has gone on record—his long-standing line that it does not routinely disclose advisers have been trailing it liberally after the glitzy who is denied entry, but I do not think that that line Hollywood dinner with the Clooneys—saying that actually withstands the slightest scrutiny. Why should the public he would go for a UK Magnitsky Act, but when push not be told, as a matter of basic principle, how such comes to shove it is nowhere to be seen. This raises a important powers are being exercised? During the three whole question about the Labour party having the years for which I have campaigned on the issue, no one courage of its convictions. So I have made this point to has given me a serious, substantive explanation. The hon. Members on my own Front Bench, but I also think the Member for Kingston upon Hull North (Diana Johnson) shadow Minister needs to be responsible for her own 105 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 106 position and her own party’s position—and, indeed, I remain convinced that Britain should enact a Sergei answer for what the leader of the Labour party has trailed Magnitsky law, like the Americans, with mandatory widely in the media. visa bans and asset freezes imposed on people linked to Coming back to the substance of this, it is also worth the worst international crimes. In the meantime, at the remembering that in cases of extradition or deportation very least we need to shine a light on the exercise of there is already a huge amount of transparency over existing UK powers to deny entry or visas to the shady both the policy and who is being removed. As a result, characters who prop up Putin, or indeed any other there is intense and legitimate scrutiny of Government despot around the world. policy. So if the public have the right to know whether This new clause does that. It would allow a temporary the Government intend to remove the likes of Abu delay in disclosure of the identity of anyone banned if Qatada, why should they not equally be told whether necessary for national security or law enforcement, and we are banning such people from coming here in the it would not alter the substantive scope of any existing first place? If we are serious about trying to alter Putin’s powers, but it would ensure that they are exercised behaviour, should we not start by making sure that consistently, and it would ensure that the public are told those who bankroll him cannot enjoy the fruits of their whom we ban from Britain. I commend new clause 18 labour here, clandestinely in luxurious comfort? Those to the House. individuals who bankroll Putin and his like should know that when they cross the line and engage in serious Stephen Barclay: I rise to speak to new clause 28 international crimes, their association with him and tabled in my name, which is much more modest than the support for him will bar their ability to enjoy the new clause tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for luxurious Knightsbridge lifestyle that so many of them Esher and Walton (Mr Raab). It is simply about giving crave. To ensure that message hits home consistently law enforcement more time in respect of multimillion and publicly, we need transparency over such visa bans. pound money laundering cases. This new clause does not single out Russia. It would At present around 316,000 suspicious activity reports apply to any individuals linked to terrorism, violent are filed each year with law enforcement agencies. Those extremism, gross violations of human rights law, money are cases where the banks, the lawyers or the accountants laundering and other serious organised crime, whatever have serious concerns around money laundering. According their nationality and wherever they take place. to the Home Office’s own figures, between £23 billion and £57 billion are being channelled through the UK Stephen Barclay: Is a further reason why we need economy each year, so we know the scale of money transparency because there is very little transparency laundering is significant. At present, when a suspicious around the beneficial ownership of multimillion pound activity report is filed the law enforcement agencies—the property in London? For example, a respected non- National Crime Agency has now taken on this responsibility governmental organisation estimates that 45% of London —have just seven days to say whether they give consent property valued at above £2 million is owned offshore to those multimillion pound transfers going ahead. where the beneficial owner is opaque. If those who have That is just seven days on a case that might well have profited through torture and corruption are able to own been built over many years, often involving jurisdictions London property, it is even more important to be where information is difficult to obtain, and if law transparent about whether they are travelling here. enforcement decides it does not wish to give consent to these transactions, which the financial institutions themselves have said look suspicious, they have just Mr Raab: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We 31 days to build the case to the satisfaction of the need to shine a light on the murky mafia-related activities courts. If they fail to do so, they risk the penalty of that are infecting our country through the acquisition costs against them, which sets a strong disincentive to of property and also by the physical entry of individuals law enforcement to take those cases forward. To put into this country. that in context, the proceeds of crime unit investigated This amendment would also make an important only 110 cases from the 316,000 suspicious activity reports statement about British foreign policy, particularly as filed with it, so clearly the system is not working. inevitably in the 21st century we have to rub along with, I thought I would give just one case to bring this to deal with and engage with Governments who do not life. The Nigerian case OPL 245 has a bit of a jargony respect the same standards of liberal democracy as we name, but it involves $1 billion paid by a British oil do here in Britain. I am a realist and I recognise that company for some offshore land in Nigeria with oil we will have to engage with regimes with a dubious assets. To put this in context, $1 billion was paid for this commitment to human rights or the rule of law, but land for drilling—they do drill offshore, I should point there ought to be some moral red lines here. People out for the benefit of any Members who might be carrying dirty money and individuals with blood on confused as to how they obtain the oil—yet 14 years their hands should not be welcome on the streets of earlier this land was granted to a company owned by Britain. This is not just a question of moral principle. the then Nigerian oil Minister. In essence the land was Sooner or later, if we keep allowing such unsavoury granted by the Nigerian oil Minister to a company that characters into the UK, bringing all their baggage and he owned and for which $1 billion was then paid 14 years vendettas with them, we risk finding that it is British later. In investigating that case that had developed over citizens who are caught in the crossfire or worse. After many years involving complex financial arrangements all, the Litvinenko inquiry has already heard that Putin’s over different jurisdictions, law enforcement has just thugs were willing to engage in nuclear terrorism here in 31 days to build a case that would block the transfer of public, so the threat to the British public is real and $1 billion that is going to a corrupt official and his serious. henchmen. 107 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 108

[Stephen Barclay] judicial authorisation is being sought, or for them to challenge the proposal or the court’s decision on the New clause 28 simply seeks to give law enforcement protection of their sources. agencies more time to build their case. I shall not press At the moment, none of the amendments satisfies it to a vote, but I hope that the Minister will tell us those three criteria. I would welcome the Government’s whether the Government believe that the current response, because I know that they are proposing to arrangements provide sufficient time, or whether they introduce detailed amendments in future legislation. I accept the substance of the new clause, which is that the would welcome information on whether such amendments current arrangements are insufficient and that they load would deal with the two other criteria. I can see that the dice against law enforcement, meaning that corrupt judicial authorisation is being addressed, but would the assets can be transferred from the UK to criminals. If questions of prior notification and the right of appeal the Government accept my proposal, I hope that they also be covered? will change the law at the earliest opportunity to create a more level playing field by giving more time for these The Government have argued that amendments tabled complex, multi-jurisdictional cases to be investigated. by others related solely to serious crime and not to other matters, and that they do not encapsulate all the recommendations in the recent report. I understand John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Lab): I am that argument, but the Government are still not putting in a state of confusion, so am here as a humble searcher forward any proposals about the use of the Police and for the truth on these matters. I know that the programme Criminal Evidence Act 1984—PACE—in relation to motion was not moved, but I am interested in discussing the way in which production orders are applied for. This Government new clause 24 and new clauses 4 and 5. As was how the whole argument started. At the moment, if secretary of the National Union of Journalists group in a production order is applied for under PACE, the Parliament, I have been trying for the past year to get journalist is informed in advance about the order. They some clarity on the protection of journalistic sources. are then able to put their case in court and, if necessary, We have dealt with this matter under the Regulation of appeal it and have it judicially reviewed. That does not Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and the Data Retention seem to be the process that is being suggested here. and Investigatory Powers Act 2014, and now we are dealing with it under this piece of legislation. I apologise for having bored the House on the matter at times. 7.45 pm Sometimes I have been in the Chamber talking about it The reason that there has been controversy, in relation almost all on my own. We are now coming to the to Metropolitan police actions in particular, is that the conclusion of this legislation, at least before the general police sought to avoid abiding by PACE by using RIPA, election. I appreciate that the Government have said thus avoiding openness, transparency and the ability of they will return to the matter after the election. an individual journalist to contest a decision. Unless the Government introduce amendments that enable I am unhappy with all the amendments that have prior notification and a mechanism by which an application been tabled, from all sides. There are three principles on can be challenged, they will certainly not satisfy the which the NUJ has been campaigning—in relation to journalists of the NUJ who have been working on this RIPA, DRIPA and this Bill—in regard to applications issue for so long, and nor will they satisfy European for access to information on journalistic sources by the legislation. I would welcome information on the process police, the intelligence services or anybody else. We have from here on in, and on whether and how those issues discovered that a large proportion of applications have will be addressed. come from people in that last category—“anybody else”—in recent years, including even local authorities. The first of the three principles that the NUJ has been trying to Sir Edward Garnier: It is a pleasure to follow the hon. establish is that there should be an independent process Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell). with judicial authorisation to protect professional I am sorry that he has been misdescribed as my hon. communications. The second is that there should be Friend the Member for North East Cambridgeshire automatic and mandatory prior notification of requests. (Stephen Barclay) on the Annunciator. I do not think The third is that there should be mechanisms in place to that either he or my hon. Friend has any doubt about challenge an application, along with the right of appeal. who they are, and, having listened to the hon. Gentleman speak in the House for the past 20 or so years, I As I said, I am here as an honest searcher for the certainly have no doubt as to who he is. Had he been truth. As far as I can see, none of the amendments able to be here on time today, his ears would have been tabled by the Government and others satisfies all three burning as the Minister and others praised him for his conditions. The first is satisfied, in that there will be at campaign on this matter. However, it is a pleasure to see least a form of the judicial authorisation for which we him here now, even if he has been described as Stephen have been arguing for at least 12 months. However, I Barclay on the Annunciator. can see no mention in the amendments of automatic and mandatory prior notification of the requests to the parties involved. With regard to data communication Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Dawn Primarolo): and collection, I see that there has been mention of Order. Members do not need to get excited. One of the notifying the company that has collected or retained the Annunciators is correct; the other is not working. However, data, but there does not seem to be a proposal for a I know what is going on, so we can proceed. process by which the individual journalist would be notified. Journalists do not seem to be party to these Sir Edward Garnier: As my father used to say, Madam proposals at all. As a result, there seems to be no Deputy Speaker, “There is no point in having two mechanism for their views to be represented when the clocks if they both tell the same time.” 109 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 110

I want briefly to respond to what my hon. Friend the not to the question I asked. I was not surprised by that, Member for North East Cambridgeshire said about his because I, like my hon. Friend the Member for Esher new clause 28. Having spent quite a lot of my time as a and Walton, suspect that there is not an answer. This is Government Law Officer and having subsequently taken what I call an early-day motion new clause. It is what is an interest in financial crime, I was much taken by what called, “Government sending out a message.”Governments he had to say. My only suggestion would be that, rather can send out messages, but they do that on television, than limiting himself to a further 31 days, he should on the radio and in the newspapers, and they get their propose— spin doctors to do it; legislation is supposed to be clear, non-repetitive and able to be clearly understood by the Stephen Barclay: It was proposed more to make a prosecuting authorities, the police, the courts and those point. who might be tempted to commit the offence that the clause hopes to describe. Sir Edward Garnier: My hon. Friend is unnecessarily I assume that an offence of “Throwing articles into modest in his ambitions. Instead of proposing 31 days, prisons” is intended to prevent or persuade people not he might have proposed any such other period as the to throw caches of drugs, razor blades, mobile telephones court might think just in all the circumstances. The and other contraband over prison walls or into prison thrust of his argument is, however, unassailable and I property—so far, so good. We all know that that is wish him well with his discussions with the Government. already a crime, not just under the Prison Act 1952, but New clause 28 makes a good deal of sense. under various other pieces of criminal legislation. To I am honoured to be a co-signatory to new clause 18, take a ludicrous example, if I were to throw a copy of particularly having just heard the speech by my hon. the Prison Act 1952, as amended, over the walls of Friend the Member for Esher and Walton (Mr Raab). Gartree prison in my constituency, would I be caught He has experience not only as an international lawyer by this? On the face of it I would and I would be liable, but as someone who has prosecuted in some pretty on indictment, to a term of imprisonment terrible cases dealing with crimes in the former Yugoslavia. “not exceeding two years or to a fine (or both)”. When he speaks, we should listen, pay attention and Sadly, the magistrates court does not exist in Market follow what he has to say, and what he had to say Harborough any more and I would have to be carted all tonight was unimpeachable. I stress, as he did, that if we the way to Leicester to be, on summary conviction, are to exclude people—be they foreign nationals or, imprisoned for up to 12 months or given a fine. under the current legislation, our own nationals—we It appears from the new clause that if I were to throw should know who they are. Secret justice is not justice. not “The complete works of William Shakespeare”, The new clause contains a proposed new subsection because that is a heavy volume, but a Shakespeare play that would allow the Secretary of State to defer publication over the prison wall, I would be committing an offence. of the name of the excluded person on particular grounds. I went to 65 of the prisons in England and Wales when I I suggest that that proposal would deal with any problems was a shadow spokesman responsible for prisons in the that anyone might suggest the new clause could create. period leading up to the 2010 election, but I never went The reason he has never received a cogent answer to his into or came out of a prison, young offenders institution questions to Ministers and officials is that there is not or secure training unit without being wholly aware of one, and he has highlighted that. The Government the notices on the gates setting out what it was unlawful should therefore have a little think about what he had to to bring into those places. Even though it might be say and what is contained in his new clause. suggested that lobbing a benign article such as “The I would say only one thing about new clause 24, and I complete works of William Shakespeare” over the prison am sorry that the hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington wall was something done with an overriding public probably will not agree with me on it, albeit that we are interest or with some other legitimate excuse, I do wish both pretty keen on the freedom of the press. The code we could stop passing legislation that already exists just of practice would be an altogether more attractive because it feels like a good thing to do. If we are going concept if I could actually read it and see what it said to take up the time of Ministers and officials in drafting before this thing came into legislation. The Minister this sort of stuff, why do we not draft something useful properly spoke about the time limits surrounding us as like new clause 18, proposed by my hon. Friend the we move towards the general election in May, but I used Member for Esher and Walton, and get that into legislation, to complain in opposition, I complained in government rather than this sort of guff? and I complain now that secondary legislation, statutory instruments and codes of practice are subsidiary rules Karen Bradley: Given the time and the debates that I that hang in locked boxes from legislative trees and are know are to follow, I shall endeavour to answer as not a good thing. If we are to persuade people that this many points as I can, but it is highly likely that I will be measure is a good thing, we should have sight of the brief in my comments. I will, however, commit to write code of practice as soon as possible. I know that Ministers to right hon. and hon. Members should I fail to never want to commit themselves to time schedules, but address specific points in this quick winding-up speech. this is an example of where, before the general election I did refer to the hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington and before this Bill becomes an Act, we should see the (John McDonnell) and I hope he will have a look at fruits of the consultation process and what the code of that. He talked about the notification of journalists practice should look like. whose communications data are sought. It has never Finally, and with a degree of diffidence, I wish to been the practice in this country for those whose discuss new clause 23. When I intervened on the Minister communications data are sought to be notified, and we to ask what offences the new clause would add to, I was do not intend to depart from that. However, as he not given an answer—well, I was given an answer, but recognised, this matter will need to be dealt with in the 111 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 112

[Karen Bradley] Mr Raab: Will my hon. Friend give way on that point? next Parliament. We have today published a draft clause which provides for judicial authorisation in cases where Karen Bradley: If my hon. Friend does not mind, I communications data are sought for the purpose of will not give way, because I need to finish by 8 o’clock, determining a journalistic source. No doubt he will take and I know that there are other hon. Members who the opportunity that future legislation will present to wish to speak. press his point again. I think we all agree that the solution we have before us today is not the perfect one, Mr Raab: Will my hon. Friend give us an illustration but we want to legislate in some way before the election of the security problem? and this is the most appropriate and perhaps only way we have of doing so. 8pm The hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull North (Diana Johnson), the shadow Minister asked why the Karen Bradley: Let me give my hon. Friend this Government did not seek to extend the scope of the example. There is a further risk that publication of Bill. We took advice from the Public Bill Office as to individuals excluded from the UK may undermine whether it would be possible to extend the scope international relations and foreign policy objectives. through an instruction and thereby enable a Government That risk is intensified if the excluded individual has new clause to be brought forward to give fullest effect connections with a foreign Government or well known to the interception of communications commissioner organisation that may be working in partnership with recommendation. The Public Bill Office advised that the UK to broaden our interests abroad. That is one the scope of the Bill could not be extended in that way. example. Also, ongoing investigations into the activities We tried, but, unfortunately, that was not possible. of an individual could be jeopardised if they became aware of the fact that they were on the list. While I My hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge appreciate the objective of the new clause and the (Dr Huppert) asked about the timing for the production commitment to transparency, the Home Secretary’s primary orders. The code will put in place the requirement to use objective in the use of her exclusion powers is to protect production orders in cases where communications data the UK from those individuals who wish to damage our are sought for the purposes of determining a journalistic national security or undermine our values. The new source. The shadow Minister, also asked about the clause would weaken her ability to do so and could detail of the code of practice. We will shortly publish a possibly put the British public at risk. revised code of practice that takes account of both the consultation responses and the recommendations of Turning to new clause 20 on firearms licensing, I put the IOCC. It will contain more detail on the factors to it to the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull North be considered in cases involving journalistic sources. that the amendment is unnecessary. The police already have the ability to take into account evidence of violence My hon. and learned Friend the Member for and domestic violence when considering firearms Harborough (Sir Edward Garnier) talked about the applications, and rigorous new guidance was issued in throwing of packages over the wall. I have to tell him July 2013 providing greater detail on how police should that in 2014 approximately 250 cases of new psychoactive handle such cases. substances being thrown into prison were recorded, compared with just 36 cases the previous year. There has The Government welcome the principle behind new been a significant increase in that number and in minor clause 21, but the expert review panel made it clear in its disorder and assaults in prison over the past year, and report last October that the ban on the supply of new increased NPS use has been linked to some of those psychoactive substances needs careful consideration. incidents. New psychoactive substances are not currently Our priority is to frame correctly any new offence and controlled drugs, which is why they do not fall within ensure that it is robust yet proportionate and embedded the legislation we would normally use. in a comprehensive legislative package. The Government are moving swiftly so that the necessary primary legislation is ready to be introduced at the earliest opportunity in Sir Edward Garnier rose— the new Parliament. Karen Bradley: I hope my hon. and learned Friend Finally, let me turn now to new clause 28 on money will not mind if I do not take an intervention from him laundering, which was tabled by my hon. Friend the at this stage, just so that I can ensure we get on to the Member for North East Cambridgeshire (Stephen Barclay). next group. The two of us have had many conversations about this. He knows that we are consulting on the suspicious New clause 18 was tabled by my hon. Friend the activity reporting regime, and I urge him to respond to Member for Esher and Walton (Mr Raab) and we have that consultation, as I am very keen to include all of discussed this point in Westminster Hall. He will be those points. familiar with the tribunal decision to uphold the Home In light of my explanations, I ask my hon. Friends Office and Information Commissioner’s decision on the Members for Esher and Walton, for North East the neither confirm nor deny response to a freedom Cambridgeshire and for Cambridge and the hon. Member of information request on information held by the for Kingston upon Hull North not to press their Department. It is a long-standing policy of this Government amendments, and I commend the Government amendments not to disclose the details of individual immigration to the House. cases, including in respect of those excluded from the UK. New clause 18 would have serious implications for Question put and agreed to. the security of our borders and therefore to the national New clause 23 accordingly read a Second time, and security of the country. added to the Bill. 113 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 114

New Clause 24 (5) The Secretary of State must lay a copy of the plan, determined under subsection (3)(a), before each House of CODES OF PRACTICE ABOUT INVESTIGATORY POWERS: Parliament within 6 months of the publication date of the JOURNALISTIC SOURCES assessment under subsection (2).’ In section 71 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (issue and revision of codes of practice), after subsection (2) Fiona Bruce: New clause 1, which I wish to be put to insert— a vote, is supported by more than 100 MPs. The arguments “(2A) A code of practice under subsection (1) that relates for it are straightforward. First, it is to clarify beyond (expressly or otherwise) to the exercise and performance, in doubt, in statute, that sex-selective abortion is illegal in connection with the prevention or detection of serious crime, UK law. This new clause is not seeking to change the of powers and duties conferred or imposed by or under Part 1 of law on abortion as some have said, but to confirm and this Act— clarify it. It also provides the Government with an (a) shall include provision designed to protect the public opportunity to address the problem by bringing forward interest in the confidentiality of journalistic sources; best practice regulations and guidance to support and (b) shall not be issued unless the Secretary of State has first protect women at risk. consulted the Interception of Communications Commissioner New clause 1 is necessary because there is no explicit and considered any relevant report made to the Prime Minister under section 58.”” .—(Karen Bradley.) statement about gender selective abortion in UK law. The law is being interpreted in different ways because This New Clause requires a code of practice made under section 71 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 relating to the when the Abortion Act 1967 was passed, scans to exercise of powers in Part 1 of that Act in relation to the prevention determine the sex of the foetus were not available. That or detection of serious crime to include provision to protect the has led to a huge amount of confusion and mixed public interest in the confidentiality of journalistic sources. messages. That is despite the fact that the Government Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added have repeatedly said that abortion on the grounds of to the Bill. gender alone is illegal. Health Ministers have said so; the Prime Minister has said so; the Department of Health has published guidance to that effect; and the New Clause 1 chief medical officer has written to doctors about it. Despite all of that, abortion providers and others, TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY ON THE GROUNDS OF staggeringly, are still refusing to accept the Government’s THE SEX OF THE UNBORN CHILD interpretation of the law. ‘Nothing in section 1 of the Abortion Act 1967 is to be interpreted as allowing a pregnancy to be terminated on the Only last week, the country’s largest abortion provider, grounds of the sex of the unborn child.’—(Fiona Bruce.) the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, republished its Brought up, and read the First time. controversial guidance in a booklet entitled, “Britain’s abortion law: what it says and why”. The following Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con): I beg to move, That question is posed: is abortion for reasons of foetal sex the clause be read a Second time. illegal under the Abortion Act? To this, it answers, “No, the law is silent on the matter.” The former Director of Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Dawn Primarolo): Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, has said: With this it will be convenient to discuss New clause 25 “The law does not in terms expressly prohibit gender-specific —Termination of pregnancy on grounds of sex of foetus— abortions.” ‘(1) The Secretary of State shall arrange for an assessment to be made of the evidence of termination of pregnancy on the Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con): All we are grounds of the sex of the foetus in England, Wales and Scotland. trying to do is simply clarify what everyone in the (2) The arrangements made under subsection (1) shall be such House of Commons wants to be the law: we should not as to enable publication of the assessment by the Secretary of have abortion on the basis of gender. That is the reply State within 6 months of the date of Royal Assent to this Act. to the DPP. We just want the law to be made absolutely (3) The Secretary of State shall consider the assessment made clear. under subsection (1) and— (a) determine and publish a strategic plan to tackle substantiated concerns identified in the assessment Fiona Bruce: Absolutely right. That is the purpose of made under subsection (1); or new clause 1. I will come on to explain why it is so (b) publish a statement and explanation in relation to why important to many of the women who are suffering as a a plan under subsection (3)(a) is not required. result of the lack of clarity in the law. (4) Any strategic plan under subsection (3)(a) must include, This House must make the matter clear. If we cannot but need not be limited to, steps— get a consistent line from abortion providers on whether (a) to promote change in the social and cultural patterns or not it is illegal to abort a girl—it is usually girls but of behaviour with a view to eradicating prejudices, not always—for the sole reason that she is a girl, then customs, traditions and all other practices which are the law is not fit for purpose. To do so constitutes a based on the idea of the inferiority of women and gross form of sex discrimination. Indeed it is the first which may amount to pressure to seek a termination and most fundamental form of violence against women on the grounds of the sex of the foetus; and girls. Surely no one can object to a clause that (b) to ensure best practice exists in identifying women simply states that that is wrong. being coerced or pressured into seeking a termination on the grounds of the sex of the foetus, or at risk of New clause 1 will do more than that, because if it is being so, and in the provision of protection and passed, by virtue of clause 79 (2) the Government will support to potential victims; and be able to issue guidance to help address this abuse and (c) to promote guidance to service providers, health support affected women. That is why new clause 25 is professionals and other stakeholders. inadequate when taken alone. What it is proposing is a 115 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 116

[Fiona Bruce] Fiona Bruce rose—

Department of Health assessment or review of the Glenda Jackson: Will the hon. Lady give way? issue. The Department can already do that. Without new clause 1, it is inadequate, because it fails to go to Fiona Bruce: No, I am going to continue. I thank the the heart of the issue and to clear up the very real former Attorney-General for making that point so lucidly. confusion that exists. It fails to clarify the law, as new clause 1 does, that sex election abortion is illegal in this We have also heard that the new clause could introduce country. racial profiling of expectant mothers, but has anyone argued that for female genital mutilation? The term Let me turn now to some of the objections to new “family balancing” goes wider than any one particular clause 1. Much of them have misrepresented its impact community. and some have been plain scaremongering. First, it is said that it will criminalise women. That is flatly untrue. Then there is the argument that the new clause will The clause applies only to authorising doctors; it does do nothing to help abused women. It will indeed. It will not affect an expectant mother’s standing in law. We clarify the law and as Polly Harrar of Jeena International have also heard that it will stop abortion for disability powerfully told me: where there is a sex-linked condition. That is also totally “What we’ve found with the Forced Marriage Act 2007 was incorrect. I can reassure colleagues that there is nothing that we were able to use that piece of legislation as a bargaining in this new clause to prevent a doctor from diagnosing tool to negotiate with parents, so a young woman could say, ‘You substantial risk of serious handicap via the sex of the do realise this is a criminal offence?’” baby. In such cases, the ground for the abortion is In the same way, Polly says, the risk of the disability, not the sex of the baby. New “with sex-selective abortion: having clarity in the law means that clause 1 will not change that, and I have been careful to women could use this clarification to protect themselves against obtain expert legal opinion to that effect. pressure to have a sex-selection abortion.” She continues that Kate Green (Stretford and Urmston) (Lab): The hon. “as with FGM having a higher profile, legislation does effect a Lady spoke rightly a few moments ago about the step change in cultural attitudes. So while legislation alone is not importance of clarity in law. Does she not agree that enough, it has real power to change behaviour, and that’s what is there would be reluctance and confusion when the needed.” grounds for a termination were the genetic disorder, That addresses clearly the Royal College of Midwives’ but the only way in which that genetic order could arise objection that new clause 1 will do little to alleviate the is in relation to the gender of the foetus? external pressures or coercion that these women face. As Mandy Sanghera said: Fiona Bruce: Not at all. We can trust our medical “We also we hope this will act as a deterrent—it will enable practitioners to be professional in that respect. It is women to have more control over their own decisions.” quite clear that the ground for the abortion in such cases would be the genetic condition and not the sex of Is that not what many objecting to the clause want? the child. What does not help women under pressure to have an abortion simply because they are carrying a girl or a Glenda Jackson (Hampstead and Kilburn) (Lab): boy, whether that pressure comes from violence or Will the hon. Lady give way on that point? coercion or is more subtle, is allowing that abortion to take place and sending the woman back to an abusive Fiona Bruce: I will, but then I need to make progress. situation. To do so is to condone the very culture behind the pressure for such abortions and to exacerbate Glenda Jackson: There are certain genetic diseases such abuse. The new clause does nothing to diminish that are transmitted by the mother to a male foetus. services for those suffering abuse. Indeed, if it is followed They are not passed on to a female foetus. So the hon. by sensitively crafted regulations it should certainly Lady’s argument is invalid. improve them. Then the quite offensive point is made that there is no Fiona Bruce: That is exactly the point that I am evidence for sex-selective abortions in the UK. That is making. If the handicap, or the condition, is diagnosed offensive as it is insulting to women such as those I have via the sex of the baby, in such cases the grounds for the mentioned who have been campaigning for many years abortion, through that diagnosis, is the risk of serious to stop this practice. Yes, the numbers are small compared handicap, and on that ground the abortion can be with those in China or India, but they are real. Should legitimately carried out. we have to wait until those numbers grow before we take action? Rani Bilkhu, who, incidentally, is pro-choice, Mr Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield) (Con): Perhaps I says: can help my hon. Friend, although I do not think that “I have been supporting women dealing with sex-selective she needs assistance. Of all the arguments that have abortions…for almost a decade. Saying that there is no evidence been put forward on this matter, the one that has no is tantamount to saying that the women we work with are lying traction at all is the suggestion that enacting this new and that my organisation”— clause would lead to the confusion that the hon. Member Jeena International— for Hampstead and Kilburn (Glenda Jackson) fears. It plainly would not. There might be other arguments that “is making things up.” can be advanced and of course there will be different Interestingly, Rani also says that “nobody is collecting views across the House, but that could not possibly data”, so it is no wonder that opponents of the new clause happen if the new clause were enacted. say that there is none. 117 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 118

I know of many examples of women who have suffered. of doctors on the legal grounds on which they might One had one daughter, conceived a second girl, had an agree a termination, if at all. It would inevitably be abortion and then could not conceive again. Another subject to legal challenges that would, I believe, dilute had three abortions on the basis of gender, including of the clarity of the 1967 Act. As far as I am aware, there is twins. Another’s husband punched and kicked her in no evidence that doctors are granting terminations to the stomach when he discovered she was having a girl. women who do not meet the medical grounds laid down Yet another says that in the Abortion Act 1967. “women suffer depression after these abortions. What is not always considered is the emotional and psychological impact.” Mr Burrowes: Does the hon. Lady agree with the These women deserve our support in the manner that TUC interpretation of the law, which is that it would be they say will really help—through legislation and by right in some circumstances for a doctor to approve an clarifying the law. That does not stop a review, but it is abortion if, for example, a woman did not want to have essential that we clear up the confusion, support these a girl for cultural reasons? women and pass new clause 1. In doing so, we would reflect the overwhelming public mood. A recent ComRes Ann Coffey: I repeat that as far as I am aware there is poll showed that 84% of the public agree that aborting no evidence that doctors are granting terminations to babies because of their gender should be explicitly women who do not meet the medical grounds laid down banned by law. More than that, we should support new in the Abortion Act 1967. That would be a criminal clause 1 because it is, quite simply, the right thing to do. offence.

Ann Coffey: I am grateful for the opportunity to Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD): I am sure that speak in support of new clause 25, tabled by me, the the hon. Lady is right about there not being evidence right hon. Member for Cardiff Central (Jenny Willott), for that. Is she aware of whether there is evidence of my right hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and doctors refusing permission for a termination on the West Norwood (Dame Tessa Jowell), my hon. Friend grounds of none of those criteria? Are there statistics to the Member for Walsall South (Valerie Vaz) and the demonstrate that that happens? hon. Members for Truro and Falmouth (Sarah Newton) and for Totnes (Dr Wollaston). I will seek to test the Ann Coffey: As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, opinion of the House on the new clause. part of the new clause proposes a proper assessment of The Offences Against the Person Act 1861 makes it a some of the issues surrounding this question. I hope criminal offence intentionally to unlawfully procure a that during the assessment we would get much better miscarriage, including for a woman to procure her own facts about what is and what is not happening. miscarriage. The Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 Women are pregnant in very different circumstances, makes it a criminal offence intentionally to kill a child subject to different pressures—economic, familial and capable of being born alive before it has a life independent community—that can all influence a pregnant woman’s of its mother. The Abortion Act 1967 creates exceptions state of mind and her attitude to continuing her pregnancy. to those offences in limited circumstances and abortion If there is no substantiated evidence that doctors are on the grounds of gender is not one of those exceptions. granting abortions on the grounds of gender alone, we It is therefore illegal and subject to criminal prosecution. might be dealing with a more complex issue, which is Indeed, guidance was reissued as recently as May 2014 how wider community and cultural attitudes to girls by the Department of Health that said again categorically and women affect the physical and mental health of the that abortion on the grounds of sex was illegal. I am pregnant woman. therefore not quite sure why the new clause proposed by Therefore, before legislating we should examine the the hon. Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce) is needed facts relating to this complex issue, because I am concerned or how inserting it into the 1967 Act would address her that the insertion of the proposed statement might have concerns. the unwanted consequence of women who might otherwise have access to an abortion on the grounds of physical 8.15 pm and mental welfare being denied a termination. New clause 25 would arrange for an assessment of the evidence Sir Edward Leigh: If the hon. Lady thinks that such of termination of pregnancy on the grounds of the sex abortions are illegal under the 1967 Act, what possible of the foetus in England, Wales and Scotland to be objection could there be to making that explicit in law? published within six months of Royal Assent. Of course, included in that assessment should be the experiences of Ann Coffey: If the hon. Gentleman will wait, I am women who feel that they have been pressured to have coming to that point. their pregnancies terminated. The statement the hon. Member for Congleton proposes Like other hon. Members, I have received briefings would sit alongside the existing seven grounds for from many organisations and groups on the issue, and termination in the 1967 Act, but of course the sex of the they demonstrate its complexity. One group that is in foetus can be a factor in causing so much distress for the favour of new clause 1 talked about a growing body of woman that she meets the existing medical criteria for a research comprising the experiences of women who termination. The British Medical Association supplied have talked about having sex-selective abortions in the two case studies that demonstrated how that can occur. UK as well as abroad. It states: In both cases, gender was a key factor in affecting the “We know from experience that women are having sex-selective state of mind of the pregnant woman and her wish not abortions in the UK, and we feel their experiences—which reflect to continue the pregnancy. It is not clear how new a much wider problem—should be taken seriously before the clause 1, if added to the Bill, would affect the decision situation worsens.” 119 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 120

[Ann Coffey] If the assessment that we propose uncovers substantiated concerns that there is pressure to seek terminations on Another group that is opposed to new clause 1 has said the grounds of gender, we need to put in place a plan to that it would deal with what is giving rise to those pressures and how “have far reaching and unintended consequences for the very we can better support women who might be being women it purports to protect.” coerced. That is the proposal in the second part of new It talked about the need to locate the protection of clause 25. I hope that in bringing forward those proposals women from sex-selective abortion within a safeguarding there would be extensive consultation with women from framework. It states: all cultural backgrounds. “There is a need to examine the issue alongside other forms of Finally, I would like to share a story with Members. gender discrimination that impact on the practice, including the On a recent train journey I started talking with an practice of dowry, domestic violence and honour based violence.” Asian woman who was originally from Bangladesh. In It therefore calls for a wide-ranging inquiry, including the course of the conversation she showed me a photo on available support services. of her three daughters, who are now grown up. I said that they were beautiful and how lucky she was to have Sir Edward Garnier: The arguments that the hon. three daughters, at which point she looked very distressed. Lady is making are those that I have read and that have She then told me that she had never enjoyed any of her persuaded me against supporting new clause 1, which I pregnancies because she knew that she was carrying a had originally intended to do when it was first mooted. girl and that her then husband saw girls as being of no I am persuaded that the real difficulty we face is getting value and, in turn, viewed her as having no value as a evidence to court, and nothing that my hon. Friend the wife because she had not produced a son. He eventually Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce) has said will abandoned her. However, I am happy to report that my improve the quality of the evidence. I horribly disapprove— travelling companion went on to have her own career and that her girls are confident young women who are Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Dawn Primarolo): finding their own ways in life. Order. This is not an opportunity for the hon. and When I asked her what she thought could be done learned Gentleman to make a speech. This debate must about those attitudes to girls, she said that the answer end at 9 o’clock and many Members wish to speak, so was education, education, education. She of course is interventions must be brief. I think that we have the gist right. We understand that from our own history of of what he was saying— fighting for women’s equality—a fight that many of us still feel is a work in progress. I hope that this cross-party Sir Edward Garnier rose— amendment will be supported by the House and that it will mean that when the Secretary of State reports back Madam Deputy Speaker: No, I think that we have the in six months’ time on her assessment, with accompanying gist. Thank you. proposals, we will be better informed about a way forward in addressing concerns that I agree we should Ann Coffey: I think that the hon. and learned Gentleman not ignore. No woman should feel pressured into seeking has made his point. a termination for any reason, including gender. I agree that the connection between cultural preferences The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health for one sex and the factors that might then lead to a (Jane Ellison): I welcome the opportunity to speak in state of inconsolable distress for the pregnant woman this debate, and I will try to do so relatively briefly needs to be better understood to enable us to protect in order to allow more Back-Bench contributions. New women from coercion and to support them in their clause 1, which stands in the name of my hon. Friend pregnancies. We should certainly look at the facts before the Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce), and new agreeing to any change in the wording of the 1967 Act, clause 25, which stands in the name of the hon. Member because we must be careful not to worsen the situation for Stockport (Ann Coffey), both relate to the very for already vulnerable women. important matter of addressing the abhorrent practice New clause 1 assumes that restating that sex-selective of sex-selective abortion. abortion is illegal will offer women protection from The Government have been consistently clear that pressure to terminate their pregnancies, but women abortion on the grounds of gender alone is already subject to intolerable pressure to abort will continue to illegal. The Department of Health repeated that in be subject to coercion. My concern is about how women guidance issued in May 2014, and it is important to would interpret the inclusion of the new clause. They stress that all independent sector providers have agreed might feel that Parliament has legislated that if the sex to comply with, and operate on the basis of, the of the child is at all an issue, irrespective of their mental Department’s guidance and that they must do so as part distress, they will not have access to a termination. of their licensing conditions. The Care Quality Commission Sometimes it is not what legislation says that has a monitors compliance with that, including through its powerful effect on behaviour, but what people believe it inspection visits. says. That might lead them to pursue alternative routes as a first resort, rather than a last one. We do not want Mr Burrowes: On the welcome guidance that was to go back to the days of the botched backstreet abortions published, I understand from freedom of information that took place prior to the 1967 Act, which throughout requests, and from an e-mail sent on 21 January, that the ages have been the resort of desperate women. I there was a request for joint badging of that guidance to remember the lengths to which women would go to ensure that all the stakeholders signed up to it. Why did terminate their pregnancies prior to that Act, in spite of that not happen? Why was it left only to the Department the risks to their own health. to publish it? 121 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 122

Jane Ellison: It was the Department’s own guidance, “Parents with a family history of such a condition may not which is why the Department published it. In the course have the option of Ground E.” of forming the guidance, we spoke with all the people The RCOG also says, in relation to how doctors might we would be expected to speak to. feel about the practical implications, that The chief medical officer for England has written “doctors deciding not to provide this aspect of gynaecological twice to all doctors—in February 2012 and November care” 2013—reminding them of their responsibilities under might do so the 1967 Act and reiterating the Government’s position on gender-selective abortion, and that was reiterated by “because it is deemed to be too ‘risky’ to them professionally.” professional bodies. The House will want to be aware of these and other The Department has also undertaken detailed analysis concerns regarding the practical implications of the to investigate whether the gender birth ratio in the UK new clause from the body that represents the doctors varies by the mother’s country of birth beyond the who provide these services and whom we entrust with range that might be expected to occur naturally. The the training, support and education of our future work analysis, first published in May 2013 and updated in force. 2014, concluded that, when broken down by the mother’s country of birth, no group was statistically different Dr Sarah Wollaston (Totnes) (Con): Does the Minister from the range we would expect to see naturally occurring. agree that one of the issues is that there are some types The Department has quite rightly committed to repeat of X-linked genetic disorders affecting only one sex that that analysis annually when new birth data become cannot be detected by genetic testing for the specific available. However, I stress that the Government will condition in question, and that that is where the uncertainty remain vigilant, will continue to monitor data and will arises? In other words, it would be entirely on the basis be fully open to any other evidence that comes to light. of the sex of the child. That is why the concern and My hon. Friend the Member for Congleton cited uncertainty would be increased by the new clause. poignant anecdotal reports of sex-selective abortion, as she did on her ten-minute rule Bill. As I said to her at the end of that debate, I urge her and anyone with Jane Ellison: My hon. Friend exactly describes the evidence of individual cases to report this to the police concerns as they have been expressed to me by the to investigate. I invite her once again to come to the RCOG. Department with such evidence. It may be helpful for me to give the House some Considerable concern has been expressed about the figures on abortions in our country. The House is aware impact of new clause 1 and it is right that we touch on that the vast majority of abortions—91%—are carried that. The Government consider that the new clause out at under 13 weeks’ gestation. This is before the would restate our long-standing position on the issue—that gestational age at which the sex of the foetus is routinely abortion on the ground of gender alone is illegal. However, identified at the second scan, at around 18 to 21 weeks’ hon. Members will have heard the concerns expressed gestation. Disclosing the sex of the foetus is a local by a number of groups about the practical implications decision and is based on clinical judgment about the of new clause 1. Although the Government do not certainty of the assessment and the individual circumstances consider on balance that ground E would be affected by of each case. Some 98% of all abortions were carried the new clause, it is naturally worrying for me as a out at under 18 weeks’ gestation in England and Wales Health Minister to hear from the Royal College of in 2013. It is also the case that 98% of abortions Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College performed in the independent sector in 2013 were carried of Midwives about the concerns that new clause 1 has out at under 18 weeks. By contrast, in 2013, 94% of caused among health professionals providing termination reported abortions for foetal abnormality were performed of pregnancy services to women. in NHS hospitals. In the light of this, the House would want to consider that the new clause could be thought Mr Grieve: I am very grateful to hear from my likely to have greatest potential impact on those health hon. Friend that ground E would not be jeopardised. professionals working in our NHS, rather than on The Government have access to good legal advice— independent sector providers. [Interruption.] I trust that they have access to good As the hon. Member for Stockport explained, new legal advice, and it must be the case that the Government clause 25 would require a further assessment of the have a position on the matter. I am grateful to hear from evidence that terminations are taking place on the ground my hon. Friend that that particular anxiety is completely of the sex of the foetus alone. I have already outlined misplaced. the analysis that the Department of Health is undertaking on an annual basis in this area. We will also take into Jane Ellison: I am concerned about the fears that consideration any other evidence that comes to light. I some people have about the practical implications of stress to the House that we take the issue of coercion the new clause, and I think others share that concern. and abuse very seriously. Women who present for an I hope to come on to that abortion will always have the opportunity to speak to a The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists health professional on their own at some point during highlighted the potential impact on abortions for foetal the consultation. From my perspective as public health abnormality—I hear the point that was made on that in Minister, this is the sort of issue that would sensibly be two interventions—where an inherited gender-related considered as part of any further review, and the condition may be indicated, and the possibility that the Department of Health is already considering what further new clause, if passed, may result in further concerns. sources of evidence can contribute to our knowledge on The RCOG says: this important issue. 123 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 124

Fiona Mactaggart (Slough) (Lab): Does the Minister Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce) confirmed, sex- accept that clauses 73 and 74 of this Bill precisely help selective abortion is already illegal under the Abortion to protect women from family coercion to have an Act 1967. abortion? Sir Edward Leigh: Will the hon. Lady give way on Jane Ellison: That is a useful point to draw out about that point? other parts of this important Bill. Luciana Berger: If the hon. Gentleman will forgive It is for the House to decide whether it wants to place me, I am not going to take his intervention. the commitment to a further review on a statutory The Government, along with the chief medical officer, footing by supporting new clause 25. the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, As is the convention with such issues of conscience, and the Royal College of Midwives, have said that as a Government we do not take a position either for or abortions carried out on the sole premise of foetal sex against new clauses 1 and 25. If the matter is pressed to are illegal. As we have heard, updated guidance and a Division, Government Members will have a free vote. instructions to doctors published within the past 12 months However, I hope that it has been helpful to hon. Members have clarified this. All independent sector providers in forming their own opinion on these two new clauses have also agreed to follow the revised guidance as part for me to set out the Government’s actions to date in of their licensing agreements. Let me be clear: we do not this area, the facts in relation to the gestations at which need new clause 1 to make sex-selective abortion illegal. most abortions are performed, and the concerns raised However, it is right that we should send a strong message by professional bodies. As I have said, it is for the from this Parliament that gender-selective abortions are House to decide whether it wants to support either of wrong. We can do that today by requiring the Government the new clauses, or indeed both or neither of them, but to carry out a thorough assessment and produce an I reiterate that abortion of a foetus on the grounds of action plan to address the root causes of this practice. gender alone is already illegal. That is what new clause 25 would do. The change to the law proposed in new clause 1 Luciana Berger (Liverpool, Wavertree) (Lab/Co-op): would not only fail to address the root issues that lie The impassioned speeches that we have heard in this behind the problem but have serious unintended debate are testament to what a sensitive and complex consequences. I listened closely to the hon. Member for matter this is. New clause 1 would amend the Abortion Congleton and to the former Attorney-General, the right Act 1967 and proposes that a pregnancy could not hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr Grieve), “be terminated on the grounds of the sex of the unborn child.” but I point to the text of new clause 1, which it is worth reading out: New clause 25 would require a review of the evidence relating to abortion on the grounds of gender alone and “Nothing in section 1 of the Abortion Act 1967 is to be interpreted as allowing a pregnancy to be terminated on the for this to be followed by a strategic Government plan grounds of the sex of the unborn child.” that addresses concerns about the prevalence of termination on the grounds of the sex of the foetus in England, It says that nothing is to be so interpreted, so that Scotland and Wales. includes medical grounds, the well-being of the mother, and gender-specific abnormalities. At best, this would I am in favour of new clause 25 as the best way to create uncertainty and doubt for doctors who administer address concerns about sex-selective abortions. Outwardly, abortions in these situations and a legal grey area for the intentions behind new clause 1 might seem reasonable. women who are already facing a very difficult decision. However, a wide range of well-respected organisations I heard the former Attorney-General’s intervention, but and experts have raised concerns, pointing out a number I have listened to many legal experts who have written of unintended and troubling consequences. The on the pages of many papers— organisations include the Royal College of Midwives, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Mr Grieve: I appreciate that there may be policy the British Medical Association, the TUC, the End arguments and all sorts of good arguments to make, Violence Against Women Coalition, Genetic Alliance but it is simply incorrect to argue that the new clause UK, Imkaan and the Southall Black Sisters, among would have the consequences that have been claimed of many others. preventing, for example, abortion from taking place where, because of the gender, there was a likelihood of Sir Edward Leigh: Will the hon. Lady give way? disability. The Minister confirmed that. She was a bit hesitant about it, but she eventually did so when I intervened on her, so I repeat her assurance. My view is Luciana Berger: I am going to continue because we that this argument is completely groundless. have a lot to get through and many Members wish to speak. Luciana Berger: I thank the right hon. and learned New clause 1 represents a significant departure from Gentleman for his intervention, but, as we have heard, the current principles on which abortion law in this many legal experts dispute that position. I refer to the country is based. Given that this is a matter of huge specific text of the new clause, which says nothing significance, the new clause deserves fuller debate and about, and is in direct conflict with, paragraphs (a) to scrutiny than we have the opportunity for in the remaining (d) of section 1(1) of the Abortion Act. 24 minutes of this debate. The Genetic Alliance has said that Choosing to terminate a pregnancy simply because “the consequences of this amendment could be devastating to the foetus one is carrying is not the sex one wishes for is women and couples at risk of having a child affected by a serious a notion that most people find abhorrent. As the hon. x-linked condition.” 125 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 126

I have heard from one family where two sisters were of what works. I sincerely hope that Members on both carriers of x-linked severe combined immunodeficiency, sides of the House will vote against new clause 1 and in a disease that affects only boys. After years of thinking, support of new clause 25. one sister decided not to have any children, because she did not want to risk the chance of having to choose Mr David Burrowes (Enfield, Southgate) (Con): It is between having a very poorly son or a termination. Her important that we try as far as possible to develop a sister decided—also after many years of consideration—to consensus on subjects such as this. Everyone across the have children and went on to have three healthy daughters. House is against abortion on the grounds of gender Those were the choices that those women made after alone. We have communicated that view, the Government much consideration and deliberation with their families. have written it in guidance and we want to make it How can Parliament take that decision away from them? clear in statute. It is as simple as that. We do not seek to I am sure that no one would wish to deprive their have a Trojan horse or to upgrade the status of the daughter, sister or partner of that choice. It is surely not unborn child. On that point, one simply needs to look for Parliament to rush this through in the short time at section 1(1)(d) of the Abortion Act 1967, which available and deny families the opportunity to have refers to “child” as a legal term, so that definition is not children or a healthy baby. unknown. Another serious concern is that new clause 1 is not We could support new clause 25, which aims to just a clarification of the law, but a fundamental reform develop further research and have a plan, but it is not an of the essential principles on which existing abortion alternative to new clause 1. Yes, we should develop law in this country been based for 47 years. The Abortion more understanding and evidence, but we should not Act 1967 places the physical and mental health of the ignore the main point of this debate, which is what woman as the overriding concern of a doctor authorising brought together more than 50 Members from both abortion. Our current legislation refers to the foetus sides of the House—whether they were pro-choice or rather than the unborn child. That is because, across pro-life—when they signed a letter in 2013. Some of our legislation and common law, children are accorded them have now signed different new clauses and are a wide range of protections and rights that Parliament seeking to divide one another when we should be coming has previously agreed should not be accorded to the together to show that we want to clear up the law. foetus. We have talked about different legal experts. Why not Changing the language of the Abortion Act, as this take one, Keir Starmer, the then Director of Public new clause would do, would send a very different signal Prosecutions? On 7 October 2013, he said: to the courts and open up different judicial interpretations of abortion or new consequences and restrictions that “The law does not…expressly prohibit gender-specific abortions”. would go far beyond the issue of sex selection. For the That no doubt came as a surprise to many members of first time since legislation in 1929, new clause 1, if the public. To put it simply, that is what new clause 1 is passed, could afford the foetus rights that would be in about—it would expressly prohibit such abortions. What conflict with those of the mother and it could seriously does the law do? As Keir Starmer went on, rather the jeopardise the future of safe, legal abortion in the UK. law “prohibits any abortion carried out without two medical practitioners Fiona Bruce: Will the hon. Lady give way? having formed a view, in good faith, that the health risks of continuing with a pregnancy outweigh those of termination.” Luciana Berger: I am not going to give way. I am going to wrap up, because I am conscious of the time 8.45 pm and Madam Deputy Speaker wants me to conclude. What drew Members from both sides of the House There are many other points that I would have liked and all sides of the ethical debate to be concerned in to address, particularly the issue of custom and practice 2013? They jointly said that the Crown Prosecution and why new clause 25 addresses the issue of coercion Service’s decision not to prosecute in communities, which is something we all want to deal with. “could lead to the conclusion that gender-specific abortion is merely a matter of professional misconduct rather than illegal.” Voting against new clause 1 is not an indication of support for sex-selective practices, but an acknowledgement The issue is whether we simply delegate this matter to that it would do nothing to address the causes or reduce professionals’ judgment in performing a balancing act and the incidences of sex-selective abortion and that some to their conduct, or deal with it—as we as parliamentarians serious negative unintended consequences would result should do and are charged with doing—by recognising from enacting this proposed change to the Serious that at the very least we must ensure that the law is clear. Crime Bill. What did the Department do? It responded to Few people would support the idea that families the concerns expressed in 2013 by deciding to issue should be able to have abortions on the grounds of departmental guidance to set out its interpretation of gender alone. That is why it is illegal under our current the law. As we have already heard, and we have been law. New clause 1 represents a significant departure bombarded with lots of briefings from many organisations from the current principles on which abortion law in —the royal colleges, the TUC, the BMA and the British this country is based. Instead, new clause 25 would Pregnancy Advisory Service—there are different require a review of the evidence relating to abortion on interpretations of the law. the grounds of gender alone, to ensure that we have a full understanding of the practice and the extent of the Sir Edward Leigh: We have to base the law on the law. problem, and for that to be followed by a Government There is no mention of this in the 1967 Act. There was strategy to tackle it accordingly, based on the evidence no possibility of mentioning it in the Act, because it 127 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 128

[Sir Edward Leigh] constantly call for clarification of the law in Northern Ireland by seeking to extend the level of abortion there was not possible to determine gender when it was passed. are quick to say that we do not need to clarify the law Keir Starmer is therefore absolutely right: the law is when it comes to tightening the law on abortion in unclear. Great Britain.

Mr Burrowes: That is right. The Department issued Jim Shannon: I thank my right hon. Friend for making helpful guidance that abortion on the grounds of gender that clear and salient point. alone was illegal. However, guidance is not sufficient. If abortion laws are unclear on whether sex-selective We do not simply rely on guidance in many areas of abortion is legal, let us tighten them up using new policy. clause 1, so that it is clear beyond reasonable doubt that As freedom of information requests have revealed, the practice is unacceptable. The new clause would the Government’s attempt jointly to badge all stakeholders inevitably clarify the law by stating explicitly that the together did not succeed, because the BMA rejected the termination of pregnancy on the grounds of the sex of very guidance published by the Government. It said the unborn child is illegal. It would add clarity and that gender selection abortion is “normally unethical”, certainty for women and medical professionals, so that but that the guidance neither party would be left wondering what their rights “fails to reflect the…full legal situation regarding abortion and and obligations were. gender.” New clause 25 would not provide adequate means for The BMA therefore had a different interpretation. It holding doctors to account, because a prosecution would also said that, separate to the issue of gender-related still hinge on the ambiguity of section 1 of the Abortion disability that has quite properly been raised, Act 1967. It is clear that it would do nothing to move “in some cases doctors may come to the conclusion that the forward the debate on the clarity of the law. New clause effects of having a child of a particular gender are so severe to the 1 would make it certain, without a doubt, that sex-selective physical or mental health of the pregnant woman as to provide abortion is illegal. There would be no conflicting legal and ethical justification for an abortion”. interpretations, just the black letter of the law. It would We need greater clarity than can be given in guidance; force the Government not only to clarify the law, but to we need to be sure that such a prohibition is clear in create initiatives to address the issue of son preference. statute. The law as it stands is not clear. We have a duty I will conclude, because I am conscious that others not just to leave it to a doctor to perform a balancing want to speak and I want to allow time for that. New act. No longer should we be silent on this issue. I urge clause 1 is vital for at least two reasons. First, at the hon. Members to support new clause 1. moment it is possible to ask whether sex-selective abortion is illegal and to get three different answers that appear Several hon. Members rose— to be contradictory, but that are all correct. That will not do. If there are varying interpretations of the law Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Dawn Primarolo): and the legality of a practice is unclear, the law must be Order. May I ask Members to make their comments amended to thwart any confusion, particularly for women, very brief, because the debate will end at 9 pm and I who should be in no doubt as to their rights in this area. want to get in as many as I can? It is therefore important that we support new clause 1. Secondly, campaigners such as Jeena International Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): Many Members, and Karma Nirvana suggest that a prejudicial attitude including myself, strongly support new clause 1 as a towards girls is a phenomenon that is occurring in the means of clarifying the law to make it absolutely clear United Kingdom. Therefore, the time to act against that sex-selective abortion, which is plainly discriminatory, sex-selective abortion is now, not when our sex ratios is illegal in the United Kingdom. In so doing, we seek to become distorted to the same levels as those of India inspire the Government to develop interventions that and China. New clause 1 sends a clear, unequivocal will address the issue of why boys are more desired than message to doctors and medical practitioners that sex- girls—the issue of son preference. selective abortion is illegal and cannot be tolerated in In setting out my position, I want to address head on our society. I urge right hon. and hon. Members to vote the argument that the new clause will criminalise women. for it tonight. That is not the case: the legal standing of women would in no way be changed, but doctors would instead be Dr Wollaston: We all agree that it is abhorrent to held to account, and rightly so. Sex-selective abortion is terminate a pregnancy on the grounds of a belief that already illegal in the United Kingdom. In fact, the daughters are less valuable than sons. However, I will Prime Minister suggested in March 2014 that abortion vote against new clause 1 for three reasons: it is unnecessary, on the grounds of gender was not only unacceptable, there would be unintended consequences and we have but illegal. It is alarming that medical organisations, insufficient time to debate what would be a fundamental such as the British Medical Pregnancy Advisory Service change to an underlying principle of the Abortion Act and the British Medical Association, have suggested 1967. that that is not the case, or that at the very least the law We have heard clearly that it is already illegal to is silent on the matter. That must be addressed. terminate a pregnancy on the grounds of gender alone, and rightly so. That has been clarified since many of us Mr Jeffrey M. Donaldson (Lagan Valley) (DUP): agreed that there was an issue. I agree that there was an Thankfully, we do not have the Abortion Act 1967 in issue. It was not possible to bring prosecutions until the Northern Ireland. One of the difficulties is that clarification was issued by the Department of Health organisations, such as the BMA and others, which and the chief medical officer. 129 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 130

The updated data on this issue, which examines not Having supported the hon. Lady’s original ten-minute only ethnicity but birth order, shows that there is no rule Bill, I have since read something from an organisation evidence of a systematic practice of gender-based abortion in America that is closely linked to the all-party pro-life in this country. It happens in other parts of the world, group that she chairs. The head of that group stated: where it is having a serious distorting effect on societies “I propose that we—the pro-life movement—adopt as our next and on the status of women, but there is no systematic goal the banning of sex…selective abortion. By formally protecting practice here, although I have no doubt that there are all female fetuses from abortion on the ground of their sex, we individual cases. would plant in the law the proposition that the developing child is a being whose claims on us should not depend on their sex…This New clause 1 would have unintended consequences. sense of contradiction will be further heightened among radical At present, women may have the confidence to disclose feminists—” to a doctor in the confidence of a consulting room that I think he means people like me— they feel under pressure. If we brought in the new clause, women might feel that they may be criminalised. “the shock troops of the abortion movement. They may believe that the right to abortion is fundamental to women’s emancipation, That would do more harm than good and bring about but many will recoil at the thought of aborting their unborn the exact reverse of the intended consequence of the sisters.” new clause. We also risk stigmatising communities through My final reason for arguing that we should reject the the implication that this is a widespread practice, which new clause is the concern of the British Medical Association it is not in the UK. We have to be clear about that. that it will make doctors more fearful of providing New clause 1 uses the very emotive term, “the unborn abortion services and training to carry out abortions. child”. That would change the meaning within the One of the biggest risks for young women seeking help Abortion Act. We have to be very careful about that. to terminate a pregnancy is not getting that help in time, My hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, Southgate as a result of which we end up with late abortions and (Mr Burrowes) mentioned that the word “child” appears women who cannot have abortions when they are entitled in the Abortion Act. I accept that, but we must look at to them. One reason for that is the growing number of the context in which the word is mentioned. It is mentioned doctors who are reluctant to perform abortions because in the grounds for terminating a pregnancy when there they practise defensive medicine. I have no doubt that is a grave risk that a child may suffer a serious abnormality. the new clause is unnecessary and likely to increase that In other words, it does not confer personhood on the and make it more difficult for women to access their foetus in the way that this change would. It may be the right to termination—a right that I am afraid the hon. view of the House that that needs to change, but let us Member for Congleton, although I agree when she says come back and debate this incredibly serious ethical that we all agree that abortion should not be available point with the time it deserves, not shoehorn it on to the on the basis of gender, does not support at all. tail end of a new clause with which it is difficult to disagree—as I said earlier, we are all agreed that termination Sir Edward Leigh: If the whole House is agreed that it on the grounds that a daughter is somehow of less value is morally repugnant to destroy a foetus simply on the than a son is totally abhorrent. basis of its gender—it is usually a girl—let us make that I urge hon. Members please to come back to this explicit in law. issue and give it the time it deserves. Let us debate it on its ethical merits, not try to pretend that we are talking Dame Angela Watkinson (Hornchurch and Upminster) about something else. We are all agreed on the fundamental (Con): Very briefly— premise, so let us give it the time it deserves and reject new clause 1 tonight. 9pm Debate interrupted (Programme Order, 5 January). Fiona Mactaggart: I speak as one of the 13 MPs who The Deputy Speaker put forthwith the Question already co-sponsored the original ten-minute rule Bill of the proposed from the Chair (Standing Order No. 83E), hon. Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce). I did that That the clause be read a Second time. because I think she was right to make people aware that sex selective abortion is illegal, and I thought her The House divided: Ayes 201, Noes 292. Bill was a powerful and good tactic to do that. Division No. 157] [9 pm However, I feel a bit as though I have been pulled along by a Trojan horse because, as the hon. Member for AYES Totnes (Dr Wollaston) said, the new clause confers the Adams, Nigel Birtwistle, Gordon status of an unborn child on the foetus, and that Afriyie, Adam Blackman, Bob radically changes our abortion laws in a way I believe is Aldous, Peter Blunkett, rh Mr David dangerous. Amess, Sir David Bone, Mr Peter As I said in an earlier intervention, clauses 73 and 74, Andrew, Stuart Bottomley, Sir Peter Arbuthnot, rh Mr James Brady, Mr Graham which deal with coercive behaviour, contain a powerful Brazier, Mr Julian Bacon, Mr Richard tool that we should use to prevent the kind of coercion Bridgen, Andrew Baker, rh Norman to which the hon. Member for Congleton referred. In Brokenshire, James those references she quoted extensively from an organisation Baldry, rh Sir Tony Bruce, Fiona based in my constituency, but personal experience of Barclay, Stephen Burley, Mr Aidan how that organisation has failed to help individual Bebb, Guto Burns, Conor constituents has led me to the conclusion that it is not Beith, rh Sir Alan Burns, rh Mr Simon possible to depend on the accuracy of what it says. I am Bellingham, Mr Henry Burrowes, Mr David therefore concerned that we are using anecdote from an Benyon, Richard Burt, rh Alistair unreliable source to make legislation on the hoof. Berry, Jake Cairns, Alun 131 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 132

Carmichael, Neil Kane, Mike Spelman, rh Mrs Caroline Wallace, Mr Ben Carswell, Douglas Kawczynski, Daniel Stephenson, Andrew Webb, rh Steve Cash, Sir William Kelly, Chris Stewart, Iain Weir, Mr Mike Chishti, Rehman Kennedy, rh Mr Charles Streeter, Mr Gary Wharton, James Chope, Mr Christopher Knight, rh Sir Greg Stuart, Mr Graham White, Chris Coffey, Dr Thérèse Leadsom, Andrea Stunell, rh Sir Andrew Whittaker, Craig Colvile, Oliver Lefroy, Jeremy Sturdy, Julian Whittingdale, Mr John Connarty, Michael Leigh, Sir Edward Swayne, rh Mr Desmond Wiggin, Bill Cooper, Rosie Leslie, Charlotte Syms, Mr Robert Williams, Mr Mark Cox, Mr Geoffrey Letwin, rh Mr Oliver Tapsell, rh Sir Peter Williamson, Gavin Crabb, rh Stephen Lewis, Dr Julian Turner, Mr Andrew Wilson, Mr Rob Crausby, Mr David Lidington, rh Mr David Twigg, Derek Wilson, Sammy Cunningham, Mr Jim Lilley, rh Mr Peter Vara, Mr Shailesh Cunningham, Sir Tony Lloyd, Stephen Vickers, Martin Tellers for the Ayes: Davies, Glyn Llwyd, rh Mr Elfyn Walker, Mr Charles Steve Baker and de Bois, Nick Loughton, Tim Walker, Mr Robin David T. C. Davies Dinenage, Caroline Luff, Sir Peter Docherty, Thomas Lumley, Karen NOES Donaldson, rh Mr Jeffrey M. MacNeil, Mr Angus Brendan Dorries, Nadine Marsden, Mr Gordon Abbott, Ms Diane Creasy, Stella Doyle, Gemma May, rh Mrs Theresa Abrahams, Debbie Crockart, Mike Duncan Smith, rh Mr Iain McCann, Mr Michael Ainsworth, rh Mr Bob Crouch, Tracey Dunne, Mr Philip McCartney, Karl Alexander, Heidi Cryer, John Durkan, Mark McCrea, Dr William Ali, Rushanara Cunningham, Alex Ellis, Michael McLoughlin, rh Mr Patrick Allen, Mr Graham Dakin, Nic Ellwood, Mr Tobias McPartland, Stephen Anderson, Mr David Danczuk, Simon Elphicke, Charlie Meale, Sir Alan Ashworth, Jonathan Darling, rh Mr Alistair Bailey, Mr Adrian Evans, Graham Menzies, Mark Davey, rh Mr Edward Bain, Mr William Evans, Jonathan Mills, Nigel David, Wayne Balls, rh Ed Evans, Mr Nigel Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Davidson, Mr Ian Baron, Mr John Evennett, Mr David Mosley, Stephen Davies, Geraint Fallon, rh Michael Mudie, Mr George Barron, rh Kevin Bayley, Sir Hugh De Piero, Gloria Field, rh Mr Frank Mundell, rh David Donohoe, Mr Brian H. Field, Mark Murphy, rh Paul Beckett, rh Margaret Doran, Mr Frank Flello, Robert Neill, Robert Benn, rh Hilary Doughty, Stephen Fox,rhDrLiam Newmark, Mr Brooks Beresford, Sir Paul Dowd, Jim Francois, rh Mr Mark Nuttall, Mr David Berger, Luciana Dromey, Jack Fuller, Richard O’Brien, rh Mr Stephen Betts, Mr Clive Gale, Sir Roger Ollerenshaw, Eric Bingham, Andrew Dugher, Michael Gillan, rh Mrs Cheryl Paice, rh Sir James Blears, rh Hazel Duncan, rh Sir Alan Glass, Pat Patel, Priti Blenkinsop, Tom Eagle, Ms Angela Glen, John Pawsey, Mark Blomfield, Paul Eagle, Maria Glindon, Mrs Mary Penning, rh Mike Blunt, Crispin Edwards, Jonathan Goodwill, Mr Robert Percy, Andrew Boles, Nick Efford, Clive Graham, Richard Pickles, rh Mr Eric Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben Elliott, Julie Gray, Mr James Pincher, Christopher Brake, rh Tom Ellison, Jane Pound, Stephen Greatrex, Tom Brennan, Kevin Ellman, Mrs Louise Prisk, Mr Mark Green, rh Damian Brine, Steve Evans, Chris Pritchard, Mark Grieve, rh Mr Dominic Brooke, rh Annette Fabricant, Michael Pugh, John Gummer, Ben Brown, rh Mr Nicholas Featherstone, rh Lynne Raab, Mr Dominic Brown, Mr Russell Halfon, Robert Randall, rh Sir John Fitzpatrick, Jim Hammond, Stephen Reckless, Mark Browne, Mr Jeremy Flint, rh Caroline Hands, rh Greg Redwood, rh Mr John Bruce, rh Sir Malcolm Flynn, Paul Harper, Mr Mark Rees-Mogg, Jacob Bryant, Chris Foster, rh Mr Don Harris, Mr Tom Reevell, Simon Buck, Ms Karen Fovargue, Yvonne Hart, Simon Reid, Mr Alan Burnham, rh Andy Francis, Dr Hywel Haselhurst, rh Sir Alan Ritchie, Ms Margaret Burt, Lorely Freer, Mike Hayes, rh Mr John Byles, Dan Robathan, rh Mr Andrew Gapes, Mike Heaton-Harris, Chris Rogerson, Dan Byrne, rh Mr Liam Gardiner, Barry Hillier, Meg Rosindell, Andrew Campbell, rh Mr Alan Garnier, Mark Hinds, Damian Roy, Mr Frank Campbell, Mr Ronnie George, Andrew Hoban, Mr Mark Ruffley, Mr David Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair Gibb, Mr Nick Hoey, Kate Russell, Sir Bob Caton, Martin Hollingbery, George Rutley, David Chapman, Jenny Gilbert, Stephen Hollobone, Mr Philip Scott, Mr Lee Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey Goldsmith, Zac Howarth, Sir Gerald Selous, Andrew Coaker, Vernon Green, Kate Hunt, rh Mr Jeremy Shannon, Jim Coffey, Ann Greening, rh Justine Jackson, Mr Stewart Shelbrooke, Alec Collins, Damian Greenwood, Lilian Javid, rh Sajid Shuker, Gavin Cooper, rh Yvette Griffith, Nia Jones, Mr Marcus Smith, Henry Corbyn, Jeremy Gwynne, Andrew Jones, Susan Elan Spellar, rh Mr John Creagh, Mary Gyimah, Mr Sam 133 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 134

Hain, rh Mr Peter McFadden, rh Mr Pat Soames, rh Sir Nicholas Watkinson, Dame Angela Hames, Duncan McGovern, Alison Soubry, Anna Watson, Mr Tom Hamilton, Mr David McGuire, rh Dame Anne Stewart, Bob Watts, Mr Dave Hamilton, Fabian McInnes, Liz Stewart, Rory Weatherley, Mike Hancock, rh Matthew McKechin, Ann Stride, Mel Wheeler, Heather Hancock, Mr Mike McKenzie, Mr Iain Stringer, Graham Whiteford, Dr Eilidh Hanson, rh Mr David Mearns, Ian Stuart, Ms Gisela Whitehead, Dr Alan Harman, rh Ms Harriet Metcalfe, Stephen Sutcliffe, Mr Gerry Williams, Stephen Harrington, Richard Miliband, rh Edward Swales, Ian Williamson, Chris Harris, Rebecca Miller, Andrew Swinson, Jo Wilson, Phil Hart, Simon Miller, rh Maria Swire, rh Mr Hugo Winnick, Mr David Harvey, Sir Nick Mitchell, Austin Tami, Mark Winterton, rh Ms Rosie Havard, Mr Dai Moon, Mrs Madeleine Thornberry, Emily Wollaston, Dr Sarah Healey, rh John Moore, rh Michael Thurso, rh John Wood, Mike Hemming, John Mordaunt, Penny Tomlinson, Justin Woodcock, John Hendry, Charles Morden, Jessica Trickett, Jon Woodward, rh Mr Shaun Heyes, David Morgan, rh Nicky Turner, Karl Wright, David Hilling, Julie Morrice, Graeme (Livingston) Twigg, Stephen Wright, Mr Iain Hodge, rh Margaret Morris, Grahame M. Tyrie, Mr Andrew Wright, Simon Hodgson, Mrs Sharon (Easington) Umunna, Mr Chuka Yeo, Mr Tim Hollingbery, George Morris, James Uppal, Paul Young, rh Sir George Hood, Mr Jim Mowat, David Vaizey, Mr Edward Zahawi, Nadhim Hopkins, Kelvin Munn, Meg Vaz, Valerie Tellers for the Noes: Horwood, Martin Munt, Tessa Walley, Joan Sarah Newton and Howarth, rh Mr George Murray, Sheryll Ward, Mr David Jenny Willott Howell, John Murrison, Dr Andrew Hughes, rh Simon Nandy, Lisa Hunt, Tristram Nokes, Caroline Question accordingly negatived. Huppert, Dr Julian O’Donnell, Fiona The Deputy Speaker then put forthwith the Questions Hurd, Mr Nick Offord, Dr Matthew necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded Irranca-Davies, Huw Onwurah, Chi at that time (Standing Order No. 83E). Jackson, Glenda Osborne, Sandra James, Margot Ottaway, rh Sir Richard James, Mrs Siân C. Owen, Albert New Clause 2 Jarvis, Dan Parish, Neil Jenkin, Mr Bernard Pearce, Teresa OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT 1989 (ADDITIONAL DEFENCE) Jenrick, Robert Perkins, Toby (1) The Official Secrets Act 1989 is amended as follows— Johnson, rh Alan Perry, Claire Johnson, Diana Phillips, Stephen (2) After section 8, insert— Johnson, Gareth Phillipson, Bridget “(8A) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence Johnson, Joseph Poulter, Dr Daniel under any provision of this Act to prove that he knew, or had Jones, Andrew Powell, Lucy reasonable cause to believe, that the information, document or Jones, Graham Qureshi, Yasmin article disclosed was— Jones, Mr Kevan Raynsford, rh Mr Nick (a) germane to an official investigation of, or inquiry into, Jowell, rh Dame Tessa Reed, Mr Steve historic child abuse, and Kane, Mike Reynolds, Emma (b) provided only to an officer of such an investigation or Kendall, Liz Robertson, Angus inquiry.”—(John Mann.) Khan, rh Sadiq Robertson, rh Sir Hugh Brought up. Kirby, Simon Robertson, John Lancaster, Mark Robinson, Mr Geoffrey Question put, That the clause be added to the Bill. Latham, Pauline Rotheram, Steve The House divided: Ayes 233, Noes 296. Lavery, Ian Ruddock, rh Dame Joan Lazarowicz, Mark Sanders, Mr Adrian Division No. 158] [9.15 pm Leech, Mr John Sandys, Laura Leslie, Chris Sarwar, Anas AYES Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma Sawford, Andy Abbott, Ms Diane Betts, Mr Clive Lewis, Brandon Seabeck, Alison Abrahams, Debbie Blears, rh Hazel Lewis, Mr Ivan Shapps, rh Grant Ainsworth, rh Mr Bob Blenkinsop, Tom Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Sharma, Mr Virendra Ali, Rushanara Blomfield, Paul Love, Mr Andrew Sheerman, Mr Barry Allen, Mr Graham Blunkett, rh Mr David Lucas, Caroline Simmonds, rh Mark Anderson, Mr David Bone, Mr Peter Lucas, Ian Simpson, Mr Keith Ashworth, Jonathan Bottomley, Sir Peter Mactaggart, Fiona Skidmore, Chris Bailey, Mr Adrian Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben Mahmood, Mr Khalid Skinner, Mr Dennis Bain, Mr William Brennan, Kevin Malhotra, Seema Slaughter, Mr Andy Balls, rh Ed Brown, rh Mr Nicholas Mann, John Smith, rh Mr Andrew Baron, Mr John Brown, Mr Russell McCabe, Steve Smith, Angela Barron, rh Kevin Bryant, Chris McCarthy, Kerry Smith, Chloe Bayley, Sir Hugh Buck, Ms Karen McCartney, Jason Smith, Julian Bebb, Guto Burnham, rh Andy McDonagh, Siobhain Smith, Nick Beckett, rh Margaret Byrne, rh Mr Liam McDonald, Andy Smith, Owen Benn, rh Hilary Campbell, rh Mr Alan McDonnell, John Smith, Sir Robert Berger, Luciana Campbell, Mr Ronnie 135 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 136

Carswell, Douglas Hoey, Kate Phillipson, Bridget Sutcliffe, Mr Gerry Caton, Martin Hollobone, Mr Philip Pound, Stephen Tami, Mark Chapman, Jenny Hood, Mr Jim Powell, Lucy Thornberry, Emily Coaker, Vernon Hopkins, Kelvin Qureshi, Yasmin Timms, rh Stephen Coffey, Ann Howarth, rh Mr George Reckless, Mark Trickett, Jon Connarty, Michael Hunt, Tristram Reed, Mr Steve Turner, Karl Cooper, Rosie Irranca-Davies, Huw Reynolds, Emma Twigg, Derek Cooper, rh Yvette Jackson, Glenda Ritchie, Ms Margaret Twigg, Stephen Corbyn, Jeremy James, Mrs Siân C. Robertson, Angus Umunna, Mr Chuka Crausby, Mr David Jarvis, Dan Robertson, John Vaz, Valerie Creagh, Mary Johnson, rh Alan Robinson, Mr Geoffrey Walley, Joan Creasy, Stella Johnson, Diana Rotheram, Steve Watson, Mr Tom Cruddas, Jon Jones, Graham Roy, Mr Frank Watts, Mr Dave Cryer, John Jones, Mr Kevan Ruddock, rh Dame Joan Weir, Mr Mike Cunningham, Alex Jones, Susan Elan Sarwar, Anas Whiteford, Dr Eilidh Cunningham, Mr Jim Jowell, rh Dame Tessa Sawford, Andy Whitehead, Dr Alan Cunningham, Sir Tony Kane, Mike Seabeck, Alison Williamson, Chris Dakin, Nic Kaufman, rh Sir Gerald Shannon, Jim Wilson, Phil Danczuk, Simon Kendall, Liz Sharma, Mr Virendra Wilson, Sammy Darling, rh Mr Alistair Khan, rh Sadiq Sheerman, Mr Barry Winnick, Mr David David, Wayne Lavery, Ian Shuker, Gavin Winterton, rh Ms Rosie Davidson, Mr Ian Lazarowicz, Mark Skinner, Mr Dennis Wood, Mike Davies, Geraint Lefroy, Jeremy Slaughter, Mr Andy Woodcock, John De Piero, Gloria Leslie, Charlotte Smith, rh Mr Andrew Woodward, rh Mr Shaun Docherty, Thomas Leslie, Chris Smith, Angela Wright, David Donaldson, rh Mr Jeffrey M. Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma Smith, Nick Wright, Mr Iain Donohoe, Mr Brian H. Lewis, Mr Ivan Smith, Owen Doran, Mr Frank Llwyd, rh Mr Elfyn Spellar, rh Mr John Tellers for the Ayes: Dowd, Jim Love, Mr Andrew Stringer, Graham Heidi Alexander and Doyle, Gemma Lucas, Caroline Stuart, Ms Gisela Stephen Doughty Dromey, Jack Lucas, Ian Dugher, Michael MacNeil, Mr Angus Brendan NOES Durkan, Mark Mactaggart, Fiona Eagle, Ms Angela Mahmood, Mr Khalid Adams, Nigel Burrowes, Mr David Eagle, Maria Malhotra, Seema Afriyie, Adam Burt, rh Alistair Edwards, Jonathan Mann, John Aldous, Peter Burt, Lorely Efford, Clive Marsden, Mr Gordon Amess, Sir David Byles, Dan Elliott, Julie McCabe, Steve Andrew, Stuart Cairns, Alun Ellman, Mrs Louise McCann, Mr Michael Arbuthnot, rh Mr James Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair Evans, Chris McCarthy, Kerry Bacon, Mr Richard Carmichael, Neil Fitzpatrick, Jim McCrea, Dr William Baker, rh Norman Cash, Sir William Flello, Robert McDonagh, Siobhain Baker, Steve Chishti, Rehman Flint, rh Caroline McDonald, Andy Baldry, rh Sir Tony Chope, Mr Christopher Flynn, Paul McDonnell, John Baldwin, Harriett Clark, rh Greg Fovargue, Yvonne McFadden, rh Mr Pat Barclay, Stephen Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey Francis, Dr Hywel McGovern, Alison Barker, rh Gregory Coffey, Dr Thérèse Gapes, Mike McGuire, rh Dame Anne Barwell, Gavin Collins, Damian Gardiner, Barry McInnes, Liz Beith, rh Sir Alan Colvile, Oliver Glass, Pat McKechin, Ann Bellingham, Mr Henry Cox, Mr Geoffrey Glindon, Mrs Mary McKenzie, Mr Iain Benyon, Richard Crabb, rh Stephen Goldsmith, Zac Meale, Sir Alan Beresford, Sir Paul Crockart, Mike Goodman, Helen Mearns, Ian Berry, Jake Crouch, Tracey Greatrex, Tom Miliband, rh Edward Bingham, Andrew Davey, rh Mr Edward Green, Kate Miller, Andrew Birtwistle, Gordon Davies, David T. C. Greenwood, Lilian Mitchell, Austin Blackman, Bob (Monmouth) Griffith, Nia Moon, Mrs Madeleine Blackwood, Nicola Davies, Glyn Gwynne, Andrew Morden, Jessica Blunt, Crispin de Bois, Nick Hain, rh Mr Peter Morrice, Graeme (Livingston) Boles, Nick Dinenage, Caroline Hames, Duncan Morris, Grahame M. Bradley, Karen Dorries, Nadine Hamilton, Mr David (Easington) Brady, Mr Graham Doyle-Price, Jackie Hamilton, Fabian Mudie, Mr George Brazier, Mr Julian Drax, Richard Hanson, rh Mr David Munn, Meg Bridgen, Andrew Duncan, rh Sir Alan Harman, rh Ms Harriet Munt, Tessa Brine, Steve Duncan Smith, rh Mr Iain Harris, Mr Tom Murphy, rh Paul Brokenshire, James Dunne, Mr Philip Havard, Mr Dai Nandy, Lisa Brooke, rh Annette Ellis, Michael Healey, rh John Nash, Pamela Browne, Mr Jeremy Ellison, Jane Hemming, John O’Donnell, Fiona Bruce, Fiona Ellwood, Mr Tobias Heyes, David Onwurah, Chi Bruce, rh Sir Malcolm Elphicke, Charlie Hillier, Meg Osborne, Sandra Buckland, Mr Robert Eustice, George Hilling, Julie Owen, Albert Burley, Mr Aidan Evans, Graham Hodge, rh Margaret Pearce, Teresa Burns, Conor Evans, Jonathan Hodgson, Mrs Sharon Perkins, Toby Burns, rh Mr Simon Evans, Mr Nigel 137 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 138

Evennett, Mr David Laws, rh Mr David Robathan, rh Mr Andrew Thurso, rh John Fabricant, Michael Leadsom, Andrea Robertson, rh Sir Hugh Timpson, Mr Edward Fallon, rh Michael Lee, Jessica Rogerson, Dan Tomlinson, Justin Featherstone, rh Lynne Lee, Dr Phillip Rosindell, Andrew Tredinnick, David Field, Mark Leech, Mr John Rudd, Amber Turner, Mr Andrew Foster, rh Mr Don Letwin, rh Mr Oliver Ruffley, Mr David Tyrie, Mr Andrew Fox,rhDrLiam Lewis, Brandon Russell, Sir Bob Uppal, Paul Francois, rh Mr Mark Lewis, Dr Julian Rutley, David Vaizey, Mr Edward Freer, Mike Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Sanders, Mr Adrian Vara, Mr Shailesh Fuller, Richard Lidington, rh Mr David Sandys, Laura Vickers, Martin Gale, Sir Roger Lilley, rh Mr Peter Scott, Mr Lee Villiers, rh Mrs Theresa Garnier, Sir Edward Lloyd, Stephen Selous, Andrew Walker, Mr Charles Garnier, Mark Lopresti, Jack Shapps, rh Grant Walker, Mr Robin Gauke, Mr David Loughton, Tim Sharma, Alok Ward, Mr David George, Andrew Luff, Sir Peter Shelbrooke, Alec Watkinson, Dame Angela Gibb, Mr Nick Lumley, Karen Simmonds, rh Mark Weatherley, Mike Gilbert, Stephen May, rh Mrs Theresa Simpson, Mr Keith Webb, rh Steve Gillan, rh Mrs Cheryl McCartney, Jason Skidmore, Chris Wharton, James Glen, John McCartney, Karl Smith, Chloe Wheeler, Heather Goodwill, Mr Robert McIntosh, Miss Anne Smith, Henry White, Chris Graham, Richard McLoughlin, rh Mr Patrick Smith, Julian Whittaker, Craig Grant, Mrs Helen McPartland, Stephen Smith, Sir Robert Whittingdale, Mr John Gray, Mr James Menzies, Mark Soames, rh Sir Nicholas Wiggin, Bill Green, rh Damian Metcalfe, Stephen Soubry, Anna Willetts, rh Mr David Greening, rh Justine Miller, rh Maria Spelman, rh Mrs Caroline Williams, Mr Mark Grieve, rh Mr Dominic Mills, Nigel Stephenson, Andrew Williams, Stephen Gummer, Ben Milton, Anne Stewart, Bob Williamson, Gavin Gyimah, Mr Sam Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Stewart, Iain Willott, rh Jenny Halfon, Robert Moore, rh Michael Stewart, Rory Wilson, Mr Rob Hammond, Stephen Mordaunt, Penny Streeter, Mr Gary Wollaston, Dr Sarah Hancock, rh Matthew Morgan, rh Nicky Stride, Mel Wright, rh Jeremy Hancock, Mr Mike Morris, Anne Marie Stuart, Mr Graham Wright, Simon Hands, rh Greg Morris, David Stunell, rh Sir Andrew Yeo, Mr Tim Harper, Mr Mark Morris, James Sturdy, Julian Young, rh Sir George Harrington, Richard Mosley, Stephen Swales, Ian Zahawi, Nadhim Harris, Rebecca Mowat, David Swayne, rh Mr Desmond Hart, Simon Mulholland, Greg Swinson, Jo Tellers for the Noes: Harvey, Sir Nick Mundell, rh David Swire, rh Mr Hugo Tom Brake and Haselhurst, rh Sir Alan Murray, Sheryll Syms, Mr Robert Mr Ben Wallace Hayes, rh Mr John Murrison, Dr Andrew Heald, Sir Oliver Neill, Robert Question accordingly negatived. Heaton-Harris, Chris Newmark, Mr Brooks Henderson, Gordon Newton, Sarah Hendry, Charles Nokes, Caroline New Clause 17 Herbert, rh Nick Norman, Jesse Hinds, Damian Nuttall, Mr David Hoban, Mr Mark O’Brien, rh Mr Stephen MANDATORY REPORTING OF SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE Hollingbery, George Offord, Dr Matthew ‘(1) A person commits an offence if— Horwood, Martin Ollerenshaw, Eric (a) he is involved in the provision of regulated activity as Howarth, Sir Gerald Opperman, Guy defined by section 5 of the Safeguarding Vulnerable Howell, John Ottaway, rh Sir Richard Groups Act 2006 for which he is paid; Hughes, rh Simon Paice, rh Sir James (b) he is a provider of regulated activity as defined by Hunt, rh Mr Jeremy Parish, Neil section 6 of the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act Huppert, Dr Julian Patel, Priti 2006; Hurd, Mr Nick Pawsey, Mark (c) he becomes aware that a child has been harmed in Jackson, Mr Stewart Penning, rh Mike connection to the regulated activity; and James, Margot Penrose, John (d) he does not inform a relevant authority of this harm. Javid, rh Sajid Percy, Andrew Jenkin, Mr Bernard Perry, Claire (2) A person does not commit an offence under this section Jenrick, Robert Phillips, Stephen if— Johnson, Gareth Pickles, rh Mr Eric (a) he can demonstrate he acted in the best interests of the Johnson, Joseph Pincher, Christopher child, or Jones, Andrew Poulter, Dr Daniel (b) he complied with relevant professional guidelines or Jones, rh Mr David Prisk, Mr Mark institutional guidelines for the reporting of abuse as Jones, Mr Marcus Pritchard, Mark he believed them to be, complying with institutional Kelly, Chris Pugh, John guidelines for the reporting of abuse can include informing another individual with relevant safeguarding Kennedy, rh Mr Charles Raab, Mr Dominic responsibilities. Kirby, Simon Randall, rh Sir John Knight, rh Sir Greg Redwood, rh Mr John (3) In this section “harm” means conduct which amounts to one of the following offences— Kwarteng, Kwasi Rees-Mogg, Jacob Lancaster, Mark Reevell, Simon (a) cruelty to and neglect of children; Latham, Pauline Reid, Mr Alan (b) cruelty to children/young persons; 139 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 140

(c) child abduction; Efford, Clive McFadden, rh Mr Pat (d) rape of a female child under 16; Elliott, Julie McGovern, Alison (e) rape of a female child under 13; Ellman, Mrs Louise McGuire, rh Dame Anne Evans, Chris McInnes, Liz (f) rape of a male child under 16; Fitzpatrick, Jim McKechin, Ann (g) rape of a male child under 13; Flello, Robert McKenzie, Mr Iain (h) sexual assault on a male child under 13; Flint, rh Caroline Meale, Sir Alan (i) sexual assault on a female child under 13; Flynn, Paul Mearns, Ian (j) sexual activity involving a child under 13; Fovargue, Yvonne Miller, Andrew (k) sexual activity involving a child under 16; Francis, Dr Hywel Mitchell, Austin (l) sexual exploitation of children; Gapes, Mike Moon, Mrs Madeleine Gardiner, Barry Morden, Jessica (m) abuse of position of trust of a sexual nature; and Glass, Pat Morrice, Graeme (Livingston) (n) sexual grooming. Glindon, Mrs Mary Morris, Grahame M. (4) The Secretary of State may, by way of regulation, make Goodman, Helen (Easington) guidance as to the interpretation of subsection (2) or amend Greatrex, Tom Mudie, Mr George subsection (3). Green, Kate Murphy, rh Paul (5) Any regulations made under subsection (4) must be subject Greenwood, Lilian Nandy, Lisa to an affirmative procedure of both Houses of Parliament. Griffith, Nia Nash, Pamela (6) In this section “relevant authority” means— Gwynne, Andrew O’Donnell, Fiona Hain, rh Mr Peter Onwurah, Chi (a) the local authority with safeguarding authorities; Hamilton, Mr David Osborne, Sandra (b) the local police force; and Hamilton, Fabian Owen, Albert (c) the Disclosure and Barring Service. Hancock, Mr Mike Pearce, Teresa (7) A person guilty of an offence under this Part of this Act Hanson, rh Mr David Perkins, Toby shall be liable— Harman, rh Ms Harriet Phillipson, Bridget (a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term Harris, Mr Tom Pound, Stephen not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding Havard, Mr Dai Powell, Lucy the statutory maximum, or to both such imprisonment Healey, rh John Qureshi, Yasmin and fine; Heyes, David Raynsford, rh Mr Nick (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a Hillier, Meg Reckless, Mark term not exceeding three years.”—(Diana Johnson.) Hilling, Julie Reed, Mr Steve Brought up. Hodge, rh Margaret Reynolds, Emma Hodgson, Mrs Sharon Ritchie, Ms Margaret Question put, That the clause be added to the Bill. Hoey, Kate Robertson, John The House divided: Ayes 212, Noes 305. Hood, Mr Jim Robinson, Mr Geoffrey Hopkins, Kelvin Rotheram, Steve Division No. 159] [9.27 pm Howarth, rh Mr George Roy, Mr Frank Hunt, Tristram Ruddock, rh Dame Joan AYES Irranca-Davies, Huw Sarwar, Anas Abbott, Ms Diane Coaker, Vernon Jackson, Glenda Sawford, Andy Abrahams, Debbie Coffey, Ann James, Mrs Siân C. Seabeck, Alison Ainsworth, rh Mr Bob Connarty, Michael Jarvis, Dan Sharma, Mr Virendra Ali, Rushanara Cooper, Rosie Johnson, rh Alan Sheerman, Mr Barry Allen, Mr Graham Cooper, rh Yvette Johnson, Diana Shuker, Gavin Anderson, Mr David Corbyn, Jeremy Jones, Graham Skinner, Mr Dennis Ashworth, Jonathan Crausby, Mr David Jones, Mr Kevan Slaughter, Mr Andy Bailey, Mr Adrian Creagh, Mary Jones, Susan Elan Smith, rh Mr Andrew Bain, Mr William Creasy, Stella Jowell, rh Dame Tessa Smith, Angela Barron, rh Kevin Cruddas, Jon Kane, Mike Smith, Nick Bayley, Sir Hugh Cryer, John Kaufman, rh Sir Gerald Smith, Owen Beckett, rh Margaret Cunningham, Alex Kendall, Liz Spellar, rh Mr John Benn, rh Hilary Cunningham, Mr Jim Khan, rh Sadiq Stringer, Graham Berger, Luciana Cunningham, Sir Tony Lavery, Ian Stuart, Ms Gisela Betts, Mr Clive Dakin, Nic Lazarowicz, Mark Sutcliffe, Mr Gerry Blears, rh Hazel Danczuk, Simon Leslie, Chris Tami, Mark Blenkinsop, Tom Darling, rh Mr Alistair Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma Thornberry, Emily Blomfield, Paul David, Wayne Lewis, Mr Ivan Timms, rh Stephen Blunkett, rh Mr David Davidson, Mr Ian Love, Mr Andrew Trickett, Jon Bottomley, Sir Peter Davies, Geraint Lucas, Caroline Turner, Karl Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben De Piero, Gloria Lucas, Ian Twigg, Derek Brennan, Kevin Docherty, Thomas Mactaggart, Fiona Twigg, Stephen Brown, rh Mr Nicholas Donaldson, rh Mr Jeffrey M. Mahmood, Mr Khalid Umunna, Mr Chuka Brown, Mr Russell Donohoe, Mr Brian H. Malhotra, Seema Vaz, Valerie Bryant, Chris Doran, Mr Frank Mann, John Walley, Joan Buck, Ms Karen Dowd, Jim Marsden, Mr Gordon Watson, Mr Tom Burnham, rh Andy Doyle, Gemma McCabe, Steve Watts, Mr Dave Byrne, rh Mr Liam Dromey, Jack McCann, Mr Michael Whitehead, Dr Alan Campbell, rh Mr Alan Dugher, Michael McCarthy, Kerry Williamson, Chris Campbell, Mr Ronnie Durkan, Mark McDonagh, Siobhain Wilson, Phil Caton, Martin Eagle, Ms Angela McDonald, Andy Winnick, Mr David Chapman, Jenny Eagle, Maria McDonnell, John Winterton, rh Ms Rosie 141 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 142

Wood, Mike Wright, Mr Iain Howarth, Sir Gerald Norman, Jesse Woodcock, John Tellers for the Ayes: Howell, John Nuttall, Mr David Woodward, rh Mr Shaun Heidi Alexander and Hughes, rh Simon O’Brien, rh Mr Stephen Wright, David Stephen Doughty Hunt, rh Mr Jeremy Offord, Dr Matthew Huppert, Dr Julian Ollerenshaw, Eric Hurd, Mr Nick Opperman, Guy NOES Jackson, Mr Stewart Ottaway, rh Sir Richard Adams, Nigel Dinenage, Caroline James, Margot Paice, rh Sir James Afriyie, Adam Doyle-Price, Jackie Javid, rh Sajid Parish, Neil Aldous, Peter Drax, Richard Jenkin, Mr Bernard Patel, Priti Amess, Sir David Duncan, rh Sir Alan Jenrick, Robert Pawsey, Mark Andrew, Stuart Duncan Smith, rh Mr Iain Johnson, Gareth Penning, rh Mike Arbuthnot, rh Mr James Dunne, Mr Philip Johnson, Joseph Penrose, John Bacon, Mr Richard Edwards, Jonathan Jones, Andrew Percy, Andrew Baker, rh Norman Ellis, Michael Jones, rh Mr David Perry, Claire Baker, Steve Ellison, Jane Jones, Mr Marcus Phillips, Stephen Baldry, rh Sir Tony Ellwood, Mr Tobias Kawczynski, Daniel Pickles, rh Mr Eric Baldwin, Harriett Elphicke, Charlie Kelly, Chris Pincher, Christopher Barclay, Stephen Eustice, George Kennedy, rh Mr Charles Poulter, Dr Daniel Barker, rh Gregory Evans, Graham Kirby, Simon Prisk, Mr Mark Baron, Mr John Evans, Jonathan Knight, rh Sir Greg Pritchard, Mark Barwell, Gavin Evans, Mr Nigel Kwarteng, Kwasi Pugh, John Bebb, Guto Evennett, Mr David Lancaster, Mark Raab, Mr Dominic Beith, rh Sir Alan Fabricant, Michael Latham, Pauline Randall, rh Sir John Bellingham, Mr Henry Fallon, rh Michael Laws, rh Mr David Redwood, rh Mr John Benyon, Richard Featherstone, rh Lynne Leadsom, Andrea Rees-Mogg, Jacob Beresford, Sir Paul Field, Mark Lee, Jessica Reevell, Simon Berry, Jake Foster, rh Mr Don Lee, Dr Phillip Reid, Mr Alan Bingham, Andrew Fox,rhDrLiam Leech, Mr John Robathan, rh Mr Andrew Birtwistle, Gordon Francois, rh Mr Mark Lefroy, Jeremy Robertson, rh Sir Hugh Blackman, Bob Freer, Mike Letwin, rh Mr Oliver Rogerson, Dan Blackwood, Nicola Fuller, Richard Lewis, Brandon Rosindell, Andrew Blunt, Crispin Gale, Sir Roger Lewis, Dr Julian Rudd, Amber Boles, Nick Garnier, Sir Edward Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Ruffley, Mr David Bone, Mr Peter Garnier, Mark Lidington, rh Mr David Russell, Sir Bob Bradley, Karen Gauke, Mr David Lilley, rh Mr Peter Rutley, David Brady, Mr Graham George, Andrew Lloyd, Stephen Sanders, Mr Adrian Brazier, Mr Julian Gibb, Mr Nick Llwyd, rh Mr Elfyn Sandys, Laura Bridgen, Andrew Gillan, rh Mrs Cheryl Lopresti, Jack Scott, Mr Lee Brine, Steve Glen, John Loughton, Tim Selous, Andrew Brokenshire, James Goodwill, Mr Robert Luff, Sir Peter Shannon, Jim Brooke, rh Annette Graham, Richard Lumley, Karen Shapps, rh Grant Browne, Mr Jeremy Grant, Mrs Helen May, rh Mrs Theresa Sharma, Alok Bruce, Fiona Gray, Mr James McCartney, Jason Shelbrooke, Alec Bruce, rh Sir Malcolm Green, rh Damian McCartney, Karl Simmonds, rh Mark Buckland, Mr Robert Greening, rh Justine McCrea, Dr William Simpson, Mr Keith Burley, Mr Aidan Grieve, rh Mr Dominic McIntosh, Miss Anne Skidmore, Chris Burns, Conor Griffiths, Andrew McLoughlin, rh Mr Patrick Smith, Chloe Burns, rh Mr Simon Gummer, Ben McPartland, Stephen Smith, Henry Burrowes, Mr David Gyimah, Mr Sam Menzies, Mark Smith, Julian Burt, rh Alistair Halfon, Robert Metcalfe, Stephen Smith, Sir Robert Burt, Lorely Hames, Duncan Miller, rh Maria Soames, rh Sir Nicholas Byles, Dan Hammond, Stephen Mills, Nigel Soubry, Anna Cairns, Alun Hancock, rh Matthew Milton, Anne Spelman, rh Mrs Caroline Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair Hands, rh Greg Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Stephenson, Andrew Carmichael, Neil Harper, Mr Mark Moore, rh Michael Stewart, Bob Cash, Sir William Harrington, Richard Mordaunt, Penny Stewart, Iain Chishti, Rehman Harris, Rebecca Morgan, rh Nicky Stewart, Rory Chope, Mr Christopher Hart, Simon Morris, Anne Marie Streeter, Mr Gary Clark, rh Greg Harvey, Sir Nick Morris, David Stride, Mel Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey Haselhurst, rh Sir Alan Morris, James Stuart, Mr Graham Coffey, Dr Thérèse Hayes, rh Mr John Mosley, Stephen Stunell, rh Sir Andrew Collins, Damian Heald, Sir Oliver Mowat, David Sturdy, Julian Colvile, Oliver Heaton-Harris, Chris Mulholland, Greg Swales, Ian Cox, Mr Geoffrey Henderson, Gordon Mundell, rh David Swayne, rh Mr Desmond Crabb, rh Stephen Hendry, Charles Munn, Meg Swinson, Jo Crockart, Mike Herbert, rh Nick Murray, Sheryll Swire, rh Mr Hugo Crouch, Tracey Hinds, Damian Murrison, Dr Andrew Syms, Mr Robert Davey, rh Mr Edward Hoban, Mr Mark Neill, Robert Thurso, rh John Davies, David T. C. Hollingbery, George Newmark, Mr Brooks Timpson, Mr Edward (Monmouth) Hollobone, Mr Philip Newton, Sarah Tomlinson, Justin Davies, Glyn Horwood, Martin Nokes, Caroline Tredinnick, David 143 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 144

Turner, Mr Andrew Wiggin, Bill 2C Breach of a child abduction warning notice Tyrie, Mr Andrew Willetts, rh Mr David (1) A person arrested by virtue of section 2B(1)(b) for a breach Uppal, Paul Williams, Mr Mark of a CAWN must be held in custody and brought before the Vaizey, Mr Edward Williams, Stephen magistrates’ court which will hear the application for a child Vara, Mr Shailesh Williamson, Gavin abduction warning order (CAWO) under sections 2D and 2E— Vickers, Martin Willott, rh Jenny (a) before the end of the period of 24 hours beginning Villiers, rh Mrs Theresa Wilson, Mr Rob with the time of the arrest; or Walker, Mr Charles Wilson, Sammy (b) if earlier, at the hearing of that application. Walker, Mr Robin Wollaston, Dr Sarah Ward, Mr David Wright, rh Jeremy (2) If the person is brought before the court by virtue of Watkinson, Dame Angela Wright, Simon subsection (1)(a), the court may remand the person. Weatherley, Mike Yeo, Mr Tim (3) If the court adjourns the hearing of the application by Webb, rh Steve Young, rh Sir George virtue of subsection 2D(8), the court may remand the person. Wharton, James Zahawi, Nadhim Wheeler, Heather (4) In calculating when the period of 24 hours mentioned in White, Chris Tellers for the Noes: subsection (1)(a) of this section ends, Christmas Day, Good Whittaker, Craig Tom Brake and Friday, any Sunday and any day which is a bank holiday in Whittingdale, Mr John Mr Ben Wallace England and Wales under the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 are to be disregarded. 2D Application for a child abduction warning order Question accordingly negatived. (1) If a CAWN has been issued, a constable must apply for a child abduction warning order (“a CAWO”). New Clause 19 (2) The application must be made by complaint to a CHILD ABDUCTION WARNING NOTICE magistrates’ court. ‘In the Child Abduction Act 1984, after section 2 (offence of (3) The application must be heard by the magistrates’ court no abduction of child by other person) insert— later than 48 hours after the CAWN was served pursuant to “2A Power to issue a child abduction warning notice section 2B(2). (1) A member of a police force not below the rank of (4) In calculating when the period of 48 hours mentioned in superintendent (“the authorising officer”) may issue a child subsection (3) of this section ends, Christmas Day, Good Friday, abduction warning notice (“a CAWN”) under this section. any Sunday and any day which is a bank holiday in England and Wales under the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 are to (2) A CAWN may be issued to a person (“A”) aged 18 years or be disregarded. over if the authorising officer has reasonable grounds for believing that— (5) A notice of the hearing of the application must be given (a) A has without lawful authority or reasonable excuse to A. been found in the company of a child (“C”); and (6) The notice is deemed given if it has been left at the address (b) C is reported missing and is found on two or more given by A under section 2B(3). occasions to be in the company of A; or (7) But if the notice has not been given because no address (c) there is reason to suspect that C‘s behaviour is, by was given by A under section 2B(3), the court may hear the reason of association with the defendant, giving application for the CAWO if the court is satisfied that the significant cause for concern. constable applying for the CAWO has made reasonable efforts to (3) Before issuing a CAWN, the authorising officer must, in give A the notice. particular, take reasonable steps to gather and consider— (8) The magistrates’ court may adjourn the hearing of the (a) representations made by the person with lawful application. authority for C; and (9) If the court adjourns the hearing, the CAWN continues in (b) representations made by A as to the issuing of the effect until the application has been determined. CAWN. (10) On the hearing of an application for a CAWO, section 97 (4) A CAWN must prohibit A from being in the company of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 (summons to witness and of C. warrant for his arrest) does not apply in relation to a person for 2B Contents and service of a child abduction warning whose protection the CAWO would be made, except where the notice person has given oral or written evidence at the hearing. (1) A CAWN must state— 2E Conditions for and contents of a child abduction (a) the grounds on which it has been issued; warning order (b) that a constable may arrest A without warrant if the (1) The court may make a CAWO if two conditions are met. constable has reasonable grounds for believing that A is in breach of the CAWN; (2) The first condition is that the court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that one or more of the criteria in (c) that an application for a child abduction warning order section 2A(2)(a)-(c) are satisfied. under section 2D will be heard within 48 hours of the time of service of the CAWN and a notice of the (3) The second condition is that the court thinks that making hearing will be given to A; the CAWO is necessary to protect C from harm as a result of (d) that the CAWN continues in effect until that application association with A. has been determined; and (4) A CAWO must state that a constable may arrest A without (e) the provisions that a magistrates’ court may include in warrant if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing A is a child abduction warning order (CAWO) under in breach of the CAWO. sections 2D and 2E. (5) A CAWO may be in force for— (2) A CAWN must be in writing and must be served on A (a) no fewer than 14 days beginning with the day on which personally by a constable. it is made; and (3) On serving A with a CAWN, the constable must ask A for (b) until the date of the 16th birthday of C. an address for the purposes of being given the notice of the hearing of the application for the child abduction warning order. (6) A CAWO must state the period for which it is to be in force. 145 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 146

2F Breach of a child abduction warning order The House divided: Ayes 212, Noes 305. (1) A person arrested by virtue of section 2E(4) for a breach of Division No. 160] [9.40 pm a CAWO must be held in custody and brought before a magistrates’ court within the period of 24 hours beginning with AYES the time of the arrest. Abbott, Ms Diane Evans, Chris (2) If the matter is not disposed of when the person is brought Abrahams, Debbie Fitzpatrick, Jim before the court, the court may remand the person. Ainsworth, rh Mr Bob Flello, Robert (3) In calculating when the period of 24 hours mentioned in Ali, Rushanara Flint, rh Caroline subsection (1) ends, Christmas Day, Good Friday, any Sunday Allen, Mr Graham Flynn, Paul and any day which is a bank holiday in England and Wales under Anderson, Mr David Fovargue, Yvonne the Banking and Financial. Dealings Act 1971 are to be Ashworth, Jonathan Francis, Dr Hywel disregarded. Bailey, Mr Adrian Gapes, Mike 2G Further provision about remand Bain, Mr William Gardiner, Barry (1) This section applies for the purposes of the remand of a Barron, rh Kevin Glass, Pat person by a magistrates’ court under section 2C(2) or (3) or Bayley, Sir Hugh Glindon, Mrs Mary 2F(2). Beckett, rh Margaret Goodman, Helen (2) In the application of section 128(6) of the Magistrates’ Benn, rh Hilary Greatrex, Tom Court Act 1980 for those purposes, the reference to the “other Berger, Luciana Green, Kate party” is to be read— Betts, Mr Clive Greenwood, Lilian (a) in the case of a remand prior to the hearing of an Blears, rh Hazel Griffith, Nia application for a CAWO, as a reference to the Blomfield, Paul Gwynne, Andrew authorising officer; and Blunkett, rh Mr David Hain, rh Mr Peter Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben Hamilton, Mr David (b) in any other case, as a reference to the constable who applied for the CAWO. Brennan, Kevin Hamilton, Fabian Brown, rh Mr Nicholas Hanson, rh Mr David (3) If the court has reason to suspect that a medical report will Brown, Mr Russell Harman, rh Ms Harriet be required, the power to remand a person may be exercised for Bryant, Chris Harris, Mr Tom the purpose of enabling a medical examination to take place and Buck, Ms Karen Havard, Mr Dai a report to be made. Burnham, rh Andy Healey, rh John (4) If the person is remanded in custody for that purpose, the Byrne, rh Mr Liam Heyes, David adjournment may not be for more than three weeks at a time. Campbell, rh Mr Alan Hillier, Meg (5) If the person is remanded on bail for that purpose, the Campbell, Mr Ronnie Hilling, Julie adjournment may not be for more than four weeks at a time. Caton, Martin Hodge, rh Margaret (6) If the court has reason to suspect that the person is Chapman, Jenny Hodgson, Mrs Sharon suffering from a mental disorder within the meaning of the Coaker, Vernon Hoey, Kate Mental Health Act 1983, the court has the same power to make Coffey, Ann Hood, Mr Jim an order under section 35 of that Act (remand to hospital for Connarty, Michael Hopkins, Kelvin medical report) as it has under that section in the case of an Cooper, Rosie Howarth, rh Mr George accused person (within the meaning of that section). Cooper, rh Yvette Hunt, Tristram (7) The court may, when remanding the person on bail, require Corbyn, Jeremy Irranca-Davies, Huw the person to comply before release on bail or later, with such Crausby, Mr David Jackson, Glenda requirements as appear to the court to be necessary to secure that Creagh, Mary James, Mrs Siân C. the person does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise Creasy, Stella Jarvis, Dan obstruct the course of justice. Cruddas, Jon Johnson, rh Alan 2H Guidance Cryer, John Johnson, Diana Cunningham, Alex Jones, Graham (1) The Secretary of State may issue guidance relating to the Cunningham, Mr Jim Jones, Mr Kevan exercise by a constable of functions under sections 2A to 2F. Cunningham, Sir Tony Jones, Susan Elan (2) The guidance must set out the behaviours associated with Dakin, Nic Jowell, rh Dame Tessa “giving significant cause for concern”, including, in particular, Danczuk, Simon Kane, Mike behaviours associated with giving cause for concern of sexual Darling, rh Mr Alistair Kaufman, rh Sir Gerald exploitation or grooming. David, Wayne Kendall, Liz (3) A constable must have regard to any guidance issued under Davidson, Mr Ian Khan, rh Sadiq subsection (1) when exercising a function to which the guidance Davies, Geraint Lavery, Ian relates. De Piero, Gloria Lazarowicz, Mark (4) Before issuing guidance under this section, the Secretary of Docherty, Thomas Leslie, Chris State must consult— Donaldson, rh Mr Jeffrey M. Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma Donohoe, Mr Brian H. Lewis, Mr Ivan (a) the Association of Chief Police Officers; Doran, Mr Frank Llwyd, rh Mr Elfyn (b) the National Crime Agency; and Doughty, Stephen Love, Mr Andrew (c) such other persons as the Secretary of State thinks Dowd, Jim Lucas, Caroline fit.”” —(Diana Johnson.) Doyle, Gemma Lucas, Ian This amendment establishes child abduction warning notices Dromey, Jack Mactaggart, Fiona (CAWNs) on a statutory basis, addressing concerns raised in the Dugher, Michael Mahmood, Mr Khalid House of Lords on the issue, by introducing a two-stage process Durkan, Mark Malhotra, Seema providing judicial oversight, without compromising the ability of Eagle, Ms Angela Mann, John the police to issue a CAWN without delay. The proposed process is Eagle, Maria Marsden, Mr Gordon similar to that in place for Domestic Violence Prevention Edwards, Jonathan McCabe, Steve Notices/Domestic Violence Prevention Orders (DVPN/DVPO). Efford, Clive McCann, Mr Michael Brought up. Elliott, Julie McCarthy, Kerry Question put, That the clause be added to the Bill. Ellman, Mrs Louise McCrea, Dr William 147 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 148

McDonagh, Siobhain Shannon, Jim Colvile, Oliver Hendry, Charles McDonald, Andy Sharma, Mr Virendra Cox, Mr Geoffrey Herbert, rh Nick McDonnell, John Sheerman, Mr Barry Crabb, rh Stephen Hinds, Damian McFadden, rh Mr Pat Shuker, Gavin Crockart, Mike Hoban, Mr Mark McGovern, Alison Skinner, Mr Dennis Crouch, Tracey Hollingbery, George McGuire, rh Dame Anne Slaughter, Mr Andy Davey, rh Mr Edward Hollobone, Mr Philip McInnes, Liz Smith, rh Mr Andrew Davies, David T. C. Horwood, Martin McKechin, Ann Smith, Angela (Monmouth) Howarth, Sir Gerald McKenzie, Mr Iain Smith, Nick Davies, Glyn Howell, John Mearns, Ian Smith, Owen Dinenage, Caroline Hughes, rh Simon Miller, Andrew Spellar, rh Mr John Dorries, Nadine Hunt, rh Mr Jeremy Mitchell, Austin Stringer, Graham Doyle-Price, Jackie Huppert, Dr Julian Moon, Mrs Madeleine Stuart, Ms Gisela Drax, Richard Hurd, Mr Nick Morden, Jessica Sutcliffe, Mr Gerry Duncan, rh Sir Alan Jackson, Mr Stewart Duncan Smith, rh Mr Iain James, Margot Morrice, Graeme (Livingston) Tami, Mark Morris, Grahame M. Dunne, Mr Philip Javid, rh Sajid Thornberry, Emily (Easington) Ellis, Michael Jenkin, Mr Bernard Timms, rh Stephen Mudie, Mr George Ellison, Jane Jenrick, Robert Trickett, Jon Munn, Meg Ellwood, Mr Tobias Johnson, Gareth Turner, Karl Nash, Pamela Elphicke, Charlie Johnson, Joseph O’Donnell, Fiona Twigg, Derek Eustice, George Jones, Andrew Onwurah, Chi Twigg, Stephen Evans, Graham Jones, rh Mr David Osborne, Sandra Umunna, Mr Chuka Evans, Jonathan Jones, Mr Marcus Owen, Albert Vaz, Valerie Evans, Mr Nigel Kawczynski, Daniel Pearce, Teresa Walley, Joan Evennett, Mr David Kelly, Chris Perkins, Toby Watson, Mr Tom Fabricant, Michael Kennedy, rh Mr Charles Phillipson, Bridget Watts, Mr Dave Fallon, rh Michael Kirby, Simon Pound, Stephen Whitehead, Dr Alan Featherstone, rh Lynne Knight, rh Sir Greg Powell, Lucy Williamson, Chris Field, Mark Kwarteng, Kwasi Qureshi, Yasmin Wilson, Phil Foster, rh Mr Don Lancaster, Mark Raynsford, rh Mr Nick Wilson, Sammy Fox,rhDrLiam Latham, Pauline Reed, Mr Steve Winnick, Mr David Francois, rh Mr Mark Laws, rh Mr David Reynolds, Emma Winterton, rh Ms Rosie Freer, Mike Leadsom, Andrea Ritchie, Ms Margaret Wood, Mike Fuller, Richard Lee, Jessica Robertson, John Woodcock, John Gale, Sir Roger Lee, Dr Phillip Garnier, Sir Edward Leech, Mr John Robinson, Mr Geoffrey Woodward, rh Mr Shaun Rotheram, Steve Garnier, Mark Lefroy, Jeremy Wright, David Roy, Mr Frank Gauke, Mr David Leslie, Charlotte Wright, Mr Iain Ruddock, rh Dame Joan George, Andrew Letwin, rh Mr Oliver Sarwar, Anas Tellers for the Ayes: Gibb, Mr Nick Lewis, Brandon Sawford, Andy Heidi Alexander and Gilbert, Stephen Lewis, Dr Julian Seabeck, Alison Tom Blenkinsop Gillan, rh Mrs Cheryl Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Glen, John Lidington, rh Mr David NOES Goldsmith, Zac Lilley, rh Mr Peter Goodwill, Mr Robert Lloyd, Stephen Adams, Nigel Bradley, Karen Gove, rh Michael Lopresti, Jack Afriyie, Adam Brady, Mr Graham Graham, Richard Loughton, Tim Aldous, Peter Brazier, Mr Julian Grant, Mrs Helen Luff, Sir Peter Amess, Sir David Bridgen, Andrew Gray, Mr James Lumley, Karen Andrew, Stuart Brine, Steve Green, rh Damian May, rh Mrs Theresa Arbuthnot, rh Mr James Brokenshire, James Greening, rh Justine McCartney, Jason Baker, rh Norman Brooke, rh Annette Grieve, rh Mr Dominic McCartney, Karl Baker, Steve Browne, Mr Jeremy Griffiths, Andrew McIntosh, Miss Anne Baldry, rh Sir Tony Bruce, Fiona Gummer, Ben McLoughlin, rh Mr Patrick Baldwin, Harriett Bruce, rh Sir Malcolm Gyimah, Mr Sam McPartland, Stephen Barclay, Stephen Buckland, Mr , Robert Menzies, Mark Barker, rh Gregory Burley, Mr Aidan Hames, Duncan Metcalfe, Stephen Baron, Mr John Burns, Conor Hammond, Stephen Miller, rh Maria Barwell, Gavin Burns, rh Mr Simon Hancock, rh Matthew Mills, Nigel Bebb, Guto Burrowes, Mr David Hancock, Mr Mike Milton, Anne Beith, rh Sir Alan Burt, rh Alistair Hands, rh Greg Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Bellingham, Mr Henry Burt, Lorely Harper, Mr Mark Moore, rh Michael Benyon, Richard Byles, Dan Harrington, Richard Mordaunt, Penny Beresford, Sir Paul Cairns, Alun Harris, Rebecca Morgan, rh Nicky Berry, Jake Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair Hart, Simon Morris, Anne Marie Bingham, Andrew Carmichael, Neil Harvey, Sir Nick Morris, David Birtwistle, Gordon Chishti, Rehman Haselhurst, rh Sir Alan Morris, James Blackman, Bob Chope, Mr Christopher Hayes, rh Mr John Mosley, Stephen Blunt, Crispin Clark, rh Greg Heald, Sir Oliver Mowat, David Boles, Nick Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey Heaton-Harris, Chris Mulholland, Greg Bone, Mr Peter Coffey, Dr Thérèse Hemming, John Mundell, rh David Bottomley, Sir Peter Collins, Damian Henderson, Gordon Munt, Tessa 149 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 150

Murray, Sheryll Soubry, Anna (a) determine and publish a strategic plan to tackle Murrison, Dr Andrew Spelman, rh Mrs Caroline substantiated concerns identified in the assessment Neill, Robert Stephenson, Andrew made under subsection (1); or Newmark, Mr Brooks Stevenson, John (b) publish a statement and explanation in relation to why Newton, Sarah Stewart, Bob a plan under subsection (3)(a) is not required. Nokes, Caroline Stewart, Iain (4) Any strategic plan under subsection (3)(a) must include, Norman, Jesse Stewart, Rory but need not be limited to, steps— Nuttall, Mr David Streeter, Mr Gary (a) to promote change in the social and cultural patterns O’Brien, rh Mr Stephen Stuart, Mr Graham of behaviour with a view to eradicating prejudices, Offord, Dr Matthew Stunell, rh Sir Andrew customs, traditions and all other practices which are Ollerenshaw, Eric Sturdy, Julian based on the idea of the inferiority of women and Opperman, Guy Swales, Ian which may amount to pressure to seek a termination Ottaway, rh Sir Richard Swayne, rh Mr Desmond on the grounds of the sex of the foetus; Paice, rh Sir James Swinson, Jo (b) to ensure best practice exists in identifying women Parish, Neil Swire, rh Mr Hugo being coerced or pressured into seeking a termination Patel, Priti Syms, Mr Robert on the grounds of the sex of the foetus, or at risk of Pawsey, Mark Thurso, rh John being so, and in the provision of protection and Penning, rh Mike Timpson, Mr Edward support to potential victims; and Penrose, John Tomlinson, Justin (c) to promote guidance to service providers, health Percy, Andrew Tredinnick, David professionals and other stakeholders. Perry, Claire Turner, Mr Andrew (5) The Secretary of State must lay a copy of the plan, Phillips, Stephen Tyrie, Mr Andrew determined under subsection (3)(a), before each House of Parliament Pickles, rh Mr Eric Uppal, Paul within 6 months of the publication date of the assessment under Pincher, Christopher Vaizey, Mr Edward subsection (2).’—(Ann Coffey.) Poulter, Dr Daniel Vara, Mr Shailesh Brought up. Prisk, Mr Mark Vickers, Martin Pritchard, Mark Villiers, rh Mrs Theresa Question put, That the clause be added to the Bill. Pugh, John Walker, Mr Charles The House divided: Ayes 491, Noes 2. Raab, Mr Dominic Walker, Mr Robin Division No. 161] [9.53 pm Randall, rh Sir John Wallace, Mr Ben Redwood, rh Mr John Ward, Mr David Rees-Mogg, Jacob AYES Watkinson, Dame Angela Reevell, Simon Weatherley, Mike Abrahams, Debbie Blunkett, rh Mr David Reid, Mr Alan Webb, rh Steve Afriyie, Adam Blunt, Crispin Robathan, rh Mr Andrew Wharton, James Ainsworth, rh Mr Bob Boles, Nick Robertson, rh Sir Hugh Aldous, Peter Bone, Mr Peter Rogerson, Dan Wheeler, Heather White, Chris Alexander, Heidi Bottomley, Sir Peter Rosindell, Andrew Ali, Rushanara Bradley, Karen Whittaker, Craig Rudd, Amber Allen, Mr Graham Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben Whittingdale, Mr John Ruffley, Mr David Amess, Sir David Brady, Mr Graham Wiggin, Bill Russell, Sir Bob Anderson, Mr David Brake, rh Tom Willetts, rh Mr David Rutley, David Andrew, Stuart Brazier, Mr Julian Sanders, Mr Adrian Williams, Mr Mark Arbuthnot, rh Mr James Brennan, Kevin Sandys, Laura Williams, Stephen Ashworth, Jonathan Bridgen, Andrew Scott, Mr Lee Williamson, Gavin Bacon, Mr Richard Brine, Steve Selous, Andrew Willott, rh Jenny Bailey, Mr Adrian Brokenshire, James Shapps, rh Grant Wilson, Mr Rob Bain, Mr William Brooke, rh Annette Sharma, Alok Wollaston, Dr Sarah Baker, rh Norman Brown, rh Mr Nicholas Shelbrooke, Alec Wright, rh Jeremy Baker, Steve Brown, Mr Russell Simmonds, rh Mark Wright, Simon Baldry, rh Sir Tony Browne, Mr Jeremy Simpson, Mr Keith Yeo, Mr Tim Baldwin, Harriett Bruce, Fiona Skidmore, Chris Young, rh Sir George Balls, rh Ed Bruce, rh Sir Malcolm Smith, Chloe Zahawi, Nadhim Barclay, Stephen Bryant, Chris Smith, Henry Barker, rh Gregory Buck, Ms Karen Smith, Julian Tellers for the Noes: Baron, Mr John Buckland, Mr Robert Smith, Sir Robert Tom Brake and Barron, rh Kevin Burley, Mr Aidan Soames, rh Sir Nicholas Mel Stride Barwell, Gavin Burnham, rh Andy Bayley, Sir Hugh Burns, Conor Question accordingly negatived. Bebb, Guto Burns, rh Mr Simon Beckett, rh Margaret Burrowes, Mr David New Clause 25 Beith, rh Sir Alan Burt, rh Alistair Bellingham, Mr Henry Burt, Lorely TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY ON GROUNDS OF SEX OF Benn, rh Hilary Byles, Dan FOETUS Benyon, Richard Byrne, rh Mr Liam ‘(1) The Secretary of State shall arrange for an assessment to Beresford, Sir Paul Cairns, Alun be made of the evidence of termination of pregnancy on the Berger, Luciana Campbell, rh Mr Alan grounds of the sex of the foetus in England, Wales and Scotland. Betts, Mr Clive Campbell, Mr Ronnie (2) The arrangements made under subsection (1) shall be such Bingham, Andrew Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair as to enable publication of the assessment by the Secretary of Birtwistle, Gordon Carmichael, Neil State within 6 months of the date of Royal Assent to this Act. Blackman, Bob Caton, Martin (3) The Secretary of State shall consider the assessment made Blackwood, Nicola Chapman, Jenny under subsection (1) and— Blomfield, Paul Chishti, Rehman 151 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 152

Chope, Mr Christopher Foster, rh Mr Don Howarth, Sir Gerald McCarthy, Kerry Clark, rh Greg Fovargue, Yvonne Howell, John McCartney, Jason Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey Fox,rhDrLiam Hughes, rh Simon McCartney, Karl Coaker, Vernon Francis, Dr Hywel Hunt, rh Mr Jeremy McCrea, Dr William Coffey, Ann Freer, Mike Hunt, Tristram McDonald, Andy Coffey, Dr Thérèse Fuller, Richard Huppert, Dr Julian McDonnell, John Collins, Damian Gale, Sir Roger Hurd, Mr Nick McFadden, rh Mr Pat Colvile, Oliver Gapes, Mike Irranca-Davies, Huw McGovern, Alison Connarty, Michael Gardiner, Barry Jackson, Glenda McGuire, rh Dame Anne Cooper, Rosie Garnier, Sir Edward Jackson, Mr Stewart McInnes, Liz Cooper, rh Yvette Garnier, Mark James, Margot McIntosh, Miss Anne Corbyn, Jeremy Gauke, Mr David James, Mrs Siân C. McKechin, Ann Cox, Mr Geoffrey George, Andrew Jarvis, Dan McKenzie, Mr Iain Crabb, rh Stephen Gibb, Mr Nick Javid, rh Sajid McLoughlin, rh Mr Patrick Crausby, Mr David Gillan, rh Mrs Cheryl Jenkin, Mr Bernard McPartland, Stephen Creagh, Mary Glass, Pat Jenrick, Robert Meale, Sir Alan Creasy, Stella Glen, John Johnson, rh Alan Mearns, Ian Crockart, Mike Glindon, Mrs Mary Johnson, Diana Menzies, Mark Crouch, Tracey Goldsmith, Zac Johnson, Gareth Metcalfe, Stephen Cruddas, Jon Goodman, Helen Johnson, Joseph Miliband, rh Edward Cryer, John Goodwill, Mr Robert Jones, Andrew Miller, Andrew Cunningham, Alex Graham, Richard Jones, rh Mr David Miller, rh Maria Cunningham, Mr Jim Greatrex, Tom Jones, Graham Mills, Nigel Cunningham, Sir Tony Green, rh Damian Jones, Mr Kevan Milton, Anne Dakin, Nic Green, Kate Jones, Mr Marcus Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Danczuk, Simon Greening, rh Justine Jones, Susan Elan Mitchell, Austin Darling, rh Mr Alistair Greenwood, Lilian Jowell, rh Dame Tessa Moon, Mrs Madeleine Davey, rh Mr Edward Grieve, rh Mr Dominic Kane, Mike Moore, rh Michael David, Wayne Griffith, Nia Kawczynski, Daniel Mordaunt, Penny Davidson, Mr Ian Griffiths, Andrew Kendall, Liz Morden, Jessica Davies, David T. C. Gummer, Ben Kennedy, rh Mr Charles Morgan, rh Nicky (Monmouth) Gwynne, Andrew Khan, rh Sadiq Morrice, Graeme (Livingston) Davies, Geraint Gyimah, Mr Sam Kirby, Simon Morris, David Davies, Glyn Hain, rh Mr Peter Knight, rh Sir Greg Morris, Grahame M. De Piero, Gloria Halfon, Robert Kwarteng, Kwasi (Easington) Dinenage, Caroline Hames, Duncan Lancaster, Mark Morris, James Docherty, Thomas Hamilton, Mr David Latham, Pauline Mosley, Stephen Donaldson, rh Mr Jeffrey M. Hamilton, Fabian Lavery, Ian Mowat, David Donohoe, Mr Brian H. Hammond, Stephen Laws, rh Mr David Mundell, rh David Doran, Mr Frank Hancock, rh Matthew Lazarowicz, Mark Munn, Meg Doughty, Stephen Hancock, Mr Mike Leadsom, Andrea Munt, Tessa Dowd, Jim Hands, rh Greg Lee, Jessica Murray, Sheryll Doyle, Gemma Hanson, rh Mr David Lee, Dr Phillip Murrison, Dr Andrew Drax, Richard Harman, rh Ms Harriet Leech, Mr John Nandy, Lisa Dromey, Jack Harper, Mr Mark Lefroy, Jeremy Nash, Pamela Dugher, Michael Harrington, Richard Leslie, Charlotte Neill, Robert Duncan Smith, rh Mr Iain Harris, Rebecca Leslie, Chris Newmark, Mr Brooks Dunne, Mr Philip Harris, Mr Tom Letwin, rh Mr Oliver Nokes, Caroline Durkan, Mark Hart, Simon Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma O’Brien, rh Mr Stephen Eagle, Ms Angela Harvey, Sir Nick Lewis, Brandon O’Donnell, Fiona Eagle, Maria Havard, Mr Dai Lewis, Mr Ivan Offord, Dr Matthew Edwards, Jonathan Hayes, rh Mr John Lewis, Dr Julian Ollerenshaw, Eric Efford, Clive Heald, Sir Oliver Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Onwurah, Chi Elliott, Julie Healey, rh John Lidington, rh Mr David Opperman, Guy Ellis, Michael Heaton-Harris, Chris Lilley, rh Mr Peter Osborne, Sandra Ellison, Jane Hemming, John Lloyd, Stephen Owen, Albert Ellman, Mrs Louise Henderson, Gordon Llwyd, rh Mr Elfyn Paice, rh Sir James Elphicke, Charlie Hendry, Charles Loughton, Tim Parish, Neil Eustice, George Herbert, rh Nick Love, Mr Andrew Patel, Priti Evans, Chris Heyes, David Lucas, Caroline Pawsey, Mark Evans, Graham Hillier, Meg Lucas, Ian Pearce, Teresa Evans, Jonathan Hilling, Julie Luff, Sir Peter Penning, rh Mike Evans, Mr Nigel Hinds, Damian Lumley, Karen Penrose, John Evennett, Mr David Hoban, Mr Mark MacNeil, Mr Angus Brendan Perkins, Toby Fabricant, Michael Hodge, rh Margaret Mactaggart, Fiona Perry, Claire Fallon, rh Michael Hodgson, Mrs Sharon Mahmood, Mr Khalid Phillips, Stephen Featherstone, rh Lynne Hollingbery, George Malhotra, Seema Phillipson, Bridget Field, Mark Hollobone, Mr Philip Mann, John Pickles, rh Mr Eric Fitzpatrick, Jim Hood, Mr Jim Marsden, Mr Gordon Pincher, Christopher Flello, Robert Hopkins, Kelvin May, rh Mrs Theresa Pound, Stephen Flint, rh Caroline Horwood, Martin McCabe, Steve Powell, Lucy Flynn, Paul Howarth, rh Mr George McCann, Mr Michael Prisk, Mr Mark 153 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 154

Pritchard, Mark Sturdy, Julian Question accordingly agreed to. Pugh, John Sutcliffe, Mr Gerry New clause 25 added to the Bill. Qureshi, Yasmin Swayne, rh Mr Desmond Raab, Mr Dominic Swinson, Jo Randall, rh Sir John Swire, rh Mr Hugo Clause 65 Raynsford, rh Mr Nick Syms, Mr Robert Redwood, rh Mr John Tami, Mark INTERPRETATION ETC Reed, Mr Steve Thornberry, Emily Rees-Mogg, Jacob Thurso, rh John Amendment made: 1, page 52, line 45, at end insert— Reevell, Simon Timms, rh Stephen ‘( ) An application to a sheriff for an order under section 60, Reid, Mr Alan Tomlinson, Justin 61, 63 or 64 must be made by summary application.” —(Karen Reynolds, Emma Trickett, Jon Bradley.) Ritchie, Ms Margaret Turner, Mr Andrew Under clauses 60, 61, 63 and 64 an application may be made to the Robertson, Angus Turner, Karl appropriate court (in Scotland, a sheriff) for continued retention Robertson, rh Sir Hugh Twigg, Derek of seized substances, for forfeiture or return of substances and for Robertson, John Twigg, Stephen compensation where no forfeiture order is made. This amendment Robinson, Mr Geoffrey Tyrie, Mr Andrew provides that such applications to a sheriff must be made by Rogerson, Dan Umunna, Mr Chuka summary application. Rosindell, Andrew Uppal, Paul Rotheram, Steve Vaizey, Mr Edward Roy, Mr Frank Vara, Mr Shailesh Clause 72 Rudd, Amber Vaz, Valerie Ruddock, rh Dame Joan Villiers, rh Mrs Theresa FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION PROTECTION ORDERS Ruffley, Mr David Walker, Mr Charles Amendment proposed: 20, page 63, line 27, leave out Russell, Sir Bob Walker, Mr Robin “the” and insert “a risk of”.—(Sir William Cash.) Rutley, David Wallace, Mr Ben Sanders, Mr Adrian Walley, Joan Question put, That the amendment be made. Sarwar, Anas Ward, Mr David The House divided: Ayes 227, Noes 282. Sawford, Andy Watkinson, Dame Angela Division No. 162] [10.12 pm Scott, Mr Lee Watson, Mr Tom Seabeck, Alison Watts, Mr Dave AYES Selous, Andrew Weatherley, Mike Shannon, Jim Webb, rh Steve Abbott, Ms Diane Cooper, rh Yvette Shapps, rh Grant Weir, Mr Mike Abrahams, Debbie Corbyn, Jeremy Sharma, Alok Wharton, James Ainsworth, rh Mr Bob Crausby, Mr David Sharma, Mr Virendra Wheeler, Heather Alexander, Heidi Creagh, Mary Sheerman, Mr Barry White, Chris Ali, Rushanara Creasy, Stella Allen, Mr Graham Cruddas, Jon Shelbrooke, Alec Whitehead, Dr Alan Shuker, Gavin Anderson, Mr David Cryer, John Whittaker, Craig Simmonds, rh Mark Ashworth, Jonathan Cunningham, Alex Whittingdale, Mr John Simpson, Mr Keith Bailey, Mr Adrian Cunningham, Mr Jim Wiggin, Bill Skidmore, Chris Bain, Mr William Cunningham, Sir Tony Willetts, rh Mr David Skinner, Mr Dennis Baker, rh Norman Dakin, Nic Slaughter, Mr Andy Williams, Mr Mark Balls, rh Ed Danczuk, Simon Smith, rh Mr Andrew Williamson, Chris Barron, rh Kevin Darling, rh Mr Alistair Smith, Angela Williamson, Gavin Bayley, Sir Hugh David, Wayne Smith, Chloe Wilson, Mr Rob Beckett, rh Margaret Davidson, Mr Ian Smith, Henry Wilson, Sammy Benn, rh Hilary Davies, Geraint Smith, Julian Winnick, Mr David Berger, Luciana De Piero, Gloria Smith, Nick Winterton, rh Ms Rosie Betts, Mr Clive Docherty, Thomas Smith, Owen Wollaston, Dr Sarah Blenkinsop, Tom Donaldson, rh Mr Jeffrey M. Smith, Sir Robert Wood, Mike Blomfield, Paul Donohoe, Mr Brian H. Soames, rh Sir Nicholas Woodcock, John Bone, Mr Peter Doran, Mr Frank Soubry, Anna Woodward, rh Mr Shaun Bottomley, Sir Peter Doughty, Stephen Spellar, rh Mr John Wright, David Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben Dowd, Jim Stephenson, Andrew Wright, Mr Iain Brennan, Kevin Doyle, Gemma Stevenson, John Wright, rh Jeremy Bridgen, Andrew Dromey, Jack Stewart, Bob Wright, Simon Brown, rh Mr Nicholas Dugher, Michael Brown, Mr Russell Durkan, Mark Stewart, Iain Yeo, Mr Tim Streeter, Mr Gary Bryant, Chris Eagle, Ms Angela Young, rh Sir George Stride, Mel Buck, Ms Karen Eagle, Maria Zahawi, Nadhim Stringer, Graham Burnham, rh Andy Edwards, Jonathan Stuart, Ms Gisela Tellers for the Ayes: Byrne, rh Mr Liam Efford, Clive Stuart, Mr Graham Jenny Willott and Campbell, rh Mr Alan Elliott, Julie Stunell, rh Sir Andrew Sarah Newton Campbell, Mr Ronnie Ellman, Mrs Louise Cash, Sir William Evans, Chris NOES Caton, Martin Fitzpatrick, Jim Nuttall, Mr David Tellers for the Noes: Chapman, Jenny Flello, Robert Coaker, Vernon Flint, rh Caroline Vickers, Martin Tom Blenkinsop and Phil Wilson Coffey, Ann Flynn, Paul Connarty, Michael Fovargue, Yvonne Cooper, Rosie Francis, Dr Hywel 155 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 156

Gale, Sir Roger McKechin, Ann Woodcock, John Tellers for the Ayes: Gapes, Mike McKenzie, Mr Iain Woodward, rh Mr Shaun Steve Baker and Gardiner, Barry Meale, Sir Alan Wright, David Zac Goldsmith Glass, Pat Mearns, Ian Wright, Mr Iain Glindon, Mrs Mary Miller, Andrew Goodman, Helen Moon, Mrs Madeleine NOES Greatrex, Tom Morden, Jessica Green, Kate Morrice, Graeme (Livingston) Adams, Nigel Ellwood, Mr Tobias Greenwood, Lilian Morris, Grahame M. Afriyie, Adam Elphicke, Charlie Griffith, Nia (Easington) Aldous, Peter Eustice, George Gwynne, Andrew Mudie, Mr George Amess, Sir David Evans, Graham Hain, rh Mr Peter Munn, Meg Andrew, Stuart Evans, Jonathan Hamilton, Mr David Munt, Tessa Arbuthnot, rh Mr James Evans, Mr Nigel Hamilton, Fabian Nandy, Lisa Bacon, Mr Richard Evennett, Mr David Hancock, Mr Mike Nash, Pamela Baldry, rh Sir Tony Fabricant, Michael Hanson, rh Mr David O’Donnell, Fiona Baldwin, Harriett Fallon, rh Michael Harman, rh Ms Harriet Onwurah, Chi Barclay, Stephen Featherstone, rh Lynne Harris, Mr Tom Osborne, Sandra Barker, rh Gregory Field, Mark Havard, Mr Dai Owen, Albert Baron, Mr John Foster, rh Mr Don Healey, rh John Pearce, Teresa Barwell, Gavin Fox,rhDrLiam Heyes, David Perkins, Toby Bebb, Guto Francois, rh Mr Mark Hillier, Meg Phillipson, Bridget Beith, rh Sir Alan Freer, Mike Hilling, Julie Pound, Stephen Bellingham, Mr Henry Fuller, Richard Hodge, rh Margaret Powell, Lucy Benyon, Richard Garnier, Mark Hodgson, Mrs Sharon Qureshi, Yasmin Beresford, Sir Paul Gauke, Mr David Hollobone, Mr Philip Raynsford, rh Mr Nick Berry, Jake George, Andrew Hood, Mr Jim Redwood, rh Mr John Bingham, Andrew Gibb, Mr Nick Hopkins, Kelvin Reed, Mr Steve Birtwistle, Gordon Gillan, rh Mrs Cheryl Howarth, rh Mr George Reynolds, Emma Blackman, Bob Glen, John Hunt, Tristram Ritchie, Ms Margaret Blackwood, Nicola Goodwill, Mr Robert Irranca-Davies, Huw Robertson, John Blunt, Crispin Gove, rh Michael Jackson, Glenda Robinson, Mr Geoffrey Boles, Nick Graham, Richard James, Mrs Siân C. Rotheram, Steve Bradley, Karen Grant, Mrs Helen Jarvis, Dan Roy, Mr Frank Brazier, Mr Julian Gray, Mr James Jenkin, Mr Bernard Ruddock, rh Dame Joan Brine, Steve Green, rh Damian Johnson, rh Alan Sarwar, Anas Brokenshire, James Greening, rh Justine Johnson, Diana Sawford, Andy Brooke, rh Annette Grieve, rh Mr Dominic Jones, Graham Seabeck, Alison Bruce, Fiona Griffiths, Andrew Jones, Mr Kevan Shannon, Jim Buckland, Mr Robert Gummer, Ben Jones, Susan Elan Sharma, Mr Virendra Burley, Mr Aidan Gyimah, Mr Sam Jowell, rh Dame Tessa Sheerman, Mr Barry Burns, Conor Halfon, Robert Kane, Mike Shuker, Gavin Burns, rh Mr Simon Hames, Duncan Kaufman, rh Sir Gerald Skinner, Mr Dennis Burrowes, Mr David Hammond, Stephen Kelly, Chris Slaughter, Mr Andy Burt, rh Alistair Hancock, rh Matthew Kendall, Liz Smith, rh Mr Andrew Burt, Lorely Hands, rh Greg Khan, rh Sadiq Smith, Angela Byles, Dan Harper, Mr Mark Latham, Pauline Smith, Nick Cairns, Alun Harrington, Richard Lavery, Ian Smith, Owen Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair Harris, Rebecca Lazarowicz, Mark Spellar, rh Mr John Carmichael, Neil Hart, Simon Leslie, Chris Stringer, Graham Chishti, Rehman Harvey, Sir Nick Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma Stuart, Ms Gisela Chope, Mr Christopher Haselhurst, rh Sir Alan Lewis, Mr Ivan Sutcliffe, Mr Gerry Clark, rh Greg Hayes, rh Mr John Llwyd, rh Mr Elfyn Tami, Mark Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey Heald, Sir Oliver Love, Mr Andrew Thornberry, Emily Coffey, Dr Thérèse Hemming, John Lucas, Caroline Timms, rh Stephen Collins, Damian Henderson, Gordon Lucas, Ian Trickett, Jon Colvile, Oliver Hendry, Charles Mactaggart, Fiona Turner, Karl Cox, Mr Geoffrey Herbert, rh Nick Mahmood, Mr Khalid Twigg, Derek Crabb, rh Stephen Hinds, Damian Malhotra, Seema Twigg, Stephen Crockart, Mike Hoban, Mr Mark Mann, John Umunna, Mr Chuka Crouch, Tracey Hollingbery, George Marsden, Mr Gordon Vaz, Valerie Davey, rh Mr Edward Horwood, Martin McCabe, Steve Walley, Joan Davies, David T. C. Howarth, Sir Gerald McCann, Mr Michael Watson, Mr Tom (Monmouth) Howell, John McCarthy, Kerry Watts, Mr Dave Davies, Glyn Hughes, rh Simon McCrea, Dr William Weir, Mr Mike Dinenage, Caroline Hunt, rh Mr Jeremy McDonagh, Siobhain Whitehead, Dr Alan Doyle-Price, Jackie Huppert, Dr Julian McDonald, Andy Williamson, Chris Drax, Richard Hurd, Mr Nick McDonnell, John Wilson, Phil Duncan, rh Sir Alan Jackson, Mr Stewart McFadden, rh Mr Pat Wilson, Sammy Duncan Smith, rh Mr Iain James, Margot McGovern, Alison Winnick, Mr David Dunne, Mr Philip Javid, rh Sajid McGuire, rh Dame Anne Winterton, rh Ms Rosie Ellis, Michael Jenrick, Robert McInnes, Liz Wood, Mike Ellison, Jane Johnson, Gareth 157 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 158

Johnson, Joseph Poulter, Dr Daniel Williamson, Gavin Yeo, Mr Tim Jones, Andrew Prisk, Mr Mark Willott, rh Jenny Young, rh Sir George Jones, rh Mr David Pritchard, Mark Wilson, Mr Rob Zahawi, Nadhim Jones, Mr Marcus Pugh, John Wollaston, Dr Sarah Tellers for the Noes: Kawczynski, Daniel Raab, Mr Dominic Wright, rh Jeremy Tom Brake and Kennedy, rh Mr Charles Randall, rh Sir John Wright, Simon Mr Ben Wallace Kirby, Simon Reevell, Simon Knight, rh Sir Greg Reid, Mr Alan Kwarteng, Kwasi Robathan, rh Mr Andrew Question accordingly negatived. Lancaster, Mark Robertson, rh Sir Hugh Laws, rh Mr David Rogerson, Dan Leadsom, Andrea Rosindell, Andrew Clause 80 Lee, Jessica Rudd, Amber Lee, Dr Phillip Ruffley, Mr David TRANSITIONAL AND SAVING PROVISIONS Leech, Mr John Russell, Sir Bob Amendments made: 2, page 83, line 24, at end Lefroy, Jeremy Rutley, David insert— Leslie, Charlotte Sanders, Mr Adrian Letwin, rh Mr Oliver Scott, Mr Lee ‘( ) Subsection (7) of section (Child sexual exploitation) and Lewis, Brandon Selous, Andrew paragraph 1A of Schedule 4 do not apply in the case of an Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Shapps, rh Grant offence proceedings for which are started before the Lidington, rh Mr David Sharma, Alok commencement of that subsection.” Lilley, rh Mr Peter Shelbrooke, Alec This amendment is consequential on subsection (7) of NC8. It Lloyd, Stephen Simmonds, rh Mark provides that the restriction of the offence of loitering or soliciting Lopresti, Jack Simpson, Mr Keith for the purposes of prostitution to persons aged 18 or over does not Loughton, Tim Skidmore, Chris apply where proceedings for such an offence have started prior to Luff, Sir Peter Smith, Chloe commencement of that subsection. Lumley, Karen Smith, Henry Amendment 23, page 83, line 24, at end insert— May, rh Mrs Theresa Smith, Julian ‘( ) The amendment made by section (Codes of practice about McCartney, Jason Smith, Sir Robert investigatory powers: journalistic sources) applies only to a code McCartney, Karl Soames, rh Sir Nicholas of practice that is issued or revised on or after the day on which McIntosh, Miss Anne Soubry, Anna this Act is passed.” McLoughlin, rh Mr Patrick Spelman, rh Mrs Caroline This amendment ensures that NC24 applies only to a new or McPartland, Stephen Stephenson, Andrew newly-revised code of practice under section 71 of the Regulation Menzies, Mark Stevenson, John of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Metcalfe, Stephen Stewart, Bob Miller, rh Maria Stewart, Iain Amendment 24, page 83, line 44, at end insert— Mills, Nigel Stewart, Rory “() in that Act, subsection (4)(b) of the section 40CB Milton, Anne Streeter, Mr Gary inserted by section (Throwing articles into prisons) Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Stride, Mel above.” Moore, rh Michael Stuart, Mr Graham This amendment is consequential on NC23. It provides that the Mordaunt, Penny Stunell, rh Sir Andrew maximum penalty on summary conviction for the new offence is six Morgan, rh Nicky Sturdy, Julian months’ imprisonment, rather than 12 months’, pending the coming Morris, Anne Marie Swales, Ian into force of section 154(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Morris, David Swayne, rh Mr Desmond Amendment 25, page 84, line 10, at end insert— Morris, James Swinson, Jo (0) in that Act, subsection (4)(b) of the section 40CB Mosley, Stephen Swire, rh Mr Hugo inserted by section (Throwing articles into Mowat, David Syms, Mr Robert prisons) above;”—(Karen Bradley.) Mulholland, Greg Thurso, rh John Mundell, rh David Timpson, Mr Edward This amendment is consequential on NC23. It provides that the Murray, Sheryll Tomlinson, Justin maximum fine on summary conviction for the new offence is the Neill, Robert Tredinnick, David current statutory maximum (£5,000), rather than an unlimited Newmark, Mr Brooks Tyrie, Mr Andrew fine, pending the coming into force of section 85(1) of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. Newton, Sarah Uppal, Paul Nokes, Caroline Vaizey, Mr Edward Norman, Jesse Vara, Mr Shailesh Clause 81 Nuttall, Mr David Vickers, Martin O’Brien, rh Mr Stephen Villiers, rh Mrs Theresa Offord, Dr Matthew Walker, Mr Charles EXTENT Ollerenshaw, Eric Walker, Mr Robin Amendments made: 3, page 84, line 27, leave out Opperman, Guy Ward, Mr David paragraphs (d) and (e) and insert— Ottaway, rh Sir Richard Watkinson, Dame Angela “() sections 66 to (Child sexual exploitation);” Paice, rh Sir James Weatherley, Mike Parish, Neil Webb, rh Steve This amendment is consequential on NC8. It provides that the New Patel, Priti Wharton, James Clause extends to England and Wales only. Pawsey, Mark Wheeler, Heather Amendment 4, page 84, line 28, at end insert— Penning, rh Mike White, Chris “() sections (Duty to notify police of female genital Penrose, John Whittaker, Craig mutilation) and (Guidance about female genital Percy, Andrew Whittingdale, Mr John mutilation);”. Perry, Claire Wiggin, Bill This amendment and amendment 7 are consequential on NC9 and Phillips, Stephen Willetts, rh Mr David NC10. They provide that the new clauses and the new sections they Pickles, rh Mr Eric Williams, Mr Mark insert into the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 extend to Pincher, Christopher Williams, Stephen England and Wales only. 159 Serious Crime Bill [Lords]23 FEBRUARY 2015 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 160

Amendment 26, page 84, line 30, leave out “section 75” Amendment 7, page 117, line 6, at end insert— and insert— “Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 (c.31) “sections 75 and (Throwing articles into prisons)”—(Karen In section 8 of the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 (extent Bradley.) etc), in subsection (4) after “Scotland” insert “and sections 5B This amendment is consequential on NC23. It provides that the and 5C do not extend to Northern Ireland”. New Clause extends to England and Wales only. Amendment 8, page 117, line 10, at end insert— In section 54 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (sections 51A to Clause 82 53A: interpretation), for subsections (2) and (3) substitute— (2) In sections 51A, 52, 53 and 53A “prostitute” means a person (A) who, on at least one occasion and whether or not COMMENCEMENT compelled to do so, offers or provides sexual services to another Amendment made: 27, page 85, line 28, at end person in return for payment or a promise of payment to A or a insert— third person; and “prostitution” is to be interpreted accordingly. “() section (Codes of practice about investigatory powers: (3) In subsection (2) and section 53A, “payment” means any journalistic sources);”—(Karen Bradley.) financial advantage, including the discharge of an obligation to This amendment ensures that NC24 comes into force as soon as the pay or the provision of goods or services (including sexual Bill receives Royal Assent. services) gratuitously or at a discount.”” This amendment is consequential on NC8. It amends section 54 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 so as to preserve the existing Schedule 4 definitions of “prostitute” and “payment” for the purposes of sections 51A to 53A of that Act. MINOR AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS Amendment 9, page 117, line 12, at end insert— Amendments made: 5, page 108, line 38, at end ( ) In section 136A of that Act (meaning of specified insert— prostitution offence etc) subsection (2) is amended as follows. “Street Offences Act 1959 (c. 57) ( ) After paragraph (a) insert— 1A (1) The Schedule to the Street Offences Act 1959 (orders “(aa) an offence under section 48 of this Act committed under section 1(2A): breach, amendment etc) is amended as by causing or inciting a child to be sexually exploited follows. within the meaning given by section 51(2)(a);”. (2) In paragraphs 2(3), 3(3) and 5(4), for paragraphs (a) and ( ) In paragraph (b), for “section 48 of this Act, or Article 38 (b) substitute “a magistrates’ court acting in the relevant local of the Northern Ireland order,” substitute “Article 38 of the justice area”. Northern Ireland order”.” (3) In paragraph 9(2), for paragraphs (a) and (b) substitute ( ) After paragraph (b) insert— “any magistrates’ court”. “(ba) an offence under section 49 of this Act committed by controlling the activities of a child in relation to (4) Omit paragraph 9(4). sexual exploitation within the meaning given by (5) In paragraph 10(4), for paragraphs (a) and (b) substitute section 51(2)(a);”. “to a prison”. ( ) In paragraph (c), for “section 49 of this Act, or Article 39 of (6) Omit paragraph 10(5). the Northern Ireland order,” substitute “Article 39 of the (7) In paragraph 11(1) omit “youth court or other”.” Northern Ireland order”. This amendment makes consequential amendments to the Street ( ) After paragraph (c) insert— Offences Act 1959 as a result of the restriction of the offence of “(ca) an offence under section 50 of this Act committed by loitering or soliciting for the purposes of prostitution to persons arranging or facilitating the sexual exploitation, aged 18 or over, as provided for in subsection (7) of New Clause 8 within the meaning given by section 51(2)(a), of a [Child sexual exploitation]. child;”. Amendment 28, page 110, line 32, at end insert— ( ) In paragraph (d), for “section 50 of this Act, or Article 40 of the Northern Ireland order,” substitute “Article 49 of the “Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (c. 23) Northern Ireland order”. In section 71 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ( ) Subsection (3) of that section is amended as follows. (issue and revision of codes of practice), in subsection (8), for “(3)” substitute “(2A)”.” ( ) Before paragraph (a) insert— “(za) an offence under section 48 of this Act committed by This amendment, which is consequential on NC24, ensures that the causing or inciting a child to be sexually exploited new subsection (2A) inserted by that New Clause applies not just within the meaning given by section 51(2)(b);”. to a new code of practice but also to a revised code. ( ) In paragraph (a), for “section 48 of this Act, or Article 38 of Amendment 6, page 117, line 3, at end insert— the Northern Ireland order,” substitute “Article 38 of the ‘( ) In Schedule 2 to that Act (lifestyle offences: England and Northern Ireland order”. Wales), in paragraph 8 (prostitution and child sex), sub- ( ) After paragraph (a) insert— paragraph (2) is amended as follows. “(aa) an offence under section 49 of this Act committed ( ) In paragraph (b), for “child prostitution or pornography” by controlling the activities of a child in relation to substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”. sexual exploitation within the meaning given by ( ) In paragraph (c), for “prostitute or a child involved in section 51(2)(b);”. pornography” substitute “in relation to sexual exploitation”. ( ) In paragraph (b), for “section 49 of this Act, or Article 39 ( ) In paragraph (d), for “child prostitution or pornography” of the Northern Ireland order,” substitute “Article 39 of the substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”.” Northern Ireland order”. This amendment and amendments 9 and 11 to 17 are consequential ( ) After paragraph (b) insert— on NC8. In each case they carry through to other legislative “(ba) an offence under section 50 of this Act committed provisions the changes to the nomenclature used in the offences in by arranging or facilitating the sexual exploitation, sections 48 to 50 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, as amended by within the meaning given by section 51(2)(b), of a the New Clause. child;”. 161 Serious Crime Bill [Lords] 23 FEBRUARY 2015 162

( ) In paragraph (c), for “section 50 of this Act, or Article 40 of Amendment 31, line 12 after “crime;” insert the Northern Ireland order,” substitute “Article 49 of the Northern Ireland order”.” “to make provision about codes of practice that relate to the exercise and performance, in connection with the prevention or Amendment 10, page 117, line 13, leave out detection of serious crime, of powers and duties in relation to paragraph 59 communications;” —(Karen Bradley.) The effect of this amendment is that new offence of sexual Question put and agreed to. communication with a child under clause 67 will be subject to those provisions of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 which provide for extra-territorial jurisdiction; as such, offences committed outside 10.25 pm the United Kingdom may in certain circumstances be prosecuted in It being after 10 pm, the Speaker put the Question England and Wales. necessary to bring proceedings on Third Reading to a Amendment 11, page 117, line 36, leave out “In” conclusion (Programme Order, 5 January). Amendment 12, page 117, line 37, leave out “, after” Question put forthwith (Standing order No. 83E), and insert “is amended as follows. That the Bill be now read the Third time. ‘( ) After” Question agreed to. Amendment 13, page 117, line 39, at end insert— Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed, with ‘( ) In paragraph 136, for “child prostitution or pornography” amendments. substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”. ( ) In paragraph 137, for “prostitute or a child involved in pornography” substitute “in relation to sexual exploitation”. Business without Debate ( ) In paragraph 138, for “child prostitution or pornography” substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”.” Amendment 14, page 117, line 39, at end insert— DELEGATED LEGISLATION ‘( ) Schedule 15B to that Act (offences listed for the purposes of sections 224A, 226A and 246A) is amended as follows. Mr Speaker: With the leave of the House, we shall ( ) In paragraph 35, for “child prostitution or pornography” take motions 3 and 4 together. substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”. Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing ( ) In paragraph 36, for “prostitute or a child involved in Order No. 118(6)), pornography” substitute “in relation to sexual exploitation”.

( ) In paragraph 37, for “child prostitution or pornography” IMMIGRATION substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”.” That the draft Immigration (Biometric Registration) (Amendment) Amendment 15, page 118, line 3, at end insert— (No. 2) Regulations 2015, which were laid before this House on ‘( ) In paragraph 7(e), for “abuse of children through 17 December 2014, be approved. prostitution and pornography” substitute “sexual exploitation of That the draft Immigration (Provision of Physical Data) children”.” (Amendment) Regulations 2015, which were laid before this Amendment 16, page 119, line 16, after “Wales),” House on 17 December 2014, be approved.—(Mr Foster.) insert— Question agreed to. “in paragraph 4 (prostitution and child sex), in sub-paragraph Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing (2)— Order No. 118(6)), (a) in paragraph (b), for “child prostitution or pornography” substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”; (b) in paragraph (c), for “prostitute or a child involved in BRITISH NATIONALITY pornography” substitute “in relation to sexual That the draft British Nationality (General) (Amendment) exploitation”; Regulations 2015, which were laid before this House on 17 December (c) in paragraph (d), for “child prostitution or pornography” 2014, be approved.—(Mr Foster.) substitute “sexual exploitation of a child”. Question agreed to. ‘( ) In that Part,” Amendment 17, page 120, line 36, at end insert— Mr Speaker: With the leave of the House, we shall take motions 6 and 7 together. Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (c. 12) In section 116 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Act 2014 (information about guests at hotels believed to be used Order No. 118(6)), for child sexual exploitation), in subsection (8)(a), for “prostitution and pornography” substitute “sexual exploitation”.”—(Karen Bradley.) IMMIGRATION That the draft Immigration (Leave to Enter and Remain) (Amendment) Order 2015, which was laid before this House on Title 19 January, be approved. Amendments made: 18, line 2 after “1933,” insert That the draft Immigration (Biometric Registration) (Amendment) Regulations 2015, which were laid before this House on 19 January, “the Sexual Offences Act 2003, the Street Offences Act 1959,” be approved.—(Mr Foster.) Amendment 29, line 3 after “2005” insert “, the Question agreed to. Prison Act 1952” Amendment 19, line 5 leave out from “agents;” to Mr Speaker: With the leave of the House, we shall first “to” in line 6 take motions 8, 9 and 10 together. Amendment 30, line 8 leave out from “relationships;” Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing to “to” in line 9 Order No. 118(6)), 163 Business without Debate23 FEBRUARY 2015 Business without Debate 164

EUROPEAN UNION Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing That the draft European Union (Definition of Treaties) Order No. 118(6)), (Association Agreement) (Moldova) Order 2015, which was laid before this House on 13 January, be approved. That the draft European Union (Definition of Treaties) SOCIAL SECURITY (Association Agreement) (Ukraine) Order 2015, which was laid That the draft Guardian’s Allowance Up-rating Order 2015, before this House on 13 January, be approved. which was laid before this House on 15 January, be approved.— That the draft European Union (Definition of Treaties) (Mr. Foster.) (Association Agreement) (Georgia) Order 2015, which was laid Question agreed to. before this House on 13 January, be approved.—(Mr Foster.) Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Question agreed to. Order No. 118(6)), Mr Speaker: With the leave of the House, we shall take motions 11 and 12 together. SOCIAL SECURITY (NORTHERN IRELAND) Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing That the draft Guardian’s Allowance Up-rating (Northern Order No. 118(6)), Ireland) Order 2015, which was laid before this House on 15 January, be approved.—(Mr. Foster.) ROAD TRAFFIC Question agreed to. That the draft Motor Vehicles (Wearing of Seat Belts) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2015, which were laid before Mr Speaker: With the leave of the House, we shall this House on 14 January, be approved. take motions 17 and 18 together. That the draft Road Safety Act 2006 (Consequential Amendments) Order 2015, which was laid before this House on 16 January, be Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing approved.—(Mr. Foster.) Order No. 118(6)), Question agreed to.

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing TAX CREDITS Order No. 118(6)), That the draft Tax Credits (Appeals) Regulations (Northern Ireland) (Amendment) Order 2015, which was laid before this LOCAL GOVERNMENT House on 15 January, be approved. That the draft Community Right to Challenge (Business That the draft Tax Credits Up-rating Regulations 2015, which Improvement Districts) Regulations 2015, which were laid before were laid before this House on 15 January, be approved.— this House on 14 January, be approved.—(Mr. Foster.) (Mr. Foster.) Question agreed to. Question agreed to. Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 118(6)),

ECCLESIASTICAL LAW SCOTTISH AFFAIRS That the draft Grants to the Churches Conservation Trust Ordered, Order 2015, which was laid before this House on 13 January, be That Lindsay Roy be discharged from the Scottish Affairs approved.—(Mr. Foster.) Committee and Iain McKenzie be added.—(Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, Question agreed to. on behalf of the Committee of Selection.) 165 23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oesophageal Cancer 166

Oesophageal Cancer potentially not seeing your kids get married, to even more regret about not being treated earlier—every week Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House really does matter—and many more dark thoughts. A do now adjourn.—(Mr Foster.) sobering fact is that if Professor Mason had not insisted that the operation should be in April, and if he had 10.27 pm agreed to wait until July as I wanted, it seems very likely that I would have been dead by Christmas 2012. Mike Weatherley (Hove) (Con): In November 2011, I had my dinner as normal, but what was not normal was Step up the third person I owe my life to—Andy that it did not settle well and I threw up. I dismissed it as Gaya, who was in charge of my post-operative treatments. probably a bug of some sort, but then it happened again Intensive revolutionary radiotherapy and chemotherapy a few days later. Clearly something was not right, but I followed. There were days when I was so exhausted that did not relish the hassle of getting an appointment to I could not even reach out for the remote control to see my doctor. I hate going to see my GP, not because I change TV channels. Andy Gaya made sure that I was do not like her, but because the booking system is so going to be given the best chance of survival. We know frustrating. I put it off for another week or so, but by that almost certainly some cancer cells were not removed mid-December 2011, still throwing up occasionally, I during the surgery, and the treatments, while not pleasant, decided to battle the booking system, and I went to see had to be intensive and push the boundaries in order to my wonderful GP. She referred me to the local NHS be sure that the cancer was treated. hospital, and five weeks later I got an appointment to Of course, there is a fourth member of the care team see a gastroenterologist. The first diagnosis was excess that I owe my life to, and that is my partner Niki. I stomach acid, so I was put on antacids and on the list cannot imagine how difficult it is for anyone going for both an endoscopy and colonoscopy. Unfortunately, through this experience without someone holding their the painful probes were inconclusive, as was the follow-up hand throughout. We throw around stats and theoretical CT scan—nothing was really found other than a severely outcomes, but the reality is that there is a whole army of restrictive oesophagus—but by now eating was becoming real people behind every medical condition. In my case, a major problem. there are four people who I can say directly saved my There are many people who influence and shape a life, plus a huge number of attentive hospital staff, life, but when someone saves a life—well, that is something post-operative specialists, district care nurses, GPs and very special. Professor Robert Mason is one of those others. My dad often says that being born in the UK is exceptional people. He drew on all his experience, and like winning the lottery of life, and he is not wrong. We despite no conclusive evidence, he insisted I came in live in a great country. Having seen the NHS from the immediately to have my oesophagus removed. Of course, inside, I can of course see many areas where it is easy to I argued against this, asking for key-hole surgery or to say that this or that could be done better, and of course defer the operation until the summer after more tests, it is not perfect, but the reality is that it is an amazing but Professor Mason insisted until I changed my mind institution that performs incredibly well. That is a result and a date was set for 18 April 2012. The full extent of of the amazing people who work in that rightly cherished just how serious this was had not fully registered with organisation. me. When I was in the pre-op room, I was asked what I However, I need to mention the opposite side of the had done to prepare in the morning, and I said I had spectrum. There are a lot of people out there in society gone to work, and indeed I had. I went into Parliament who should hang their heads in shame. Around that in the morning and drafted letters to constituents, and time, as a result of my work in Parliament on various at the required time I popped across the river and issues, I was getting death threats and other hate-filled slipped on the less-than-flattering gown. correspondence, including from many people who simply It turns out that the surgery is equivalent to a triple tweeted with #getcancer. I wanted to reply saying, “Too heart bypass—the whole oesophagus is removed plus, late—already have it!”, but of course I refrained. The in my case, a third of the stomach. May I pause here to experience served as a stark contrast. One the one hand thank all the doctors and nurses who looked after me at I was seeing the best of society in the care delivered by St Thomas’, and especially the nurses in the high really caring people, but then there were the despicable dependency unit, who were simply fantastic and a tribute members of society who contributed nothing positive. to the NHS? I must also mention a second person who When I asked the Prime Minister to hold Russia to was integral to saving my life—James Gossage, who account for gay rights violations, I got one particularly carried out the surgery along with Professor Mason, nasty threat, which the police tracked down to a 24-year-old and who carried out many post-operative follow-up postgraduate from Manchester who said that she thought surgical procedures. Mr Gossage is an exceptionally it would “be a laugh”. Anyone who supports that kind nice specialist who has a dedication to his profession of hatred should spend a day in a hospital to see just that is inspirational. how lucky they are and how great doing good is. Despite the ordeal, the worst moment was still to Moving back to cancer, let me take a moment to come. Until this point no cancer had been detected, but consider some statistics. The UK is facing an upcoming a week after the operation, Professor Mason came in battle with cancer. It is projected that by 2020, more and gave me the confirmation—the biopsy confirmed than half the European population will receive a cancer stage 3 cancer. There is nothing in this world that can diagnosis sometime in their life. However, the rates of prepare someone for the words, “You have cancer.” cancer survival in the UK rank among the worst in Sadly, oesophageal cancer is particularly aggressive, Europe. Reasons for that include, but are not limited to, and more than half of oesophageal cancer patients die late diagnosis and a lack of treatment options for within a year. All sorts of things go through your mind cancer patients. In fact, a major study of more than when you hear stats like that, from severe regret about 29 European countries found that the survival rates of 167 Oesophageal Cancer23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oesophageal Cancer 168

[Mike Weatherley] another four years, I shall be part of a very small minority of just 15%. When people ask why I am almost all the most common cancers are worse in Britain leaving Parliament after one term, I reply that one of than the European average. How will the NHS cope the reasons is that, given such a high probability, there is when, within five years, more than half a million people a chance that I will not see out another Parliament, and will be diagnosed? that does make one think about other options. As a cancer survivor—I say “survivor”, but all people who have had the disease know that it can come back at Steve Brine (Winchester) (Con): I congratulate my any time, so we are really just in remission—there are a hon. Friend on raising this issue in the House. As ever, few things that I have learned. Cancer support groups he is making a powerful speech. He will know—because such as Macmillan Cancer Support and the Oesophageal he is living proof of it—that oesophageal cancer is Patients Association are key in providing aid and comfort curable if diagnosed early, and I know from all the work to those with cancer. Beside providing emotional support that has been done in connection with cancer, and to victims of cancer and their families, they often go the particularly as a result of the interest that I have taken extra mile to provide information on matters such as in the House over the years in the subject of breast treatment options, local support groups, holistic alternatives cancer, that early diagnosis is the key. However, although to surgery and chemotherapy, and cancer prevention. I timely and equitable access to diagnostic tests is hugely was lucky—I had a great partner who helped me through important, there is considerable evidence that access to it all, and I did not need to use the support services. I referral for endoscopies is not as readily available in less did have one moment in a restaurant when I could not affluent areas, and that treatments differ widely across eat and hit a terrible low, and I started reaching for the the country. The equity of access for endoscopies from support line, but for the most part I did not have to fight which my hon. Friend was so lucky to benefit is the key it on my own. Sadly, many do, and such support groups to early diagnosis, and hence to enabling many more are vital. people to survive oesophageal cancer. Specific to my cancer is the Oesophageal Patients Association, started by David Kirby back in 1985, Mike Weatherley: My hon. Friend makes a very which provides support and advice to patients with important point that I was not going to cover, and I oesophageal cancer. It is involved in the campaign to thank him immensely for doing so. increase awareness and in expanding our self-care groups Crucially, as with many other types of cancer, the across the UK. My thanks go also to Alan Moss, outcome of oesophageal cancer depends on how advanced chairman of Action Against Heartburn, for his input it is when it is diagnosed. The reason not many people into this speech. can have surgery is that by the time a difficulty in swallowing is recognised, the tumour has become fairly More than 331,000 people are diagnosed with cancer large and has spread. As my hon. Friend pointed out, each year in the UK. More than one in four deaths are the surgeons see most people when they are already too caused by it, and 161,000 people died of it in 2012. late for curative treatment, which makes it difficult to Cancer is primarily a disease of old people—more than identify survival rates for each individual stage of the 50% of cases occur in those aged 75 or more—but, disease. surprisingly, it is also the most common cause of death in children aged between eight and 14. In those aged What measures would I like the Minister to consider? between 25 and 49, cancer accounts for 18% of all Let me make six points. First and, I think, most important, deaths, and 41% of deaths among those aged between we should make the process of seeing the doctor much 50 and 74 are related to it. easier. No one should be put off from making an appointment at the first available opportunity. Access Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): In Northern Ireland, to evening and weekend GP clinics remains patchy at the mortality rate among women with oesophageal best, and, as we know, that has a knock-on effect on A cancer is rising, and the five-year survival rate among and E departments. men is only 16%. That indicates a need for resources to Secondly, we should make every effort to improve be directed towards oesophageal cancer throughout the testing at the point of contact with GPs, and to ensure United Kingdom. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that that there is rapid follow-up access to hospital diagnostic it may be time for a UK-wide strategy to be applied to tests. Giving some GPs direct access to hospital specialist all four regions? tests such as endoscopies and CT scanning would speed up the process of diagnosis. Mike Weatherley: I could not agree more. Early diagnosis Thirdly, we should educate patients so that they is one of the key recommendations that I shall be recognise the symptoms of oesophageal cancer. That making. will lead to earlier detection of cancer, which in turn It is clear that cancer is one of the leading causes of will lead to higher survival rates. A good oesophageal death, but there are risks for survivors as well. It is awareness campaign is currently running on television. estimated that 2.5 million people are living with and Fourthly, 1 believe there are some “quick wins” which, beyond cancer, and we know that at least one in four if implemented, could speed up processes, remove cancer survivors face poor health or disability after inefficiencies and save money. For example, at the moment treatment. Cancer of the oesophagus is the eighth most if someone is referred for a chest X-ray and the findings common type of cancer in the UK among men. Only are abnormal, the results go back to the consultant or 40% of those who are diagnosed with it will live for at GP and the person has to have another appointment least one year after the diagnosis, and, tragically, 85% before they can be referred for an additional test, such will die within five years. Let me put that into a personal as a CT scan. If a chest X-ray was found to be abnormal perspective. According to the statistics, if I survive for and the person was then referred straight for a CT scan, 169 Oesophageal Cancer23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oesophageal Cancer 170 it would save on unnecessary GP or consultant have diagnostic tools to deal with this disease and appointments, and ensure that when the person is seen, change outcomes, so it is not a huge step to save more their GP or consultant has all the information they need lives. to make a diagnosis and set out next steps. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s comments Fifthly, another factor in poor care is that it is almost and, hopefully, Government determination to be on the invariably because of pressure on specialists due to the patient’s side in treating this particular cancer. We really volume of work. When campaigns are announced by do need to improve on just 15% of patients living longer the Government, they create a surge in demand, which than five years once diagnosed. causes problems for medical staff because they cannot cope with the high volume of work. I would like the 10.43 pm Minister to consider allocating extra resources for endoscopy. Targets and high outputs mean that patients The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health are treated as statistics rather than as individuals. Take (Jane Ellison): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member this quote, for example, from an upper-GI surgeon: for Hove (Mike Weatherley) on both securing this debate “I get lists of potential 62 day target breaches with no details and moving it in such a personal way and giving us an of the patients themselves. We see about 20 patients in two hours account of his own experience of this dreadful disease. I in our cancer clinic on the one morning we have for these am sure his words will resonate with all of us who have appointments—that equates to just six minutes per patient. In listened tonight, and in particular the way he took us on order to give patients dignity and respect, most doctors would that journey from the first difficult moments of diagnosis need an hour per patient to talk them through their diagnosis, through to treatment. It was a vivid and thought-provoking, treatment and surgery.” but also a heartening, account. Here is a similar point direct from another specialist My hon. Friend is absolutely right to draw attention surgeon: to the dedicated and inspirational NHS staff, who work “I fully support the ‘Action Against Heartburn’ organisation so passionately up and down the country for their emphasising the need to take seriously symptoms of persistent patients. How nice it was of him to take the opportunity heartburn and dysphagia, and not having more and more medications without investigation.” to put that on record this evening; that was tremendous. Never is the debt of gratitude we owe the NHS staff felt This will increase demand on endoscopy services more keenly than when we personally benefit from the significantly, as well as CT scanning, which of course care they provide, often at our most vulnerable and would need extra funding to cope. However, the increased weak moments. They are, as he says, not just care-givers, detection of early disease will enable more minimally but life-savers in those situations. invasive endoscopic therapy, avoiding surgery and saving money. My hon. Friend rightly challenged us to do better in this area. Improving cancer outcomes is a major priority for this Government and, as the annual report on our Dr (New Forest East) (Con): I recently cancer outcomes strategy last December showed, we are had the advantage of an intensive briefing on oesophageal on track to save an extra 12,000 lives a year by 2015. cancer from Professor Tim Underwood, a specialist at That is the projection based on the figures to date. We Southampton general. My hon. Friend may be interested all want to see the best possible results for all cancer to know that it is developing a technique that would patients, but he was right to highlight the fact that enable the discovery of the cancer cells earlier and outcomes are particularly poor for patients with without an endoscopy being carried out. Research is oesophageal cancer. I am aware, from all our debates, constantly going on to try to remedy the very problem that this is an area in which we have not seen the sort of that he has identified so clearly. movement that we have seen with other cancers. Each year in England, about 7,000 people are diagnosed with Mike Weatherley: I thank my hon. Friend for that oesophageal cancer and 6,000 people are diagnosed intervention, and my surgeons have made similar points with stomach cancer. Those diseases cause around 10,200 to me. Clearly the tools are available to do that. deaths in England each year. The sixth strategy I recommend is greater hospice We had some exciting news recently: the NHS England care to provide end-of-life care away from hospitals that cancer taskforce was announced on 11 January. NHS supports people and allows them to spend their final England announced that this new independent cancer weeks and days in a place of their choice, rather than in taskforce would develop a five-year action plan for a hospital bed. cancer services with the aim of improving survival rates I hope that this short Adjournment debate has two and saving thousands of lives in England. The cancer positive outcomes. The first is an increased awareness of taskforce has been set up to produce a new cross-system this cancer, with many more people detecting problems national cancer strategy to take us through the next five earlier. If we can save lives through early detection, that years to 2020, building on NHS England’s vision for has to be a good thing. The second is a commitment to improving cancer outcomes that was set out in the additional specific resources. Of course this would mean NHS’s “Five Year Forward View”. It was formed in more money being allocated, and I am well aware that partnership with lots of different cancer charities and there are huge conflicting demands on limited budgets, other parts of the cancer community, along with other but part of this could be achieved by a quicker, more health system leaders, and it is chaired by Dr Harpal efficient diagnostic procedure. Our radiotherapy capacity Kumar, the chief executive of Cancer Research UK. is far short of what we need and access to the latest The taskforce will cover the whole cancer pathway advanced techniques to spare normal tissues is limited— through prevention, diagnosis and treatment to provide although I would stress again that, as my hon. Friend support for those living with and beyond cancer and the Member for New Forest East (Dr Lewis) said, we do end-of-life care, as well as covering how all those services 171 Oesophageal Cancer23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oesophageal Cancer 172

[Jane Ellison] Let me go back to the different ways of looking at earlier diagnosis. NHS England’s aim is to evaluate will need to develop and innovate. My hon. Friend was these innovative initiatives across more than 60 centres right to challenge us to look creatively at different ways around England to collect evidence on approaches that of doing things, and that is exactly what the taskforce could be implemented from 2016-17. In 2013, Macmillan has been charged with doing. NHS England is assessing Cancer Support, partly funded by the Department, the opportunity for improved cancer care and will produce piloted an electronic cancer decision support—CDS—tool initial views by March—next month—with the new for GPs to use in their routine practice. It covers lung, five-year cancer strategy to be published in the summer. colorectal, pancreatic, oesophagus and stomach, and As my hon. Friend emphasised, early diagnosis is ovarian cancers. Following the pilot, the CDS tool has absolutely key.Tackling late diagnosis will be an important been refined and is currently installed in more than element if we are to achieve our ambition to improve 1,000 GP practices across the UK. It is designed exactly cancer outcomes, which is why our cancer strategy to deal with the point about helping people who do not invested £450 million during this Parliament in improving see certain things very often with those diagnostics. earlier diagnosis. As his own experience has attested, it Macmillan is working with software companies to adapt can be difficult to diagnose oesophageal cancer, especially the CDS for different IT systems and make it available in its early stages. I congratulate him again on securing to GPs as part of their standard software offer. this debate and I hope that there is someone out there I just wish to mention the Be Clear on Cancer campaign, tuning into the debate who has heard his words. I am which I am glad my hon. Friend the Member for Hove sure that they will help to publicise the message about mentioned. taking notice of symptoms. When symptoms do manifest themselves, it is often Steve Baker (Wycombe) (Con): The Minister has said an indication that the cancer has developed. That is why many things that give me the impression that there is early diagnosis is crucial. Just under 70% of people potential for a huge additional demand on consultants. diagnosed with oesophago-gastric cancers at the earliest One of the most striking things that my hon. Friend the stage survive for at least five years. My hon. Friend has Member for Hove (Mike Weatherley) said was that a highlighted what it means in human terms for those consultant will get only six minutes with a patient. Will who are diagnosed at a very late stage. It has been the Minister explain what the Government are going to estimated that around 950 lives could be saved in England do to make sure that consultants have enough capacity each year if our survival rates for oesophageal and to deal with the extra demand that is likely as a result of stomach cancers matched the best in Europe, and that these laudable new methods? clearly has to be our aim: we have to do better. NHS England has launched a major early diagnosis Jane Ellison: The cancer taskforce is charged with programme, working together with Cancer Research looking at all those challenges and resolving those UK and Macmillan Cancer Support to test new approaches tensions, but the NHS’s own “Five Year Forward View” to identifying cancer more quickly. I hope that that considers some of the ways in which it can be innovative programme will give my hon. Friend some encouragement, about the use of consultants and the interaction between because it touches on some of the issues that he has primary and secondary care, and whether we can do mentioned. It will include offering patients the option more by looking at that differently. If my hon. Friend is to self-refer for diagnostic tests; lowering the threshold interested in that, it is definitely worth looking at. That for GP referrals; creating a pathway for vague symptoms; is very much the sense of direction and we are now and setting up multi-disciplinary diagnostic centres so looking to the cancer taskforce to examine all those that patients can have several tests done at the same issues. Parliamentary all-party groups have been asked place on the same day. by the cancer taskforce to contribute to its review, and we ascertained that before the Back-Bench debate. He Steve Brine: Southampton has been mentioned, as highlights a fair point; all these things bring their challenges, has my constituent Tim Underwood, who leads the and that is one reason why we put so much effort into team there. What the Minister is saying is absolutely testing the Be Clear on Cancer campaign. right. Does she agree that regional centres such as I was delighted that the recent pilot of the Be Clear Southampton—which do things that, quite rightly, not on Cancer campaign for oesophageal and stomach cancer everyone does—are the key to providing regional areas in the north-east and north Cumbria was so successful. of specialism to help us to do even better on the We carry out the pilots in order to understand what diagnosis and treatment of oesophageal cancer? additional demand they create in the system, so we can model that and cope with it if the campaigns are rolled Jane Ellison: In a recent Back-Bench debate on cancer, out. Following the pilot, a national four-week campaign mention was made of the tension that we all feel as ran from 26 January until yesterday, and was supported constituency Members between the desire to have services with national TV,radio, digital and out-of-home advertising nearby and the recognition that the expertise resulting and a public relations campaign. A variety of face-to-face from seeing lots of cancers, particularly the rarer ones, events were held across the country in venues such as is really important to developing clinical excellence. We shopping centres. have to be clear that there are areas where concentrating The campaign aimed to raise awareness of the symptoms excellence and clinical experience will save lives, and my of oesophageal and stomach cancers and to encourage hon. Friend perhaps highlights one such area. We often those with symptoms such as persistent heartburn to underestimate just how few cancers of any kind the visit their GP. The campaign was targeted at men and average GP sees, and that is especially true of rarer women aged 50 and over. Of the nearly 13,000 people cancers. who are diagnosed with oesophageal or stomach cancer 173 Oesophageal Cancer23 FEBRUARY 2015 Oesophageal Cancer 174 each year in England, more than nine out of 10 are aged surveillance tests. It is also funding a £2 million trial of 50 and over. The campaign was also aimed at friends palliative radiotherapy in addition to self-expanding and family, who can encourage those with symptoms to metal stents for improving outcomes of dysphagia and make an appointment with their doctor if they are survival from advanced oesophageal cancer. The NIHR concerned. We are all aware of those times when despite clinical research network is currently recruiting for 24 clinical knowing what is good for us, we need a loved one to say, trials and studies in oesophageal cancer. “It is time to go to the doctor.” The campaign takes that In conclusion, I thank my hon. Friend the Member into account. for Hove for securing this debate and congratulate him Let me deal with the clear and good points made on the way he moved and delivered it. I do not about endoscopy, including by my hon. Friend the underestimate the challenge of improving outcomes for Member for Winchester (Steve Brine). We accept that people with oesophageal cancer. However, I hope that there are issues to address on endoscopy capacity, which what I have briefly set out here shows that we are is why we have been working with NHS England and committed to improving cancer care through building Health Education England to prioritise this area. A greater awareness among the public; targeted and high- joint endoscopy working group, set up by the NHS profile awareness campaigns, such as the Be Clear on England’s national clinical director on diagnostics and Cancer; using technology and innovation to support imaging, has been analysing the latest data, and an GPs to better identify symptoms and improve the referral action plan has been developed to ensure sufficient process; and taking action to ensure sufficient capacity capacity in the short and long term. in areas such as endoscopy. Things are improving, but Let me briefly mention treatment. NHS England’s there is much work still to be done. We are committed to oesophageal and gastric cancer service specification improving cancer survival rates and building on the clearly defines what it expects to be in place for providers improvements we have made so far so that we have the to offer evidence-based, safe and effective oesophageal best cancer outcomes in Europe. My hon. Friend’s cancer services, in line with the National Institute for speech tonight illustrated far more eloquently than I Health and Care Excellence’s clinical guideline, “Improving can, with all my facts, figures and statistics, why that is Outcomes in Upper Gastro-intestinal Cancers”. important to our fellow countrymen and women and why it is so important that we continue to make progress, I want to touch on research, because people should and I thank him for highlighting that this evening. understand what we are doing to invest in understanding more about these specialist areas. The National Institute Question put and agreed to. for Health Research has awarded £2 million for a research professorship with a focus on improving outcomes for 10.56 pm oesophageal cancer through innovative screening and House adjourned.

1WH 23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 2WH

hon. Friend has demonstrated, people have strong feelings Westminster Hall on the issue. Seventy-seven per cent. of the people surveyed agreed that the practice of non-stun slaughter Monday 23 February 2015 should be banned, with no exceptions. However, perhaps we can all agree that the debate is not as simple as we might imagine. The same poll also highlighted that [MR JAMES GRAY in the Chair] there is a great deal of confusion about non-stun slaughter. Half of British people—51% of the people polled—believe that all halal meat is from animals that are not pre-stunned. BACKBENCH BUSINESS In fact 80% of halal meat is from animals stunned before slaughter. Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con): I commend my hon. Friend on his speech. Would it be helpful if people had 4.30 pm a better idea of what they were buying, and could make Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): I beg to an informed choice about whether they wanted to buy move, halal or kosher meat? He mentioned that there is a That this House has considered the e-petition relating to dispensation for religious belief, but the Halal Food ending non-stun slaughter to promote animal welfare. Authority estimates that halal meat makes up about 25% of the meat market. It has been estimated that 70% It is a huge pleasure to serve under your distinguished of kosher meat is not consumed by the Jewish community. chairmanship, Mr Gray, and a huge honour to start the Many people buy that meat without knowing it, and debate, which was triggered not by any Member of the surely we should have proper labelling laws, to enable House but by the great British public; 115,000 people people to make an informed choice. Then those who have signed an e-petition, which reads: want to buy it can do so with confidence, and those who “We call for an end to slaughter without pre-stunning for all do not can avoid it. animals. EU and UK law requires all animals to be pre-stunned before slaughter to render them insensible to pain until death Mr Hollobone: My hon. Friend makes an extremely supervenes. But non-stun slaughter is permitted for certain communities. good point and reflects one of the main concerns in the e-petition, about the labelling of meat products. Whatever We support BVA,RSPCA, HSA, FAWC and FVE who conclude their views on stun versus non-stun, or on halal, kosher that scientific evidence shows that non-stun slaughter allows animals to perceive pain and compromises welfare. or other methods of slaughter, I hope that most hon. Members agree that the important thing is to label meat We must differentiate between religious and non-stun slaughter. Our concern does not relate to religious belief but to the animal products as helpfully as possible, so that consumers can welfare compromise of non-stun slaughter. make an informed choice. We note— I can well understand the concerns of my constituents over 80% of UK Halal slaughter is pre-stunned— who realise that they may have eaten halal or kosher meat, when that goes against all their beliefs about what hindquarters of animals killed by (non-stun) Shechita can enter the market unlabelled. sort of meat they should consume. Whatever the views on either side of the debate about how animals should While non-stun slaughter is permitted we call for clearer slaughter- method labelling and post-cut stunning to improve welfare. be slaughtered, I hope there is more of a consensus in the House about the need to improve the labelling of Non-stun slaughter affects millions of animals. We support a good life and a humane death for all animals.” meat products. Under rules recently introduced in the House, the Dr Matthew Offord (Hendon) (Con): The point about signing of an e-petition by more than 100,000 people labelling is fine; but does my hon. Friend agree that it facilitates a debate in Westminster Hall. That is a good should extend also to other means of causing death to system, because it means Parliament debates issues that an animal, which could include clubbing, electrocution are of concern to everyone. Whatever our views, I hope and gassing? Should meat be labelled in that way? we all agree on the need for such debates; and where else should the issues be debated, if not here? I hope that Mr Hollobone: There is of course a danger that if today’s debate will generate more light than heat. The meat products are labelled in such detail, people will be issue is a contentious one for many Members and many put off buying them altogether. As my hon. Friend the of our constituents, but it generates much interest. I Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Mike Freer) contend that an overwhelming number of people want said in the debate on 4 November, there is no nice way non-stun slaughter in this country to be ended. to kill an animal. It is unpleasant whether halal or kosher, and whether the animal is stunned or not. It is a Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con): I will be blunt. If pretty unpleasant business. My hon. Friend has made a my throat were going to be cut, I would prefer to be good point. At some point the process of improving the stunned. I have seen what happens to pigs when their amount of information given to consumers in labelling throats are cut, and it made my heart bleed—if that is meat products would have to stop, or there would be not a pun. It is disgraceful that animals in this country information overload. I understand the concerns of the are not pre-stunned before slaughter. Jewish and Muslim communities that to label meat as stunned or non-stunned is not informative enough. I Mr Hollobone: I am sure that my hon. Friend speaks might personally go for a four-bar system stating that for the vast majority of his constituents. Indeed, a recent the slaughter was stun or non-stun and halal or kosher. YouGov poll, commissioned by the Royal Society for I think that is a sensible amount of information that the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, shows that, as my consumers would read and take account of. I accept 3WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 4WH

[Mr Hollobone] are labelled as such, that is helpful information. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Philip that we should provide as much information as possible, Davies) said, more meat is being slaughtered by non-stun but realistically there comes a point where not everything methods in this country than is required by the Muslim can be put on a label. and Jewish communities, and that is of great concern to those members of our society who are neither Muslim Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green): Does nor Jewish. There are three experienced and distinguished the hon. Gentleman agree that as well as strengthening Members whom I will happily give way to, the first the law, in consultation with the religious communities being the hon. Member for Mansfield (Sir Alan Meale). involved, we could also try to improve standards in all slaughterhouses, by for example supporting the campaign Sir Alan Meale (Mansfield) (Lab): I congratulate the for mandatory CCTV? Even things that are technically hon. Gentleman on his very good approach to this legal often involve high levels of animal cruelty. issue. To reiterate, the point he has been trying to make is that this debate is not about religions, but about the Mr Hollobone: Yes; one of the advantages of speaking non-stunning of animals for slaughter. As he pointed first in a debate such as this is the many helpful interventions out, one of the reasons why we need labelling is to show from informed Members that flag up items coming later the scale of this in Britain today—at least 4 million to in the speech. The hon. Lady has mentioned one of 5 million beasts. That is before we get to the question of those. I support mandatory CCTV in all slaughterhouses. poultry: 900 million such birds are slaughtered in the There have been some disgraceful episodes, which we UK every year, 90 million without any stunning whatsoever. have all seen, of animals being slaughtered incorrectly, This is a big issue, but it is not about differences with in huge distress and much pain. No one, whatever side religions or anything else; it is about stunning and of the debate they are on, would support that. Having non-stunning. CCTV in slaughterhouses would seem to be a helpful weapon against such abuse. Mr Hollobone: The hon. Gentleman is absolutely Sir James Paice (South East Cambridgeshire) (Con): correct. The wording of the e-petition refers to stunning I wanted to pick up on my hon. Friend’s suggestion of a versus non-stunning, but we cannot have a complete four-bar label. After he listed stunned and non-stunned, debate about this subject unless we tackle the religious which I would support, he listed halal and kosher. I dimension because that is the elephant in the room. I draw his attention to the distinct difference between have been led down that path in the first few minutes of those two. All kosher meat has to be killed by the the debate because that is the understandable concern shechita method, which is non-stunned, but not all of Muslim and Jewish communities. He is correct that halal meat is non-stunned. As he said, for 80% of halal the wording of the e-petition and the purpose of the meat the animal is electrically stunned first and then debate is about stunned versus non-stunned, but we done in the normal way. Therefore, if he were to put soon come on to other issues. halal on a label, he would be inviting people to discriminate on religious grounds as opposed to the welfare grounds Steve Baker (Wycombe) (Con): Muslim constituents of stunned or non-stunned. I want to make him and in Wycombe will want to buy halal meat and they colleagues aware that we must be careful. We are talking should be able to do that. One of my Muslim constituents about welfare, which has nothing to do with religion as wants to buy halal meat because of not only the religious he said in his opening comments. justification, but welfare. For him, halal slaughter is a method with a higher standard of welfare than other Mr Hollobone: My right hon. Friend knows far more methods that were common, such as strangulation. about this subject than I do, not least because he was a Could an element of the debate be that animal welfare distinguished Minister in the Department for Environment, standards have advanced with technology, and that in Food and Rural Affairs. He makes a good point, but many cases we can find common ground for animals to perhaps I did not explain myself as well as I might have be both stunned and halal slaughtered? done, which is a common failing of mine. Personally, I have no problem with labelling food in a Mr Hollobone: My hon. Friend has demonstrated religious way. If my constituents went to the supermarket once again how he frequently speaks up in a most and saw packets of meat on the shelves marked with thoughtful way in this House on behalf of his constituents. four boxes—stunned, non-stunned, halal and kosher—some His constituent and many others elsewhere who are meat might have ticks in the stunned and halal boxes, Muslim might well take that view of halal slaughter, but which is fine, and other products might have ticks in the he will be aware that that is not the majority opinion. halal and non-stunned boxes, which is also fine. It is Eight out of 10 people want to see an end to non-stunned helpful to give consumers that level of information and slaughter and I suggest that the Muslim and Jewish I do not see what the problem is with labelling food communities have a lot of persuading to do if they want halal and kosher. After all, a Muslim constituent who their point of view to win the day. wants to eat halal meat will be looking for that halal label. A Jewish constituent who wants to eat kosher Mr Dave Watts (St Helens North) (Lab): Does the food sees the shechita label— hon. Gentleman agree that nothing can justify cruelty to animals, and that that has little to do with religion and Several hon. Members rose— more to do with cultural history? That practice would have been introduced when stunning was not available, Mr Hollobone: I will be happy to give way to all hon. so is it time for everyone to move on and accept that we Members, but I want to finish this point. If someone of should not be unnecessarily cruel to animals in the food Jewish faith wants to buy shechita products and products chain? 5WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 6WH

Mr Hollobone: That is the view of the British Veterinary for sheep, up to two and a half minutes or more for Association, the RSPCA and the other distinguished poultry, and sometimes 15 minutes or more for fish. animal welfare groups who come at that from the latest Pre-stunning delivers an instant loss of consciousness advances in animal welfare. The hon. Gentleman makes when it is done correctly. an extremely good point, but that will be contended by the Jewish and Muslim communities. (Romsey and Southampton North) (Con): Is my hon. Friend aware that a great deal more Philip Davies: My hon. Friend is being very generous. research has been done on this matter recently, and that Does he agree that this is not just about animal welfare? our knowledge of the effects on animals has increased? Of course, that is incredibly important, but many people We understand better nowadays their level of suffering of different religious views, such as Sikhs and Christians, than we ever have previously. object to the blessing given to halal meat. That is one Mr Hollobone: That is an extremely good point, and reason why they believe it should be labelled. I am the House will want to ensure that our domestic legislation delighted that there seems to be growing support for follows the evidence. If the quality of the evidence is labelling, because that was not evident when I twice improved by scientific advance, that should surely be tried to introduce legislation to make it compulsory. reflected in the laws that we pass. As has been said, EU and UK law requires all farm Mr Hollobone: I was pleased to support my hon. animals to be stunned before slaughter, but there is an Friend’s ten-minute rule Bill, because I am a strong exemption for religious slaughter. That comes back to supporter of more transparent labelling for meat products. the point mentioned by the hon. Member for Mansfield: The wording of the e-petition does not go into the although the e-petition mentions stun versus non-stun, religious rights said over slaughtered meat, but he makes one soon gets on to the religious dimension. The EU law an extremely good point. on slaughter is contained in European Council regulation We have already discussed that there is no nice way 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at the time of for any animal to die. It is important, however, to get in killing. The regulation came into force in January 2013 context the volumes of halal and shechita meat compared and allows member states to apply a derogation to permit with everything else. One estimate is that 114 million slaughter without stunning for religious and traditional animals are killed annually in the UK using the halal purposes. That can be decided at member state level. method, 80% of which will have been stunned first, and Interestingly, practice differs across the European only 2 million animals are killed under the Jewish Union. Slaughter without prior stunning has been banned shechita method. An RSPCA poll showed that only two in Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and Denmark. fifths of people surveyed knew that the exemption in In Austria, Estonia, Finland and Slovakia, stunning is the law applied to the shechita method of slaughter. required immediately after the incision if the animal has Therefore, while there has been much comment ahead not been stunned before. In Germany, abattoirs have to of the debate from the Jewish community, the number prove the religious needs, and the number of animals to of animals slaughtered according to shechita requirements be slaughtered to satisfy the needs of the religious is small. community concerned, before they are granted a licence. To put that into content, while there is no nice way In Australia, stunning at slaughter is required, but there for an animal to die, sadly there are many instances in is an option for a state or meat inspection authority to which animals are mis-stunned and mis-slaughtered. In provide an exemption and approve an abattoir for ritual my research for the debate, I was horrified to realise that, slaughter without prior stunning for the domestic market, each year, potentially hundreds of thousands of animals but even in those cases, post-cut stunning is a requirement. are not stunned properly before slaughter, yet data on My hon. Friend the Member for Shipley mentioned the extent of the problem are practically non-existent. the large number of animals that are slaughtered in this When the Minister addresses the Chamber, I hope he country without having been stunned first, and how will stress his commitment to get the Food Standards that exceeds the requirements of the Muslim and Jewish Agency to raise its game to ensure not only that all communities. The Food Standards Agency carried out slaughterhouses are properly monitored, but that the a survey of slaughterhouses in September 2013, and the number of mis-stuns is properly recorded. In some results published last month indicated that in 2013, years, critical instances of mis-stunning have been in 31 million poultry animals, 2.5 million sheep and goats, single figures when we all know that the scale of the and 44,000 cattle were not stunned. The number of problem is potentially hundreds of thousands. Of course, slaughtered chickens, sheep, goats and cattle is more the number of animals mis-stunned could well be greater than is required for the Muslim and Jewish communities than the number of animals slaughtered by the shechita to consume. method appropriate for the Jewish community. The British Veterinary Association does not agree The strong view of the BVA, the RSPCA and the with me. It does not support calls to label meat as halal other organisations behind the e-petition is that there is or kosher compulsorily because, in its view, that would clear scientific evidence that slaughter without pre-stunning not help consumers. As we have mentioned, 80% of causes pain and distress. Behavioural and brain scanning halal slaughter is pre-stunned and the hindquarters of research reveals that animals experience pain when their animals killed by the non-stun shechita method are not neck is cut and they inhale their own blood, which regarded as kosher and are therefore unlabelled. causes pain and distress—that was very much the point In a November 2014 debate in this Chamber that I raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Beckenham had the privilege to chair, the Minister said that (Bob Stewart). Slaughter without pre-stunning causes a “from the EU perspective, ‘stunned’ has a clear legal definition in delay to loss of consciousness. It can take up to two the legislation, and it is simply that an animal is rendered insensible minutes for cattle to lose consciousness, up to 20 seconds to pain almost immediately.” 7WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 8WH

[Mr Hollobone] The shechita community can make a good case, but I contend that they are not making it strongly enough, He also said that it was and that there is work for them to do to convince the “a clear definition and the scientific evidence does not support Government of the merits of their case. They are also the argument that a cut without prior stunning achieves that.”— going against an overwhelming tide of opinion in this [Official Report, 4 November 2014; Vol. 587, c. 169WH.] country which is against the non-stun slaughter of meat. I understand that that goes directly against the shechita I respect the Jewish point of view—please do not get me understanding, in that a cut to the throat stuns, kills wrong on that—but they need to make their case rather and exsanguinates all in one go, so there is clearly a better. different view, and that circle needs to be squared. The There was an interesting letter in last week’s Jewish shechita authorities in this country need to make a Chronicle, of which I happen to be a weekly reader, more powerful case to Her Majesty’s Government if from, presumably, a Jewish correspondent from Lancaster, they want their view to prevail. who said: (North Herefordshire) (Con): Unlike most “The rabbinical interpretation has been made that the blood colleagues, my constituents are more likely to be beef should be removed by drainage through a severed artery. And that producers than halal or shechita consumers. I am concerned is carried out by cutting the throat. However, I cannot see why that, although everybody should be able to eat beef having the animal anaesthetised, before its throat is cut, in any way detracts from the original biblical injunction not to consume whatever their religious backgrounds, more work could animal blood. be done on the amount of blood left in carcases that have been stunned or not stunned, and we do not have Perhaps a rabbi can explain where I am wrong. sufficient evidence to allow the Jewish community to Is there really any religious reason that shechita might not convince themselves that stunning would be helpful. include stunning of the cattle before their throats are cut?” Without that, we are not really allowing them to take I suggest that elements of the Jewish community do not the right steps. quite understand where Shechita UK and other organisations are coming from. Mr Hollobone: My hon. Friend makes a very good point. As he represents a farming constituency, he will Simon Hart (Carmarthen West and South appreciate perhaps more than many Members that farmers Pembrokeshire) (Con): I place on the record my complete take a very close interest in where their livestock ends support for what my hon. Friend is attempting to up. They take the view that if they bend over backwards do. Perhaps he could, though, use this debate to draw a to ensure that their reared animals have a good quality distinction between the expressions “cruelty” and of life, and that they are looked after to the very high “suffering”. The former is often assigned to human standards that we enforce in this country, their lives behaviour and the latter is a more measurable impact should not be ended inappropriately with inappropriate on the animals themselves. The House does not have a slaughter. He will know that farmers are very concerned particularly good record of separating the two. that their livestock ends up being slaughtered in an appropriate way. Mr Hollobone: That is right, but to the great British Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con): My hon. Friend public, the two are closely aligned. A lot of people would referred originally to the question of pain and suffering take the view that non-stun slaughter is a cruel way for for the animal. Is he aware of any laboratory experiments animals to die. That would be the language of British or any scientific evidence whatever that point to the fact public opinion. About 80% of people want an end to that shechita is cruel and unacceptable? The shechita non-stun slaughter, but I take my hon. Friend’s point. community clearly believe that it is the most humane I have spoken for too long and I know that many method of slaughtering animals, and of course, if the other hon. Members will make better contributions animal is damaged in any way, shape or form, it would than I have, but I want to ask the Minister five questions. not be kosher meat. Do the Government agree that all animals should be stunned before slaughter for animal welfare reasons? Mr Hollobone: My hon. Friend makes an extremely Why are they allowing non-stunned meat to go outside good point. I have a great deal of respect for the the communities for which it was intended, contrary to shechita position. The shochetim who slaughter under EU and UK legislation? Will they support the introduction the shechita provisions, as my hon. Friend the Member of compulsory labelling of meat, fish and products for Finchley and Golders Green has described, might from non-stun slaughter as “non-stun”? Will they look be miscategorised as mad axemen running around with at introducing mandatory post-cut stunning, as has knives slaughtering animals by cutting their throats. been done in some countries, including Finland, Austria, They are not like that. They have to go through a very Estonia, Slovakia and Australia? Finally, will they consider intensive training programme that lasts at least three the German approach of abattoirs having to prove the years. They have to be calm, and the animal has to be religious needs, and to define the number of animals to calm when the slaughter is about to take place. A be slaughtered to satisfy the needs of the religious surgically sharp knife is used, and I have to say that a community concerned, before being granted a licence? strong case can be made that an animal meeting its death in that calm environment with a trained professional It has been a huge privilege to introduce this debate. may meet a better end—“happy”is the wrong word—than There will be many contributions that are more intelligent, an animal that is pushed through mass production thoughtful and informed than mine, and I look forward abattoirs, where animals are bumping into each other, to doing my best to sum those up at the end of the three mis-stunning takes place and there is a lot of distress hours. and noise because of the need for mass-produced meat in this country. Several hon. Members rose— 9WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 10WH

Mr James Gray (in the Chair): Order. A glance around is simply not possible to do. All these issues are tied in the Chamber will demonstrate that quite a large number intimately with one another and should therefore be of hon. Members want to take part in the debate. I do considered in that context. not intend to impose a time limit, which to me would There will be differing views, and different pieces of sacrifice quality in favour of clock-watching. None the science that we can quote at one another in support of less, colleagues might wish to be considerate towards our respective positions on whether non-stun slaughter one another by keeping their remarks reasonably crisp. is or can be described as humane, but one point that is often not made in these debates is that for religious 5.2 pm minority communities, the non-stun slaughter of animals must be done in a way that ensures that the animal does Shabana Mahmood (Birmingham, Ladywood) (Lab): not suffer. The whole reason for having those rules and It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, laws in the first place was precisely to prevent the Mr Gray, and to speak after the hon. Member for suffering of animals. It is testimony to the importance Kettering (Mr Hollobone), who opened the debate very of the ancient texts that laid down those laws that there well. I note that the last time I spoke in a Westminster was such concern for animal rights at that point. That Hall debate on this matter, he was in the Chair. It has motivation and desire to ensure that an animal does not been good to hear his views this afternoon. suffer needless pain is important for everyone to remember I welcome this debate. It is important that we debate when we debate these matters. this very emotive issue in an atmosphere of calm in I also make the point that for religious people, who which, hopefully, reason can dominate, rather than the are looking for religious slaughter of animals before they hysteria that we sometimes see in the national media. consume meat, that act itself is an act of faith, because Certainly there was much more hysteria the last time religious people, who care about these issues, do not this issue was debated in Westminster Hall, and religious take the killing of animals lightly. The hon. Member for minority communities in this country—the Muslim and Kettering made the point that there is no good way to Jewish communities—rightly felt picked on and unfairly kill an animal—I made that exact point in the last scrutinised. It was as if people were saying that their way debate—but for religious communities, the right to take of life was significantly more cruel, and that they were the life of an animal is an expression of faith. It is a more reckless as to the level of cruelty than any other God-given right that can be exercised only in very communities, which is a deeply unfair mischaracterisation specific and prescribed circumstances. For people who of the seriousness with which practising religious take their religious obligations seriously and who practise minority communities in this country take their religious their religious obligations, these are matters of great obligations. concern. These things are not done in a way that is It is clear from some interventions that significant negligent or reckless as to what act is being committed. points of disagreement will remain at the end of the Practising Muslims and Jews know, when they are debate, but it is important that we continue to examine consuming meat, that as a matter of religious law, they these issues in an atmosphere that, as the hon. Member are allowed that meat only in certain circumstances. for Kettering said, generates light rather than heat. As I They recognise that the animal had a life and then died. have noted before, I am a practising Muslim, so the debate They care about that fact before they consume that matters to me on a personal level, but I also represent meat. It is important to recognise that, because often many thousands of practising Muslims and Jews, and the debate happens in a way that implies that we simply both communities have written to ask me to place on do not care about the welfare of animals—we just want the record in this debate their views and feelings. it our way and no other way—without recognising the reasons behind how those ways came about. It is interesting to note that the first national legislative requirement in England and Wales for stunning before Sir Greg Knight (East Yorkshire) (Con): Before the slaughter was in the Slaughter of Animals Act 1933, hon. Lady concludes her remarks, will she deal with the which, even then, retained an exception from stunning point about labelling? Surely there can be no objection for religious slaughter by Jews and Muslims. That strikes to supporting more comprehensive labelling of halal meat. me as a very British approach to an issue that is clearly of long-standing interest to both the public and legislators Shabana Mahmood: I am grateful for that intervention. in this place. The Government have made it clear—this The next part of my remarks is about precisely that: is my understanding; I hope that the Minister will confirm labelling. However, before I leave the issue of welfare, I it this afternoon—that they do not intend to move away want to say—this point was made by the hon. Member from having an exception in the law for religious, non-stun for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas)—that enforcement slaughter. I welcome that commitment on behalf of my of the current rules on welfare is just as important, constituents, for whom this is an incredibly important when we discuss these issues, as whether religious slaughter issue. is humane or can be done in other ways, because any As we have heard in the debate, the key point of abuse of the current rules does not exactly inspire disagreement is of course about welfare. I have to say to confidence that any additional rules that we may bring hon. Members who tried to make a distinction between in will be followed. a debate that is focused on religion and one that is The point about mis-stunning is really important. focused on welfare that it is actually very difficult to For religious communities, the risk that an animal has make that distinction. For those of us who are members been mis-stunned would negate the claim that it had of a religious minority in this country and who practise been slaughtered in accordance with religious rites. our faith, it is very difficult to hear people say, “Actually, Even those who accept that stunning might be possible we are talking about only one thing here, not something under a different reading of religious law would not else. You shouldn’t really feel so strongly about it.” That tolerate mis-stunning, which is cruel and barbaric. 11WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 12WH

Stephen Timms (East Ham) (Lab): Many of the points an arbitrary threshold. That seems very unfair to me. that my hon. Friend is making will be welcomed by the The hon. Gentleman suggested that the line should be large number of my constituents who have contacted drawn at labelling meat halal or kosher, and stun or me about the matter. In the discussions that she has non-stun, but to do so would support a debate that is had, have any concerns been expressed about the pretty about heat rather than light. Such a debate stigmatises horrific things that appear to be going on under the certain communities and implies that their way of doing label of mis-stunning? In theory, that is supposed to things is really bad, so there must be a special label to protect animal welfare, but the reality seems to be very allow people to opt out of it. To say that is to forget that different. there is no good, clean way of killing an animal; it ends up dead one way or the other. Shabana Mahmood: My right hon. Friend is absolutely We ought to know more about how animals are right. That is why it is so important that we reach the stunned. As a result, many people may well make the position of being able to guarantee that the current choice that they do not want to consume meat full stop, basic standards are fully realised in slaughterhouses. We and they have the right to do so. That is not a choice all need to understand better what goes on in that I would make, because I am quite well informed slaughterhouses and how different types of animals are about these things. I make my choice knowing exactly slaughtered in the current process. It is important to what happens when stunning does or does not take shed more light on what goes on in slaughterhouses place, and what happens during different types of slaughter. before moving the debate to other practices and However, I believe that the majority of people in our complicating things further. That may or may not be a country do not have that knowledge. If we are to be road that we want to go down, but it does not inspire champions of animal rights and animal welfare, not confidence about enforcement if we cannot do things only in our country but across the world, we should be correctly now. better informed as a nation. Detailed labelling would go a long way to supporting that. Mr David Ward (Bradford East) (LD): We are talking The point has been made that 80% of the halal meat about the clash of two principles, one being animal produced within the Muslim community is stunned. It welfare and the other being people’s right to practise is certainly true to say that large numbers of Muslims their religion. If it were proved that there were serious have accepted the stunning of animals before slaughter, issues of animal welfare, which of those two principles and it should be open to them to make that choice. does the hon. Lady believe would trump the other? Clearly, there is a demand for such meat, because it is being produced and consumed. For those of us who Shabana Mahmood: The hon. Gentleman and I are wish to make a different choice, however, it is just as entering the debate from different starting points. I do important to know that our halal meat is non-stunned not accept that non-stun slaughter is cruel or inhumane, and to be able to rely on the label to give us true and if it is done properly in accordance with Jewish or accurate information. I am all for labelling, but it should Islamic religious texts. We must not forget that those be thorough. It should not be introduced because we texts lay down clear and detailed rules about, for example, want to muddy the waters in the debate. I believe that how one animal must not witness what happens to some on the other side of the argument believe that we another animal. That would never apply in any of the are trying to do that when we say that a label should slaughterhouses where the mechanised slaughter of large detail whether the stunning has been done by bolt, or volumes of animals takes place. I simply reject the basis whatever. We support that precisely because we live in of the hon. Gentleman’s question. the information age, and people want to know what has I turn to the question of labelling, which we have happened to an animal. We should not draw an arbitrary debated before. I agree with the labelling of our meat, line that puts some communities under greater scrutiny and I believe that all consumers in this country should and makes people feel threatened. We should make all have a much better idea of where our meat comes from. the information available for all to see. In an age of My perspective on the debate is shaped by being a social media, it is very easy to put lots of information practising Muslim. I have spent my whole life looking at into the public domain so that the public who care labels and trying to work out whether something contains, about the matter will learn about it, understand it and for example, derivatives of alcohol or derivatives of pig then apply the rules to their daily life. meat. For me, labels that provide a lot of detail and I accept that as technology develops, we should continue information are a great thing, because they enable me to to re-examine the issues that we are discussing. Speaking exercise choice. At the moment, when I am in doubt from a Muslim perspective, it is imperative that as about something, I simply put it back, but I may be society and science evolve, we continue to examine our missing out on something that I could legitimately have jurisprudence and our approach to it. However, I see consumed. Often, I rely on the good old V symbol on nothing at the moment that would support a derogation food, which shows that it is suitable for vegans and from the exception for non-stun slaughter. We should vegetarians, because I think that it must be okay for me ask much deeper questions about the mechanisation of as long as it is not a meat product. That does not help our slaughter processes and the volume of meat that we me out when it comes to meat, however. produce, and whether they make it difficult to maintain I reject what the hon. Member for Kettering said any kind of standards. When so much meat has to be about the danger of too much information. I simply do produced in such a short time, it is hard to keep track of not buy that argument. If we say that people should be different rules and regulations. I believe that that is able to make a choice, we should ensure that their where science, as it develops, should focus. I see no choice is fully informed. If we want to shed light, we reason for us to move away from the very British way in should not say that that light can extend no further than which we have approached the matter. We have maintained 13WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 14WH the exception in law for many decades, and I hope that longer. In the slaughters I witnessed it was nearly always the Government will confirm that that exception will much longer than two minutes. I watched animals going remain for the foreseeable future. into the slaughter box, where their head was lifted by a form of restraint to expose the neck, which was then 5.17 pm cut. Their heart, of course, was still going. Blood gushed out—there is no alternative word, and I am not Sir James Paice (South East Cambridgeshire) (Con): overemphasising this—and stretched several feet in front I suspect that if we asked hon. Members of this House, of the animal. The gushing went on for minute after I would not be seen as someone who was particularly minute. Animals are not held up in such restraints, so squeamish or had too much of a conscience, given my they remain standing on their legs. If we take the point agricultural credentials, which have already been referred that an animal becomes senseless when it collapses, or to. I have to say, however, that the killing of an animal that it collapses at the point when it becomes senseless, without stunning is, in my view, repugnant. It should be we are talking about four to six minutes. I saw animals stopped, in an ideal world, but I accept that there are stand for six minutes before they collapsed. That is my constraints on taking that final step. I say that not experience. because I have read about the process or been pressurised by various people, but because I took the trouble when I The owner of the abattoir I visited was trying to be was a Minister to go and watch it happening. It was helpful. He clearly understood the reason for my presence clear to me that what was often referred to as religious and would have preferred not to have to slaughter slaughter—unstunned slaughter—was a political issue unstunned animals, so he also did what has been referred of some importance, so my private office organised my to as a post-cut stun, in which a bolt is fired into the visit to a halal slaughterhouse to witness it happening. I animal’s head at the moment its throat is cut. Of course, stress that I have not been to a shechita abattoir. the animal collapsed immediately. Any animal in the conventional slaughter process collapses senseless at the I went to the halal abattoir, and I watched a number moment the bolt is fired. Such post-cut stunning strikes of sheep and cattle being slaughtered. The owner of the me as a significant alternative option. I am concerned abattoir, himself a Muslim, made it absolutely clear to about the disagreement within the Muslim religion about me that he did not like unstunned killing, but that when what constitutes halal, but I believe that we should be it comes to the obligation that the hon. Member for able to find a way forward. Birmingham, Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood) touched on a moment ago, the decision as to whether something My hon. Friend did not refer to New Zealand, but I is halal is taken by the imam who is present at the time. have also witnessed the halal slaughter of both sheep A prayer has to be said during the slaughter of all halal and cattle in New Zealand slaughterhouses. The animals meat, but the decision on whether an animal is stunned were all electrically stunned, rather than stunned with a or unstunned is taken by the imam. A number of retained bolt, before their throat was cut. In all the cases Muslim organisations take it upon themselves to decide I witnessed, the animals appeared to be completely what is and what is not halal. When I was a Minister, I senseless from the electrical shock when their throat organised meetings with representatives of many Muslim was cut. I therefore conclude that the animals were not organisations and groups, and I am afraid that there suffering, but my experience in this country is different. was absolutely no meeting of minds—I do not mean As an aside, we have heard from a number of quarters with me, but between the organisations across the table. about mis-stunning. I was going to say that mis-stunning I sat back and listened to some very strong language is regrettable, but that is not strong enough. Mis-stunning between Muslim abattoir operators who always pre-stun is not good enough, but it is a distraction from the issue. everything and whose imams are happy to say the Mis-stunning should be dealt with. Even if every animal prayer when an animal has its throat cut after being is stunned, mis-stunning should be addressed through electrically stunned. better training and the proper prosecution of abattoirs Going back to my own experience, I have watched a in which it takes place. number of sheep having their throat cut without pre- I do not want to venture too far into the religious stunning. As anyone who has visited an abattoir will arguments—I strongly feel that non-stun slaughter is an know, the sheep were held in a conventional rising animal welfare issue—but the other issue is what constitutes V-belt. They are hugged by the V-belt, which is made up what is legitimate under sharia law and Muslim beliefs. of two belts, and when they reach the top it is their turn The argument put to me by those who support non-stun to be killed. Normally the animals are stunned before slaughter is that the animal must be able to recover if its their throat is cut, but what I saw was without the throat is not cut. An animal clearly cannot recover from stunning. Incidentally, that is how the abattoirs address a bolt fired from a bolt gun, and therefore it is not the issue that one animal should not see another animal permissible. The debate is much more balanced on being slaughtered, because, in a V-belt, the next animal electrical pre-cut stunning. The problem—I am sure in line is behind the one being slaughtered. I saw a this has already been put to my hon. Friend—is that number of sheep being slaughtered, and the average members of the Muslim community who would be time before those animals appeared to become senseless—in prepared to entertain electrical stunning as acceptable, other words, before their head dropped, which most other than those who already do, want evidence that people assume is the point at which an animal collapses— animals are able to recover. In other words, if an animal’s was between 15 and 18 seconds. throat is not cut after it has been electrocuted, they I have also watched cattle being slaughtered, and I want evidence that, moments later, it will recover and be am afraid that my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering perfectly all right and undamaged. The problem—this (Mr Hollobone) underestimates the length of time before is bureaucracy gone mad—is that supporters cannot cattle become senseless. He referred to two minutes, but provide that evidence because it then becomes animal when I was a Minister I was told that it often takes a lot experimentation, which requires a Home Office licence. 15WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 16WH

[Sir James Paice] The conclusion that I came to when I was the Minister responsible—frankly, I wish that I had had time to The Home Office will not grant such a licence, so pursue the issue as I wanted to—was that the way supporters cannot provide the evidence that might convince forward to reduce suffering while recognising the need people of the argument. for proper respect for religious rites was to introduce Earlier, somebody said that pigs do not count because compulsory post-cut stunning. That would have been they are not eaten by either Muslims or Jews, and I also far more effective at reducing suffering, as I witnessed. I want to address the issue of training. also thought that the arguments used by those who opposed a pre-cut stun would fall aside, if their view is that the animal is dead immediately after stunning. Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab): I am genuinely interested in the right hon. Gentleman’s speech, and I John Hemming (Birmingham, Yardley) (LD): I thank bow to his far superior knowledge of the subject. May I the right hon. Gentleman for his well-informed and ask him about the head-only electrical stun? I have been impressive speech. Does he see no role for additional told by animal welfare groups that, under UK law, labelling? sheep only have to have one artery, rather than both arteries, cut, which often means that, because the electrical Sir James Paice: I am certainly not against labelling. stun only lasts between 20 and 40 seconds, there is a As I said a few minutes ago, I have recommended and good chance that a sheep will recover consciousness indeed driven forward initiatives to provide consumers before it bleeds to death. Will he enlighten me as to with more information, and I am not averse to the idea whether that is the case? I have been told that, even of doing so in this context. I have grave doubts about though they have been stunned, some 4 million sheep a how effective it would be, simply because I fear that it year recover consciousness before their throats are cut. would be difficult to enforce. My final comment relates to training. I discussed the Sir James Paice: I genuinely do not know. I cannot issue of mis-stunning, and I am sure that all of us have vouch for the accuracy of that statistic. All I would say often heard different groups say that Jewish slaughtermen is that I have watched quite a number of sheep having are far more effectively trained than Muslim slaughtermen. their throat cut after electrical stunning not just in the I have heard all sorts of accusations about some halal UK but in New Zealand, and they usually become slaughtermen using blunt knives to saw away at necks insensible—in other words, their head collapses—in and so on. All that I can say—maybe this is obvious—is about 15 seconds. I have never witnessed an animal that the examples that I witnessed in both this country come round at a point at which it might suffer. I cannot and New Zealand do not sustain that argument. As far answer the hon. Lady’s question. as I could tell—I am not a complete layman; I have been Understandably, there has been a lot of debate about to many abattoirs in my lifetime—the animals were cut labelling, not least because a lot of shechita meat is not as quickly as possible with very sharp weapons, and the acceptable for Jews to eat and therefore goes into the training was perfect. Whatever system of slaughter is mainstream, as does a lot of halal, whether or not it has used—pre-cut stun, post-cut stun or anything else—we been pre-cut stunned. Nobody can argue against informing cannot accept anything less than highly skilled operators. consumers, of course, and I would never dream of I certainly believe that that is a matter for enforcement, doing so. I have advocated all sorts of labelling, and I whatever else might be decided. would support it in this instance, except that I question I do not know whether I shall speak again in this whether it would work. It is not that I think that place during the next five weeks, but if this is my last consumers would not respond to it; however, it is wide speech, I hope that it is recognised as a seriously intentioned open to abuse. It would be extremely difficult to enforce argument for moving forward in the interests of animal and monitor, and to trace pieces of meat as they moved welfare and nothing else. I strongly urge my hon. Friend through the supply chain to determine whether the the Minister to consider the post-cut stun—it is a labelling on whether the animal was stunned before compromise—as a way of effectively reducing unwanted slaughter was correct. and unnecessary suffering. I am afraid that I do not agree with my hon. Friend Mr James Gray (in the Chair): The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Kettering about putting religious will forgive me for saying that if that was his last connotations into labelling, because I wholly object to speech—we all hope that it was not—it was an extremely anybody discriminating on those grounds. People have fine contribution at the end of a long and distinguished written to me saying, “I object to buying meat that has career. had some Muslim say a prayer over it.” I reject that attitude totally; in my view, it is racist, and I will have nothing to do with it. I am concerned purely with welfare. 5.35 pm I want to mention the distinction that was made Richard Harrington (Watford) (Con): I congratulate concerning the Jewish process, which renders an animal my right hon. Friend the Member for South East effectively dead the moment its throat is cut. As I said, I Cambridgeshire (Sir James Paice) on his speech, which have never actually witnessed that process, so I cannot was moving and hugely well informed. I also congratulate speak from experience, but if that is the case, I cannot my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr Hollobone) see how that community can argue against a post-cut on his part in this debate. stun. If their view is that the animal is dead the moment I am afraid that I do not have such experience or its throat is cut, what is wrong with a bolt or electrical erudition to add to the debate, but I will make one or shock seconds afterwards? According to that argument, two points. I am Jewish. I was not brought up to eat it is effectively being applied to a dead animal. kosher meat, and I am not agricultural. I have visited 17WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 18WH slaughterhouses on two occasions, which I will mention Richard Harrington: My hon. Friend, as ever, makes in a minute. I make these comments entirely because of an extremely good point that reiterates what I was what I have learned from speaking to my constituents—both saying about modern standards of cleanliness and methods. those who are religious and those who simply follow the My hon. Friend the Member for Kettering pointed traditions—after debates on the subject in this House. out in his brilliant opening remarks that this debate Perhaps I should mention that I have received a came about because of an e-petition; I think that he petition from nearly 2,000 members of the Muslim said about 110,000 or 115,000 people had signed it. I community in Watford, suitably supported by members know that this debate is not simply a “mine’s bigger of the Jewish community, who were rather fewer in than yours” or “my brother is bigger than yours” kind number because there are rather fewer Jewish people in of argument. However, the chairman of the Conservative Watford than Muslims. It came about as a result of Muslim Forum, Mohammed Amin, had a counter-petition comments by the new president of the British Veterinary called “Protect religious slaughter in the UK and EU”, Association that appeared in The Times. which has received 125,000 signatures. It is not just a I took the petition to the Prime Minister, who seemed question of the number of signatures, but we can gauge clear on the Government’s view, although of course the from the number of signatures to both these petitions Minister will say what he has to say. The Prime Minister that strong views are held, quite legitimately and properly, said that he was “delighted to support” my campaign in by people on both sides of the argument. Watford, and that he was I congratulate my hon. Friend for the way that he “very happy to confirm that while I am Prime Minister of this tried to address all the arguments. MPs have a reputation country”, for talking about things they do not know much about, both halal and kosher killing are and it is true that most of us from urban backgrounds do not know very much about this issue. However, “safe in Britain”. based first on the interests of my constituents and the That is a clear view from the Government. If I may sincerity with which they hold their views; secondly, speak for the Opposition—I have never had the arrogance on my limited experience of observing two types of to do so before, but I think that I am right in saying slaughterhouse, and I do not recommend either of this—I imagine their official view to be much the same. them, but I saw no material difference in the suffering of I have visited two abattoirs in my life, one using the animals; and thirdly, on this country’s belief in conventional slaughter and the other religious slaughter. tolerance and religious freedom, including protecting I did not visit them as a Member of Parliament, and people’s religious beliefs, it seems to me that the status again, I cannot compare my visits and level of observation quo should be upheld, possibly with some amendments to those of my right hon. Friend the Member for South relating to modern slaughterhouse conditions. East Cambridgeshire. I must say that I did not see a material difference between the death of the animal in Anas Sarwar (Glasgow Central) (Lab): The hon. the conventional abattoir, which was stunned, and the Gentleman and I—a Jew and a Muslim—travelled to religious slaughter, which was done without stunning. I some of the most deprived communities in the world can say without discrimination that I was absolutely put together when we were on the International Development off eating meat for some time by both of them—I am Committee, and we have had many discussions similar not a vegetarian, but I could see an argument for it to this one. Is it right to say that this cannot be viewed —but I cannot and would not say that I noticed any as a debate between those in favour of animal welfare material difference in the suffering of the animals in and people of faith? I am sure that there are people who either case. have an overlap—who are really keen followers of faith Given that it is one of our great beliefs in this country and who also passionately believe in animal welfare. If that people’s religious traditions and views should be it is right, confusing the two is very dangerous indeed, upheld, and that the issue is important to religious particularly as both Islamophobia and anti-Semitism Muslims and religious Jewish people, I believe that it is are on the rise in the UK. the Government’s job to stipulate standards of cleanliness and to deal with other more modern issues. As the hon. Richard Harrington: The hon. Gentleman is correct. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood) Of course, certain things come out of ignorance, and mentioned, religious texts can be interpreted in a modern ignorance breeds the sort of anti-Semitism and way, which I am sure must include modern versions of Islamophobic comments that are made; the actual method safety and cleanliness, but I cannot accept that in today’s of slaughter becomes almost irrelevant. society, religious traditions held with such belief by Mr Gray, you have been very patient as regards the people in this country could be declared illegal by the time that you have given me. I will say finally that most Government. I will do everything in my power, modest things in religion came about for a reason, including though that power may be, to reject anything of the hygiene, decency at the time and the reduction of animal sort. suffering, and I do not really see that very much has changed. Mr Lee Scott (Ilford North) (Con): I totally agree with my hon. Friend that people’s freedom to practise 5.42 pm religion, and to eat meat produced as they feel it should be produced, is vital. Does he agree that this is really a Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con): I matter of protecting animals? A bad abattoir is a bad welcome you to the Chair, Mr Gray, and I congratulate abattoir, whatever process it might carry out. That is my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr Hollobone) what we should stamp out: bad abattoirs, not the method on presenting this e-petition and speaking to it with his by which the animals are slaughtered. usual charm, eloquence and thoughtfulness. 19WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 20WH

[Miss Anne McIntosh] Having seen animals, not so much at abattoirs but at a regular auction mart, I can accept that livestock This is not an issue that the Environment, Food and coming at someone in numbers and at some speed can Rural Affairs Committee has considered, so I make my be scary, and I think that goes to the heart of the remarks today in a personal capacity. Also, I come from matter. The way forward is to regulate, inspect and have the constituency of Thirsk and Malton, which contains much closer supervision of slaughterhouses, including Filey. It is not only probably the most northerly but also this particular slaughterhouse, to ensure that the standards one of the most rural constituencies in England. It has within are the highest possible. two livestock marts and a number of abattoirs. At the outset, we must recognise that farmers put the Kerry McCarthy: I entirely agree with the hon. Lady welfare of the animals they produce right at the heart of that better inspection and enforcement of standards is all their activities, and their passion. I recognise that the the way forward. However, I understand that many ritual slaughter of animals for religious purposes is of slaughterhouses pay their staff according to the number historical interest, not only in this country but across of animals killed. The Department for Environment, many other EU countries, and that traditionally it has Food and Rural Affairs and the Meat Hygiene Service been a very limited practice. As my hon. Friend pointed have said that it is not their business how slaughterhouses out, some 80% of halal meat is already non-stunned, choose to pay their workers. Surely, however, if workers which puts this debate in context. are being paid according to how many hundreds of I must refer to the highly regrettable incident at animals they kill each day, they are less likely to pay Bowood Lamb abattoir in Carlton Miniott, near Thirsk, attention to proper standards and doing things properly. in my constituency, which displayed the most gross and unacceptable animal cruelty; it was caught on camera. Miss McIntosh: The Minister will have heard what There is absolutely no place for cruelty at any stage of the hon. Lady said, and I think that her questions back production, or indeed in the final stage of slaughter, up my argument. and this incident has sent shockwaves through the rural The issue of how many animals are being slaughtered, constituency—through Thirsk, Malton and Filey—and particularly for halal meat, was first raised with me at a not least through farmers, who feel very beleaguered at meeting attended by the then chairman of Natural present, even though they are of course in no way England at a regular farmers’ event I hold in my implicated in the incident. constituency at the new auction mart premises at Thirsk Farmers display the highest level of care and welfare, Rural Business Centre. At that meeting, it was put to me and leave their animals at the place of slaughter in the by someone who farms and who is also a former most stress-free state. They are concerned about that newsreader—so they obviously make a good case—that not only because they invest a lot of time, energy and, many animals are being slaughtered for halal meat, but as I say, passion in the production of animals, but for a actually there is no intention that the meat produced very good economic reason: a stressed animal damages will be used in the specific religious halal trade; instead, the quality of the meat, making it, in many instances, it enters into the general market. I take the point made either inedible or valued at a price lower than the market by the former Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member would otherwise dictate. It is an affront to farmers and for South East Cambridgeshire, about its being difficult others if their animals are treated in such a way. to label, but people are getting quite upset. The debate today, and indeed that incident, prompts There is a market out there for halal meat, and I a number of questions that go beyond the actual incident, congratulate the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood as my right hon. Friend the Member for South East (Shabana Mahmood) for making the case for it. I support Cambridgeshire (Sir James Paice), a former Minister, the case for all forms of religious slaughter—I have mentioned. I went to see a halal slaughterhouse, where done as a Member of the European Parliament, and I chickens were being slaughtered. I saw the chickens continue to do so in this place—but I ask the Minister before they went through the slaughterhouse and after to look closely into practices arising where halal slaughter they came out, but I could not bring myself to see the might be respected but the ultimate destination of meat moment of truth. Today’s debate raises a number of so slaughtered is not halal. questions about who inspects such premises and how There is clearly a higher proportion of such meat—my frequently. understanding is that it is more halal than shechita When the Minister responding to this debate replies, meat—being produced now than there was, say, five, I would be grateful if he could say what the role of the 10 or 15 years ago. I understand that this has to be Food Standards Agency should be in all this. In particular, provided to hospitals, schools, airlines and many other when was the Bowood Lamb abattoir last inspected, public places and restaurants, but this matter goes to and how frequently would it have been inspected? Obviously, the heart of the issue addressed in the petition regarding in that particular case, the camera revealed inhumane animal welfare, as my hon. Friends the Members for and deeply cruel practice, which one hopes was a one-off Watford (Richard Harrington) and for Kettering said, incident and not something that had happened previously. and it raises questions about where this meat ends up. The footage went to the heart of how workers at abattoirs That is a separate source of concern. are trained. It is some time since that abattoir changed You would think, Mr Gray, that we had learned the hands, but we must ask how abattoir workers are trained, lessons of adulterating the food chain through the because what is important for halal and kosher is not horsemeat scandal, but today’s debate shows—I back only the moment of truth—the point of slaughter—but up what the Minister has said previously—that any whether the workers at that abattoir were working directly form of labelling has to be done at EU level. I hope that under the supervision of the owners and managers. Had the Minister is able to report to us and say precisely the workers been properly trained in handling livestock? where we are in that process, because if the wish of the 21WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 22WH

House, along with that of the 115,000 petitioners, is to governing which animals people are permitted to eat, have better labelling—or, indeed, any form of labelling— what condition they must be in before that is allowed, stating that an animal has been slaughtered according and how they are killed and subsequently dealt with, to religious conditions, meat should be clearly marked and it is performed by a trained person whose licence is accordingly. We should also aim to have shorter food annually renewed. The incision is made by a regularly supply chains, greater transparency and openness in the inspected sharp instrument at the structure at the back food chain and better labelling, either for religious or of the neck, and at that point, blood supply and the animal welfare purposes, which is what the red tractor ability to feel pain cease, consciousness is immediately label covers. lost, and rapid death follows. In effect, cutting and How can we seek to raise standards at slaughterhouses? stunning happen almost simultaneously. It is important There was a recent debate, which I was not able to attend, to spell those things out, because it is vital that when on the use of closed circuit television in slaughterhouses. slaughter of a permitted animals occurs it is done in the I hope that the Minister will forgive my asking a question kindest, most pain-free way possible. that may have been asked during that debate. We have What is not permitted under Jewish laws is mechanical regular debates about the cost of food and the cost of stunning. We are not just talking about stunning; we are food production. If CCTV cameras are to be installed talking about mechanical stunning. Many people believe and regularly monitored in slaughterhouses and abattoirs, that mechanical stunning is essentially superior to any who will be responsible for monitoring them and for the other kind of stunning as regards the alleviation of cost of fitting them? Obviously, if the farmer has to pay, pain, but there is no scientific unanimity on that point. that is taking away from their profit. Many sectors—dairy In a recent contribution in the other place, the noble is the worst—feel beleaguered, given the difference between Lord Winston went into some detail on those points, the farm-gate price and what we pay in the supermarket. and I do not intend to repeat that here. This is a timely debate, given the questions raised in It is important to look at what happens in practice. the petition and those asked by hon. Members this Mis-stunning takes place on a significant scale. The afternoon. We have to establish how labelling would Food Standards Authority has admitted that its numbers work, whether the amount of meat produced for religious do not constitute a full record, and that it is likely that a purposes is larger than required, whether it is entering greatly reduced number of animals have been recorded into the regular food chain, and how it could be labelled as having been subjected to mis-stunning. The 2004 as such. I invite the Minister to report back on negotiations report from the European Food Safety Authority on the for better labelling at EU level. welfare aspects of animal stunning and killing methods I should be delighted if the Minister also reassured shows that failure rates for mechanical stunning in the public that there are regular inspections at abattoirs cattle may be more than 6.6% and could rise to 31% for and slaughterhouses, and that standards are being upheld. non-penetrative bolt stunning and electric stunning. I understand that criminal prosecutions may follow There is a significant level of mis-stunning. Anecdotal from the recent cruelty at Bowood Lamb abattoir, and I reports from DEFRA show a similar picture. hope that that sends a message to other abattoirs throughout the country. It is also important to remember the video produced by Animal Aid after secret filming in three slaughterhouses in 2009, which showed pigs, sheep and calves inadequately [MR DAI HAVARD in the Chair] stunned by electrocution, and horrific scenes in those slaughterhouses of animals trying to flee and ewes 5.54 pm watching their young being killed. Mrs Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab/Co-op): In debating this issue, it is important that we look at I apologise for my late arrival, Mr Havard—I was not only the theory but the facts. It is also important chairing the Select Committee on Transport—and I that there is proper monitoring of what takes place in thank you for calling me to speak. I congratulate the all slaughterhouses, whatever the methods of slaughter, hon. Members who secured the debate and the 115,000 and that CCTV is used where it can be effective in people who signed the e-petition, which has brought showing what is actually happening. this debate to the fore. There are differences of view on this topic, but I Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op): I have a believe that everybody speaks about it with sincerity, large number of constituents who are concerned about and that concerns about animal welfare are at the animal welfare. I also have a large number of constituents forefront. I ask that the concerns of the Jewish community who are concerned that this debate and this petition be considered when looking at this whole issue, and that highlight animal welfare issues for the Muslim and some thought be given to shechita, the Jewish method Jewish communities that are not being highlighted more of slaughter, in relation to the genuine and legitimate widely. My hon. Friend referred to the Animal Aid concerns raised by petitioners, which have led to today’s videos and filming, but some of the terrible practices debate. First, I hope that we can all reject the term they show were in places that have nothing to do with “ritual slaughter”, which is often used in relation to shechita or halal. They were producing meat in the both Jewish and Muslim methods of slaughter. That is normal, run-of-the-mill way that we do in this country. an unpleasant, pejorative term with very unpleasant Is there therefore not a danger that we are focusing the connotations. It is not helpful for such a term to be debate on the wrong issue? We should be concerned used. about all animals and their welfare. If people do not like I stress that Judaism’s key concern is with the animal’s animals being hurt in any way, presumably they will welfare, in life as well as in death. Shechita, the Jewish become vegans. I am afraid that I am not prepared to method of slaughter, is extremely complex. It has rules do that, but— 23WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 24WH

Mr Dai Havard (in the Chair): Order. I remind Members derogation to permit non-stunned slaughter for religious that interventions are meant to be short, concise and purposes. Out of understandable consideration for religious cogent. beliefs, the UK and certain other member states have decided to apply the derogation, but it is clear, as my Mrs Ellman: I thank my hon. Friend the Member for hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr Hollobone) Ilford South (Mike Gapes) for his intervention. He pointed out in his excellent opening remarks, that there makes an extremely important point. Animal welfare is is no uniformity in how that derogation has been applied. important and counts in how animals live, as well as in In some countries, such as Denmark and Sweden, non- how they die. It is not solely about methods of slaughter, stunned slaughter is not permitted. In others, such as but about what is happening in individual slaughterhouses Austria, Estonia, Finland and Slovakia, post-incision daily. His point shows the wider context in which this stunning is required if the animal has not been previously issue should be discussed. stunned. That is the halfway house my right hon. Friend The kashrut enables observant Jewish people to eat the Member for South East Cambridgeshire mentioned. meat and poultry. Although not all members of the Interestingly and importantly—this was mentioned Jewish community observe the rules of kashrut, most by my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering—in Germany, do. Enabling kashrut to take place in this country is a where the derogation has been applied, abattoirs have recognition of an important part of the Jewish way of to prove the religious needs of the community concerned life. If such a practice were banned, that would be seen before a licence is granted. There may well be different as an infringement of the civil rights of many members approaches to the interpretation of the derogation by of the Jewish community. It would be a sad day for the individual states, but all the member states I have mentioned diverse communities in our society, which are important, have a great deal more clarity on how the derogation and our recognition of their individual contributions. has been applied than the United Kingdom. Indeed, I I end by reiterating the statement I began with: this specifically ask the Minister to address the lack of issue is about animal welfare and being humane. Judaism clarity in the application of the UK derogation. and kashrut are about humanity and reducing pain. The fact is that in the UK in 2013, some 15% of sheep Those Jewish people who observe kashrut do so because and goats were not stunned before slaughter. That is they believe it to be the most humane and kindest way some 2.4 million animals. Given that the Muslim and to deal with animals. Jewish communities together comprise only 4% to 5% of the British population, and given that most halal meat —we have heard that the figure is 80%—is from stunned 6.2 pm animals, it follows that a significant proportion of sheep Mr David Jones (Clwyd West) (Con): I welcome you and goat meat from non-stunned slaughter is being to the Chair, Mr Havard. I am grateful for the opportunity supplied otherwise than to the market for which it was to participate in this important debate. As we have intended. In other words, I would go so far as to say heard, it has attracted a great amount of attention. The —this was touched on by my hon. Friend the Member e-petition on which the debate is based has attracted, for Thirsk and Malton (Miss McIntosh)—that there seems according to my iPhone, more than 116,000 signatories. to be a gross over-provision of non-stun slaughterhouses On the other hand, the other petition, which is aimed at in this country, and I would be interested to hear what protecting religious slaughter, has attracted more than the Government intend to do about it. The extent of 124,000 signatories. This issue clearly attracts a great non-stunned slaughter in this country tends to go against deal of interest and arouses a great deal of passion, and the UK and EU legislation. it is a credit to Members of this House that the debate is being conducted in such a calm and rational manner. Ms Diane Abbott (Hackney North and Stoke Newington) (Lab): Surely the point that the right hon. Gentleman We must not be under any illusions. As my right hon. raises is about labelling, rather than the nature of the Friend the Member for South East Cambridgeshire stunning. (Sir James Paice) pointed out, any form of animal slaughter is a distressing business and all rational people, Mr Jones: Not entirely. If more non-stunned slaughter whatever their beliefs, would wish to do all they can to is being carried out in this country than is required for minimise, if not obviate altogether, any suffering caused religious purposes, there is an over-provision of non-stunned to another sentient creature. In that regard, the scientific slaughter. The point that the hon. Lady makes on evidence is clear: stunning minimises the distress caused labelling is absolutely right, however. It is unacceptable to the animal before and at the time of slaughter. The that meat from non-stunned animals should be sold in Dialrel report of 2010, for example, stated: this country without that being drawn to the attention “It can be stated with high probability that animals feel pain of potential consumers. While we have heard suggestions during and after the throat cut without prior stunning.” today that the precise methods of non-stunned or stunned It also found that in the case of stunned slaughter, the slaughter should be drawn to consumers’ attention, my hazards of restraint stress and injury were low, as were view is that “stunned” or “non-stunned” is at least a pain and suffering during the cut and immediately clear and understandable starting point for labelling, afterwards, while in the case of slaughter without stunning, and I believe it would be widely welcomed. We have those hazards were considered to be high. On purely already heard that simply to label meat as “halal” or scientific grounds, therefore, it seems clear that the case “kosher” would be insufficient, for all the reasons that for stunned slaughter is strong. have already been advanced. It is with good reason, therefore, that European law It emerged last year that the restaurant chain and United Kingdom law require that animals should PizzaExpress had been serving halal-only chicken for be stunned before slaughter, but as we have heard, the some considerable time without drawing that to the relevant EU directive permits member states to apply a attention of consumers. Labelling goes beyond what is 25WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 26WH displayed in the butcher’s shop or on the supermarket chain: it does not. There are approximately 300,000 shelves. People in restaurants must have a clear choice Jewish people in this country, and the meat produced as to what they are being offered, so labelling should for them goes to the community itself. The Beth Din extend to menus in restaurants. already label kosher meat. We must ensure that only the appropriate level of non-stunned meat is allowed to be sold in this country. Sir James Paice: If all shechita slaughtered meat is Similarly, it is essential that consumers know precisely eaten by Jews, is my hon. Friend saying that they are what is being offered for sale before they buy it and put eating the hind quarters? That is forbidden. What happens it on their families’ plates. to the hind quarters?

6.10 pm Dr Offord: I take my right hon. Friend’s point about all parts of the animal—I do not know whether they are Dr Matthew Offord (Hendon) (Con): It is a pleasure discarded, or whether my right hon. Friend knows the to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Havard, and to answer to that. follow the hon. Members for Liverpool, Riverside (Mrs Ellman) and for Birmingham, Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood), who succinctly set out the positions of the Sir James Paice: They are sold into the rest of the Jewish and Muslim faiths on the stunning and non-stunning supply. of meat. It is always useful to debate a range of subjects, but this debate seems to involve a sense of déjà vu. We Dr Offord: My right hon. Friend may say that, but he discussed the issue on 4 November, and I see present has not come forward with any evidence to convince Members who contributed to that debate, along with me. Some people may argue that slaughter is humane if others. Indeed, my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering it is— (Mr Hollobone) chaired that debate. I am surprised that the issue has come around for discussion again so The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for quickly. If former and current Ministers did not already Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (George Eustice): know the range of views on this matter, we have made Will my hon. Friend give way? them very clear over the years. I want to say a few words about why I certainly do Dr Offord: Well, I must give way to the Minister. not support the e-petition. I have several thousand Muslim and Jewish constituents, and I am representing George Eustice: I have discussed this issue with Shechita their point of view. I am also against stunning because UK, and everyone acknowledges that the hind quarters of my own view about animal welfare. I have been a are normally sold on the open market. It would be vegetarian for the past 32 years. I can assure Members conceded that most of it goes to Smithfield, possibly to that I am not squeamish about killing animals: on be sold to caterers, but Shechita UK will also maintain occasion, animal welfare necessitates the death of animals. that some of it goes to halal markets. I have, in the recent past, put animals—particularly rabbits —out of their misery when I felt that their poor quality Dr Offord: I apologise to the former Minister, my of life required action, so I feel that I speak on animal right hon. Friend the Member for South East welfare with some authority. The hon. Member for Cambridgeshire (Sir James Paice), because I have been Ilford South (Mike Gapes) suggested in an intervention corrected. I can only say that some of it may indeed go that perhaps more people should go vegan or vegetarian. into the food chain, but not in the way that was Sometimes, when the hon. Member for Bristol East anticipated—that is, the whole carcass of an animal. I (Kerry McCarthy) suggests that we should have a day in think we are dancing on the head of a pin if we are Parliament each year when people do not eat meat, she saying that only some might go into the food chain. is ridiculed. That is wrong. What is humane slaughter? Some people say that In preparing for this speech, I looked at the amount slaughter is humane if an animal is protected from of meat that is consumed in this country. We have unavoidable excitement, pain or suffering, and that that already heard about the glut of meat in the market. The requires the animal to be restrained and stunned, rendering Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs it insensitive to pain before it is allowed to bleed to has consulted on the consumption habits of the British death. I do not accept that. I too have been to an public for the past 20 years. In the last year for which abattoir, and I have also been around cattle when they the figures are known, people consumed around 190 grams have been killed in other places. When cattle enter any of chicken each week. If we multiply that figure by 52, kind of contraption, including the back of a lorry, their we get around 9.8 kg—almost 10 kg of chicken every stress levels increase. year. If broilers are slaughtered at eight weeks and the In preparation for this debate, I read Jon Henley’s average carcass weight is around 1.8 kg, that means that January 2009 article in The Guardian about the European some people, at least, are eating at least six chickens a pig industry. Some animals experience a lifetime of year. If we extrapolate those figures, we come to the distress and suffering. The article documented pigs view that every year in the UK approximately 2.6 million being kept on slatted concrete floors; pregnant sows cattle, 10 million pigs, 14.5 million sheep and lambs, being kept in cages so small that they could not move; 80 million fish and 950 million birds are slaughtered for piglets being castrated without pain relief; and tails human consumption. I have to ask: why are we consuming routinely being docked to prevent animals from attacking so much meat? each other. The food that enters the UK food chain I will contradict some of my colleagues in saying that from the EU is never discussed, which is peculiar. shechita accounts for only 1% of the totals that I just Muslim and Jewish people do not eat pork, but no one read out, and it is incorrect to say that it enters the food ever discusses such issues—we seem to be focusing on 27WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 28WH

[Dr Offord] covert attack on them and their way of life. I am glad that so many of the speeches today have confirmed the the same issues time and again. We should certainly importance—for some of us, at least—of not only spend time on other issues, such as the trimming of animal welfare, obviously, but the right of communities hens’ beaks; the mechanical mis-stunning of animals; to slaughter meat in the way they wish to under the law. the fly-grazing of horses; puppy farming; the culling of chicks on the basis of sex; and the cultivation of endangered Dr Offord: The hon. Lady’s intervention illustrates turtle meat in places such as the Cayman Islands. None that some of the concerns of people in different of that is ever covered. communities are not as portrayed by far-right organisations, It is worth highlighting that the petition has come but are very much about more normal things, including about with great haste, in contrast with the British not only how they feed their children, but how they Veterinary Association petition, which has taken almost look after their children and live their daily lives. a year to come to fruition. I would like the new BVA In preparing my speech, I wondered which of the chairman to stop fanning the hysteria around this issue British values we are talking about are those to which and look at what veterinarians are doing to ensure slaughter practices are alien. I looked at the Department animal welfare in slaughter houses. for Education’s advice on promoting fundamental British I will not talk about shechita in particular, because it values in UK schools, which is clear: has already been covered, but I want to make a point “Schools should promote the fundamental British values of about why some of the methods we have discussed have democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and mutual respect come about. The whole motivation in the large-scale and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs”. factory abattoirs is to speed up the process and prevent Surely the e-petition goes against that. Moreover, schools the animal from thrashing around at the point of slaughter. should That is why stunning occurs. Animal welfare organisations “further tolerance and harmony between different cultural traditions claim to have adopted the idea of stunning in an effort by enabling students to acquire an appreciation of and respect for to raise levels of animal welfare, but the evidence in their own and other cultures…encourage respect for other support of the animal welfare benefits is inconclusive. people...and…an understanding that the freedom to choose and Mechanical methods frequently go wrong, leaving the hold other faiths and beliefs is protected in law”. animal in great, prolonged distress. The e-petition and today’s motion go against that. The last time we debated this issue, I mentioned the We are going down the route of asking people to choose Food Standards Agency statistics on mis-stuns, which the food that they eat on the basis of religion. Labelling showed—and the Minister agreed—that an unrealistically already exists to indicate whether food is kosher, and low number of mis-stuns had been reported in the UK. the Muslim community may introduce similar arrangements In 2011, only six cattle were officially reported as having as well. I feel aggrieved on behalf of my constituents been mis-stunned. Following my questions, the Minister that we are returning to the same issue. Many of them conceded that the statistics are not complete and may feel under attack as a result. represent only a fraction of the actual number, and that the FSA will have to endeavour to improve its reporting Several hon. Members rose— methods. I oppose stunning on the basis that mis-stuns cause Mr Dai Havard (in the Chair): Four Members wish to animals more pain and distress and that it does not speak and I want to start the Front-Bench wind-ups by improve animal welfare. I am uneasy about the idea of 6.55, leaving them a goodly time to reply. Will Members ending non-stun slaughter coming forward so soon restrain themselves to about seven minutes each, so that after the previous debate. I defend people’s right to eat they may all get in? meat and I defend my right not to eat meat; I also defend my constituents’ right to eat meat slaughtered in the way that they want it to be. Some people have said 6.22 pm that these methods of slaughter are alien practices that (Tiverton and Honiton) (Con): Thank are not part of British culture and not something we do you, Mr Havard, and it is a great pleasure to take part in in Britain. That starts to produce a divide between some the debate, which I thank my hon. Friend the Member groups and the so-called British public, and I am greatly for Kettering (Mr Hollobone) for securing. concerned about that. I do not rise to talk about anything that is anti the On the back of the Copenhagen and Paris attacks, Jewish or Muslim communities. The debate is very many of my Jewish constituents worry that they are not much about animal welfare. My right hon. Friend the wanted in this country. They, however, are more British Member for South East Cambridgeshire (Sir James than some of the people who have signed the e-petition; Paice) made the point very well: in the end, according to they, at the end of their synagogue services, always play scientific and veterinary experience and the New Zealand “God Save the Queen” and sing along. We do not see research into slaughter methods, an animal that is stunned that in other parts of society, more’s the pity. Similarly, before slaughter without doubt feels less pain than one when I visit my Muslim constituents at the mosque, they that is not stunned. That is the issue. do not talk about the issues that some of the far right claim that they do; they are more concerned about We should be able to work with religious communities parking outside the mosque on a Friday, so that they can to find compromises to ensure that animals are stunned get not only to the mosque but back to work afterwards. at slaughter. For example, my right hon. Friend made the point that there is very much a case for post-stunning, Ms Abbott: My local Muslim community is concerned especially of large animals. Clearly, a cow or beef animal about this debate. Many do not feel that it is really can take up to four or five minutes to die, so post-stunning about animal welfare; they worry that it is some sort of is relevant. 29WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 30WH

In addition, the halal system is about ensuring that we are to go down the labelling route, we must ensure an animal may recover from being stunned—that is what that the labels say “Stunned” or “Non-stunned”. That makes the difference. If electric shock is used, the animal should clearly be the issue. We need to get that right. should be rendered senseless so that the cut may be In this country and throughout Europe and the world, made and the animal bled without it feeling any pain, if religious communities believe that there can be no but it should be able to recover from the shock. That is stunning of animals, we should ensure that as few why the stunning system is acceptable—we should not animals as possible are slaughtered under such a system forget that 80% or 90% of halal meat is from stunned and that that meat should go to the community concerned. animals—and it is what we want to happen. I want to I am not against people having their religious rights, but see more and more animals stunned. it is wrong that more animals than necessary are being My hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Dr Offord) slaughtered without stunning. We need to sort that out. made many points, one of which was that all the meat I repeat that we have to have cameras in slaughterhouses slaughtered under the shechita system was consumed to ensure that the systems are carried out properly. We by the Jewish community. That is far from the point and can then work with religious communities to try to is not what happens. All the hindquarters go into general minimise the amount of animals not stunned at slaughter meat consumption, so labelling of such products is and the amount of meat that goes into the normal meat essential. trade and not into the kosher or halal trade. That way we will be able to get to a position where most animals Furthermore, I think I am right to say that in Israel, in this country are stunned before slaughter and fewer because fewer cattle are slaughtered, much more of the and fewer are not. That is where we need to get to. That animal is eaten by the Jewish community than in this is not an easy matter, but it is something that I am sure country. I have done a lot of work on this through the Minister will reply to. At the end of the day, this is various Committees and, no matter how much meat is not a party political issue but an issue of what is right needed for the Jewish community, they will accept no for animal welfare. stunning whatever. They are absolutely convinced that the way in which the knife is wielded does the stunning. I do not believe that to be the case, but that is the 6.31 pm argument that is made. If so, clearly the amount of Ms Diane Abbott (Hackney North and Stoke Newington) meat needed for the Jewish community should be the (Lab): I have listened with great interest to the contributions amount slaughtered under the shechita system. I therefore to the debate, in particular the contribution from the press the Minister on the situation in Germany where, right hon. Member for South East Cambridgeshire as my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering pointed (Sir James Paice). I am here to speak not to the technicalities out, the Jewish community has to be clear about the or detail of the issue, but about how it is seen by amount of meat they need, so that that is the amount of communities. meat slaughtered. I represent Hackney, a traditional centre of the Jewish In this country, not all shechita systems use slow community, with the oldest synagogue in the country in methods of slaughter. In some slaughterhouses, even Brenthouse road. We also have, from a little more recently, shechita is a relatively fast system. When two or three a large Muslim community. Both those communities animals are slaughtered without stunning, only one are quite anxious about this debate. Both are very civic might land up as in the shechita system, because the minded. On Cazenove road in Stoke Newington we other two have passed through before the Jewish inspectors have a mosque, the Simon Marks school, which is a have time to ensure that the animals are fit. Shechita is maintained Jewish school, and other Jewish schools. not only about the method of slaughter, but about Whenever there have been pressures and tensions, my testing the lungs and other parts of the animal to ensure Jewish community and my Muslim community have that it is healthy enough to be accepted. There is a lot of come together—they are an example of how that can practice out there that we can tighten up on. happen. Both communities are concerned about the debate. There should also be CCTV cameras in all They are concerned that it has come forward so quickly slaughterhouses, whether they are using shechita or after we debated the issue in November. They are also halal systems, or the general system of slaughter with concerned about what the debate really means. They are stunning. Also, mis-stunning should be put right. I wish worried that the issue is not really one of animal welfare. to refute entirely an argument that has been made People of all faiths and none are concerned about animal several times, which is that because there are some welfare. There is an issue about whether slaughterhouses mis-stuns when we stun animals, we should not stun are well run, and there is agreement that we must get them at all and do everything under a shechita system. them run properly, through using CCTV and stamping We should ensure that there is absolutely no mis-stunning out abuses where they occur. Everyone is concerned in this country. That is where I nail my colours to the about animal welfare, but my communities are concerned mast, because we have to stamp out any mis-stunning. that, although we hear little about other forms of animal Furthermore, where possible animals should be stunned. use and abuse that could be dubbed cruel, some people We also need to look at having a workable labelling keep wanting to go back to the issue of halal meat. system, which we do not have at the moment. If we talk I was asked to speak in the debate to make it clear to about a shechita or halal system, we immediately make people that communities want to work within the law the issue a religious one. We do not want to make it a and to have the highest standards of animal welfare, but religious issue, nor should it be one. My right hon. that they worry that some people—not all, because I Friend the Member for South East Cambridgeshire imagine most people who signed the petition did so in said that any system would not be easy to police, but if good faith—who are pursing the issue of halal meat are 31WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 32WH

[Ms Diane Abbott] I believe that the vast majority of people raising this issue are concerned with animal welfare, but that for in some sense antagonistic to some of our communities some it is a flag of convenience. For instance, when Animal of faith. When we are debating this issue, I urge hon. Aid aired the video on 3 February of the appalling Members to avoid a narrative that makes it sound as if behaviour of slaughtermen in a halal abattoir, there was one is trying to say that communities of faith are quite rightly an outcry, but a week later, when a video backward or mediaeval, or unnecessarily cruel to animals. was aired showing the same behaviour in a mainstream Let us try to restrict the debate to practical measures to abattoir, there was not a peep. It is an interesting achieve the safest and most humane methods of animal juxtaposition of people’s responses: for halal, there is slaughter. outcry, but for non-halal, silence. There is real concern in communities. They will not I have also had e-mails in the past saying: read the details of some of the speeches made today, “I don’t want my meat touched by a dirty man in a beard” but they hear people going back once more to the issue or of halal meat and wonder what it is a vehicle for. I do not believe that there is necessarily a contradiction “I don’t want Muslim meat”— between religious observance and treating animals in a whatever Muslim meat is. I have bought meat in halal humane way, and would not want anyone to feel that shops, in kosher shops and in Sainsbury’s, and frankly I their methods of religious observance are under threat. cannot tell the difference, so I am still trying to get my I was glad to hear from the hon. Member for Watford head around how Muslim meat or kosher meat is meant (Richard Harrington) that the Prime Minister himself to be so different that people do not want it because it is has given an undertaking that halal slaughter and shechita blessed or is in some way religious meat. Sadly, it shows slaughter are safe in principle. That will be reassuring to that perhaps ignorance, racism, Islamophobia and anti- the people I represent and to Jewish and Muslim faith Semitism lurk behind some of the respectable arguments. communities up and down the country. Mike Gapes: The hon. Gentleman is making a powerful Several hon. Members rose— point. I will add my voice to his. Constituents in Ilford Mr Dai Havard (in the Chair): Order. To give hon. have written to me in exactly those terms this week, Members a little advice before we continue, when we saying that there is a rising Islamophobia and anti-Semitism. vote it will be on a motion to say that we have considered I have had almost identical words from Jewish constituents the petition, not that we necessarily agree or disagree and from Muslim constituents. It is not just in his part with it. Mr Freer is itching to go in trap one. of London but in east London, which has large Jewish and Muslim communities that go back many decades— 6.35 pm indeed, the Jewish community goes back centuries. Mike Freer (Finchley and Golders Green) (Con): The debate has quite rightly focused on animal welfare. I Mike Freer: The hon. Gentleman is right. Religious have to say that those who believe in methods associated communities feel that they are under threat and that with religious slaughter are equally concerned with they are being made to feel unwelcome. However, I animal welfare. I am not Jewish, but, representing Finchley should put the issue in context: some, but not all, and and Golders Green, I have taken a great deal of time to certainly not the majority, are using animal welfare as a understand the religious traditions behind religious flag of convenience. That is why we must ensure that we slaughter. Any rabbi or imam will say that the welfare of anchor our arguments in animal welfare. the animal is paramount. If the animal is stressed or in In that respect, my right hon. Friend the Member for any way hurt or damaged, it cannot be slaughtered. It is South East Cambridgeshire (Sir James Paice)—I took also important to remember the long and proud tradition members of Shechita UK to see him when he was a we have of protecting religious freedoms. I do not Minister—has given this issue a huge amount of thought, believe that the two are incompatible. not only because of his farming background, but because We are here once more, having debated the same of his former ministerial position. I do not always share issues in November. I apologise, but I want to repeat his views, but they come from a very valid point of view, some points that I have made previously. I recognise and I will seek advice on the point he raised about the that the debate has been prompted by 116,000 people post-stunning cut, because it is a fair one and it needs to signing a petition calling for non-stun slaughter to be be explored—I am not a Talmudic scholar, although I banned, which I believe was started last April. However, sometimes feel I am rapidly becoming one. I am sure 10 days ago, a counter-petition was started, which now someone will have an answer. has 124,000 signatures. My point is that the public are Before I looked at this issue, I thought I would go to completely divided. There is not a common view. see these things for myself, and I am surprised to find Before we go on to the key animal welfare issues, I that a number of colleagues have also been to an will touch on something that is a bit like the elephant in abattoir. I went to see what goes go on, and I have to say the room. A number of Members have alluded to the it is not a pleasant experience. Anyone who goes to an fact that our religious communities, whether the Muslim abattoir either comes back firmly a vegan or simply has community or the Haredi community in Hackney, the to deal with the fact that there is no such thing as a Jewish community that my hon. Friend the Member for good death for a cow. I certainly do not have the Hendon (Dr Offord) and I share in London, or the experience of my right hon. Friend or the experts. I saw largest Jewish population in the UK, represented by a these things from a layman’s point of view, like my hon. colleague from slightly further away, my hon. Friend the Friend the Member for Watford (Richard Harrington). Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman), and our I have seen the shochetim operate, and I have seen the constituents, are concerned about the motives behind bolt through the head, and, to put it bluntly, there is no some of the debate—not all of it, but some of it. such thing as a warm, cuddly abattoir. The cow or the 33WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 34WH lamb is being slaughtered: they either get a quick slice The debate has largely centred on the difference across the neck or they get a bolt fired at pressure through between religious manners of slaughtering cattle, sheep their skull—there is no nice way of dressing it up. However, and other animals, and the supposed stunning version. from what I witnessed, I simply could not see the difference However, it should be clear, as has been alluded to, that between the two methods. If colleagues get the opportunity the welfare of the animal being slaughtered is paramount to see animals being slaughtered, they should do so—it in the Jewish religion and the Muslim religion. The is gruesome, but they will be better informed. animal is being used for food and to sustain human life, My right hon. Friend the Member for South East so it is paramount in both religions that the slaughter Cambridgeshire said the training of non-religious takes place in the most humane way possible. slaughtermen is rigorous, but it is not as rigorous as that In an intervention, I made a point about the process for the shochetim. The shochetim go through examinations, that I think is quite important. As my hon. Friend the and they have at least three years’ training before they Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Mike Freer) can use the surgical blade. Furthermore—this sounds said, shechita slaughter requires a fully trained individual slightly frivolous—if the shochetim is involved in a row to slice through the neck and carotid arteries of the while driving to the abattoir, they are not allowed to cattle with one stroke—not a series of strokes. There is a practise. Not only must the animal be calm, centred and particular way of doing this, which is quite clear, and it unharmed, but the shochetim must be peaceful and requires particular skill and ability, as I have personally calm as well. A great deal of time and effort are put into seen. The stroke renders the animal unconscious, removing ensuring that the process is as humane as possible. its ability to feel pain through the cerebral link—it is an The point about labelling is a fair one, but labelling instantaneous means of rendering it unable to suffer meat as stunned or non-stunned is simplistic. If we are pain. However, I would argue that the animal will suffer going to talk about animal welfare, we have to say, “This pain regardless of whether it is stunned with a bolt or was stunned”, “This was gassed”, “This was electrified” electrified. Therefore, the shechita method and the halal and “This was a bolt through the head. Oh, by the way, method, if used properly, are the humane way to proceed— we had to use three bolts before we got it right.” If people they are a process of stunning the animal to start with. want to inform the public about animal welfare, they There has been no scientific evidence from a laboratory can do so. If we label meat only kosher or halal, stunned environment to demonstrate whether one method of or non-stunned, the danger is that the issue becomes stunning is more humane than another. However, leading religion, not animal welfare. scientists and academics regard shechita and halal slaughter My hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Honiton as being at least as humane as, if not preferable to, the (Neil Parish), who is not in his place, said the scientific forms of stunning used in abattoirs up and down the evidence showed that non-stunned animals suffered country. There is a clear issue there. There is an absolute more pain, but that contradicts last November’s report duty to introduce CCTV in every abattoir in the country. from his all-party parliamentary group for beef and We will then be able to see the process, and there will be lamb, which said the evidence regarding the pain felt evidence that the slaughter has taken place in an effective following a bolt through the head or following religious and humane way. slaughter was inconclusive. Several hon. Members have mentioned labelling. I have two final comments. First, 1% of animals in Simplistically labelling food as stunned or non-stunned the food chain are non-stunned, but we seem to obsess is not appropriate. The process that has taken place should about that 1%, rather than about the poor practices that be clear. If meat is regarded as kosher or halal, or is have been illustrated in the slaughter of the other 99% produced by any other means, fine; I do not believe that of animals. Secondly, the all-party group report said: that sort of labelling is a problem. Accepting stunning “it is to the benefit and pride of the United Kingdom that or non-stunning as the principle would not be appropriate, religious freedoms allow communities to eat meat prepared in particularly given the contention by the shechita and accordance with their religious rites.” halal communities that their means of stunning are at That has been the consistent view of this House, and I least as humane as other, conventional methods. Such say once again that we should leave it alone. labelling would clearly be directly discriminatory against Mr Dai Havard (in the Chair): I now intend to let both the Jewish and Muslim communities. I do not Mr Blackman speak. We will then have the two Front-Bench think that that is acceptable. spokesmen. I will give Mr Hollobone some time at the Debates such as this one are generally a means of end to wind up. formulating policy, and getting the views of the Government and the Opposition, so I would welcome a clear statement 6.45 pm from both of them that there will be no change to the Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con): It is a pleasure principle of allowing shechita and halal meat to be to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Havard. The prepared exactly as it is now, and that slaughter will be debate has demonstrated the power of e-petitions to allowed to happen exactly as it has for hundreds of generate calm, sensible and rational debates on issues years. In the summer, a comprehensive food labelling petitioners wish to raise with us. report will come from the European Commission. The I start from the principle that we should look at the Government of the day will then have to make a decision. definition of stunning, because it has not been referred to I would welcome the Government’s and Opposition’s during the debate. The EU definition is that stunning is view on what they would do about that report if their “any intentionally induced process which causes loss of consciousness party were to form the next Government. The process is and sensibility without pain, including any process resulting in important. instantaneous death” The regulations that apply to shechita, in particular, by causing immediate cerebral perfusion. That is my are important. The animal’s throat must be cut by one starting point. rapid, uninterrupted movement of the knife. Both the 35WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 36WH

[Bob Blackman] Government and is based on well established scientific consensus, which points to evidence that slaughter without carotid arteries and both jugular veins must be severed, pre-stunning causes pain and distress. The EU-funded and the knife used to slaughter the animal must be DIALREL project, a DEFRA and New Zealand Ministry inspected before each animal is slaughtered, to make of Agriculture and Forestry research study, a European sure it is of sufficient size and sharpness to slaughter Food Safety Authority study, and the Farm Animal that animal and render it deceased immediately. Since Welfare Committee, among others, have come to the March 1999, under the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter same conclusion. Some, in defence of non-stun slaughter or Killing) (Amendment) Regulations 1999, such religious for religious reasons, contest the evidence; but the slaughter has been able to take place only in a licensed mainstream scientific consensus is well established. There slaughterhouse. The relevant European Council regulation is, however, an exemption within EU and UK law to requires stunning before slaughter, but allows member allow religious slaughter for kosher and halal meat. states to exempt religious slaughter. However, they can Labour would prefer that all animals be stunned before impose stricter rules if they wish. I invite the Opposition slaughter, but we support the exemption, which allows and the Government to state their position on whether for production and consumption of kosher and halal they will continue with the derogations. That will give meat. There is of course a delicate balance to be struck an important signal to the community. between the pressing need to respect different religious I share the view of many hon. Members who have communities and beliefs in the UK, and the equally spoken in the debate that there is a growing feeling of pressing need for animal welfare and the reduction of anti-Semitism and of Islamophobia in this country. The suffering and distress in slaughter. public’s attitudes have given rise to great concern, The Labour party also believes strongly that consumer particularly among the Jewish community.Those concerns interests are best served through transparency in food must be treated appropriately. I received many e-mails production and processing, and that consumers have a before the debate from constituents who believe that right to know where their food comes from, and how it their way of life is being directly threatened and attacked. was reared and slaughtered. We believe that that labelling We need to send the strong signal that they are British to show different methods of slaughter, or simply stun and deserve to be treated appropriately. Their way of or non-stun slaughter, has merit, but that it is best life must be respected. debated and agreed at an EU level to ensure a clear and consistent approach across all EU member states. We 6.53 pm hope that today the Minister will be able to reveal some progress with the extended European Commission study Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab): This has been on labelling, which was originally expected to report an excellent debate. I congratulate the hon. Member for in 2014. Kettering (Mr Hollobone) on introducing it, and on his calm and reasoned approach to the subject matter. I The Minister might also want to comment on the also congratulate the other right hon. and hon. Members practicality of an industry-led UK-only scheme, in response who have made speeches or interventions, including to consumer concerns. The British trade body for the my hon. Friends the Members for Birmingham, beef and sheep industry, EBLEX, led a consultation in Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood), for Liverpool, Riverside 2013 on such a scheme, and the British Veterinary (Mrs Ellman) and for Hackney North and Stoke Newington Association, of which I am an honorary associate member, (Ms Abbott), the right hon. Members for South East the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Cambridgeshire (Sir James Paice) and for Clwyd West Animals and the Humane Slaughter Association have (Mr Jones), and the hon. Members for Watford (Richard advocated the adoption of a simple logo to indicate Harrington), for Thirsk and Malton (Miss McIntosh), whether the animal was stunned before slaughter. Has for Hendon (Dr Offord), for Tiverton and Honiton the Minister had any discussions with those trade bodies (Neil Parish), for Finchley and Golders Green (Mike or other organisations on the practicality of implementing Freer) and for Harrow East (Bob Blackman). All brought a UK-only scheme—perhaps industry-led, and perhaps well informed views to the debate and spoke passionately a voluntary approach? Will the Minister also reveal on behalf of their constituents. There have been urban what discussions, if any, he has had with consumer and rural, agricultural and non-agricultural, religious organisations about the changing levels of concern—or and non-religious views put forward. The animal welfare otherwise—of UK consumers, given heightened media considerations have been wide-ranging, and I hope that coverage of the issue in recent times? What is the people who read the report of the debate will, like current level of consumer demand in the UK for clear me—and, I think, other Members—feel better informed labelling on methods of slaughter, or simply on stunned because of the debate and this afternoon’s parliamentary or non-stunned slaughter? work. Many organisations have come together to demand a I forget who made the comment this afternoon that total ban on slaughter without pre-stunning. The Labour religious communities are deeply concerned with animal party commends their focus on animal welfare, which is welfare. I put that top and foremost in my speech, something that we have long championed. Only last because it is right. Those who condemn the slaughter week, the shadow Secretary of State, my hon. Friend practices of religious communities should be aware that the Member for Garston and Halewood (Maria Eagle), those who practice shechita or halal do it with the best launched Labour’s wide-ranging animal welfare proposals, interest of the animal in mind, and attempt to do that to which were warmly welcomed. the highest standard. However, the call for an outright ban on pre-stunned The Labour party position is that we would prefer it slaughter would have significant consequences. It would if all animals were stunned before slaughter. That is a end the non-stunned slaughter for kosher and halal long-held policy position shared with Her Majesty’s meat in the UK, which would of course impact on 37WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 38WH religious communities. It would not, to my understanding, this debate. Members from all parties have expressed ban the importation of non-stunned meat from other frustration at the fact that we debated this issue as countries, where we have no direct control over methods recently as November, but let me be clear: I have always of slaughter. If done in the UK, at least we can effectively been of the view that debate never does harm to a regulate and enforce the highest standards of animal democracy such as ours. This issue has been debated in welfare for stunned and non-stunned slaughter. When Parliament since 1875 and if reports are to be believed standards of slaughter fall short, as they have in recent that another petition has also exceeded 100,000 signatories, examples highlighted by Animal Aid and others, action no doubt we will discuss it again, perhaps even before can be and is taken decisively by UK authorities. For the general election. animal welfare considerations, therefore, exponents of a The reason for that is the importance of this issue to ban need to be sure that we would not simply offshore the public. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for non-stunned slaughter to other countries where we have Kettering (Mr Hollobone) that the new procedure that no such controls. enables members of the public to force debate on issues Let me be absolutely clear: banning the production of that are important to them is a good one. It is healthy non-stunned meat will not lead automatically to the end for our democracy, so we should embrace and support of the consumption of non-stunned meat. For many it. I remember that he chaired the previous debate, Muslims and Jews, there is no alternative to consumption which took place here back in November, when I dealt of meat slaughtered in accordance with their religious with many of these issues. He may recall that I set out beliefs, or an interpretation of religious beliefs that some of the historical context. Given that some hon. stipulates that an animal may not be stunned. Members here were not at that debate, it might be useful Organisations such as the RSPCA, the BVA, the to summarise briefly some of that context again. Humane Slaughter Association and others have come European and domestic regulations, which apply to together with reasonable questions for the Minister on the welfare of all animals slaughtered, require that all measures that fall short of a ban, but could improve animals are stunned before slaughter. However, there is animal welfare at slaughter. I ask him for his response to a long-standing derogation to allow slaughter without their suggestions, which he will have had time to consider stunning in accordance with religious rites for the before the debate. First, what consideration have the production of halal or kosher meat. Government given to the German approach, which Our current national requirements on religious slaughter places a requirement on abattoirs to demonstrate religious have a long history. The Government first set down need and demand, and to define precisely the numbers powers to prevent cruelty in slaughterhouses through to be slaughtered for the demand of that religious the Public Health Act 1875, and byelaws made under community, as a condition of being granted a licence that legislation required animals to be “effectually stunned”. for non-stunned slaughter? The logic is that that restricts In 1904, the Admiralty set up a committee to ascertain non-stunned slaughter to a minimum, and avoids excessive the most humane and practical methods of slaughtering and unnecessary non-stunned slaughter, in which ultimately animals. Its report recommended, without exception, surplus meat is diverted away from those communities that all animals should be stunned before slaughter. and into the wider UK and EU supply chain. Following that report, the Local Government Board What discussions has the Minister had with our issued a circular proposing that the recommendations Muslim and Jewish community leaders and organisations of the Admiralty’s committee should be implemented, in the UK on greater use of post-cut stunning to reduce but stunning should not be obligatory where slaughter animals’ distress and suffering? Does he, as Members was carried out by a Jew, licensed by the Chief Rabbi, have said today, see scope for progress on that? Post-cut provided that no unnecessary suffering was inflicted. It stunning would be a significant step forward on animal is interesting that a similar requirement for shechita welfare. While countries such as Finland, Estonia, Austria, slaughter—that it is carried out by a Jewish slaughterman, Slovakia and Australia have made that mandatory, we licensed by the Rabbinical Commission—still exists in want to see our religious communities work with the our national legislation. Government to achieve that without mandation, if possible. The first national legislative requirement for stunning Labour will continue to speak up for animal welfare was brought in under the Slaughter of Animals Act and consumer rights while respecting religious communities. 1933, as I think the hon. Member for Birmingham, There is work to be done by Government, but also by Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood) alluded to. That also and with organisations concerned with animal welfare contained an exception from stunning for slaughter for and those religious communities affected, who are also Jews and Muslims. Over the years the national rules hugely concerned with animal welfare. We are committed governing religious slaughter have developed to provide to taking this matter forward when we are in government, protection to animals that are slaughtered in accordance working with all concerned to ensure the highest standards with religious rites. That brings me to the current situation. of animal welfare at slaughter, and building on our Our existing national rules on religious slaughter, long-standing support for improving welfare standards which are set out in schedule 12 to the Welfare of in production and processing of Great British food and Animals (Slaughter and Killing) Regulations 1995, provide in our fisheries. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s greater protection than those contained in the European response. regulation. For example, there are requirements on how cattle can be restrained: we require bovines to be restrained only in pens that meet the requirements set down in the 7.4 pm regulations. Such pens must be of suitable size and design, TheParliamentaryUnder-Secretaryof StateforEnvironment, and include a suitable head restraint and a means of Food and Rural Affairs (George Eustice): I congratulate support that will take the animal’s weight during and all the members of the public who signed the petition following slaughter—a belly support. All pens must go and for getting it past the 100,000 threshold to secure through a rigorous procedure before approval is given. 39WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 40WH

[George Eustice] As my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering pointed out, there are also differing requirements right across Furthermore, unlike member states such as France Europe, as provided for in the European regulations. In and the Netherlands, we do not allow inversion of cattle Germany, for example, abattoirs have to prove the religious for religious slaughter. That ban followed the 1985 report needs and the number of animals to be slaughtered to of the then Farm Animal Welfare Council, which satisfy the needs of the religious community concerned recommended that inversion should be banned. The before being granted a licence. My hon. Friend asked reason it gave was whether we could look at that further, as did the shadow “the terror and discomfort which ensue from the inversion of Minister. It is an interesting area and following this cattle in the rotary pen”. debate, given the apparent support from hon. Members, The FAWC went on to recommend I would be willing to look at it. However, the existing “that the law be amended to permit the use of a pen which standstill times are already a powerful disincentive for restrains the animal in a standing position provided that the the mainstreaming of religious slaughter, because they design of the pen, which must be approved by Ministers, incorporates make the process much slower. It is therefore not really effective restraint and support for the animal”. in the interests of any abattoir to conduct religious Other recommendations from that important 1985 slaughter in accordance with the regulations unless it is FAWC report have been part of our national rules for for a specific need. some 25 years. They include, for instance, that no animal should be placed in a restraining pen until the slaughterman Mr David Jones: Why are such a high proportion of is in position and ready to carry out the incision. The sheep and goats being killed by the non-stun method? regulations also require that a captive bolt gun must be The figure is 15%, as we have heard, whereas the Jewish kept close to the restraining pen in case of any emergency— and Muslim population of this country accounts for for example, if the animal does not become unconscious only some 5% of the total population. due to the occlusion of the arteries in its neck. George Eustice: I am not sure. I will have to check Miss McIntosh: The Bowood episode clearly shows those particular figures. We know, for instance, that that the regulations might not be being followed to the around 73% of all halal meat slaughtered is already letter, so who is responsible for ensuring that they are? stunned before it is slaughtered, and as many hon. George Eustice: The food business operator—the Members pointed out, the amount of kosher meat on operator of the abattoir—is legally required to ensure the market is a very small proportion. However, this is that those are followed, but I point out that an official an interesting area, and it is something that I have veterinarian is present at every abattoir and it is their looked at. I do not think that it gets away from the job to enforce them. I shall return to the issue of broader dilemma of the debate, but nevertheless, it is enforcement later. worthy of further consideration. In addition, the regulations require that before each In the Netherlands, all animals must be stunned if animal is slaughtered, the knife must be checked to they have not lost consciousness within 40 seconds of ensure it is sharp and undamaged, and that the cut must the cut. In France, there must be a post-cut stun if cattle be a rapid and uninterrupted movement that cuts both are still conscious after 90 seconds. Other countries—notably carotid arteries and veins. Finland, Austria, Estonia and Slovakia—go further in Other national rules concern the so-called standstill requiring immediate post-cut stunning, whereas Denmark times for cattle, sheep and goats: following the neck cut, requires post-cut stunning in bovines only. the animal cannot be moved, in the case of bovines, Further afield, as several hon. Members have pointed until it is unconscious and at least 30 seconds have out, under Australian law, stunning at slaughter is required, passed, or, in the case of sheep and goats, until at least but there is an option for a state or meat inspection 20 seconds have passed. The standstill times aim to authority to provide an exemption and approve an provide protection from avoidable pain, suffering and abattoir for ritual slaughter without prior stunning for distress caused, for example, by unnecessary movement the domestic market, but post-cut stunning is still a while the animal is still conscious. requirement for those animals. Although there are no standstill rules as such for As we have plenty of time, I want to move on to other poultry, there are still a number of national rules that points that hon. Members have raised. Having discussed aim to minimise pain, suffering and distress. Following this issue with my right hon. Friend the Member for the neck cut, no further dressing procedure can be South East Cambridgeshire (Sir James Paice), who was carried out on the bird until it is unconscious and at one of my predecessors in this role, I know that this is least two minutes have elapsed, in the case of turkeys something he has looked at. I can tell him that I have and geese; for all other birds it is 90 seconds. looked at it in equal detail since and that finding a I set those regulations out in detail because it is consensus among the various parties concerned is no important to recognise that there are special, strict easier than it ever was. However, I want to pick up on a requirements where religious slaughter is carried out. few issues that he highlighted. However, hon. Members should recognise another My right hon. Friend described a situation in an important point: none of the exemptions we have for abattoir in which several sheep were inaVrestrainer religious slaughter exempt any operator from their conveyor simultaneously. That would be a breach of the obligations under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. It is the existing regulations. There should never be more than role of the official veterinarians in the abattoirs to one sheep in a sheep restrainer for the purposes of decide when it may be necessary to go in, as required religious slaughter, because, as I have pointed out, the under the regulations, and use a bolt gun where something requirement is very clear that they cannot go into the goes wrong. I shall return to that point later. slaughter pen—in this case, the V restrainer—until they 41WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 42WH are ready to be slaughtered. That is very important, consensus—is that we have to look at the scientific because sheep have a natural tendency to want to flock, evidence that we have, and the argument that says that and putting them in a restrainer where they are held the cut itself is equivalent to a stun is not borne out by firm, while there are the standstill times and other sheep the scientific evidence. As the shadow Minister pointed taking 15 or 20 seconds ahead of them, is not right. out, we had in 2003 the Farm Animal Welfare Committee That is a breach of the existing regulations. report, which concluded that non-stun slaughter could My right hon. Friend raised valid points on the time cause distress and suffering. In 2004, we had the European to unconsciousness. I remember well him describing to Food Safety Authority report, which also concluded me seeing cattle take up to six minutes to lose consciousness. that it was preferable to have stunning of all animals. In I hear various ranges for the time to loss of consciousness. 2009, the EU DIALREL report reached the same There is a consensus that chickens are normally unconscious conclusion. It looked at neurological surveys of animals within 15 to 20 seconds. Likewise, I am told that 10 to that were being slaughtered in order to establish scientifically 15 seconds is typical in the case of sheep, as he pointed whether they were experiencing pain. More recently, out, and sometimes it is a little longer. However, when it work in New Zealand has confirmed the same. It is comes to cattle, it is clear that there can be quite wide therefore important that we recognise the basis on variances. He says that he witnessed cattle taking between which the exemption exists. It is not because we think four and six minutes to lose consciousness. I have discussed that somehow religious slaughter, be it halal or shechita, the matter with our veterinary advisers, some of whom is a more humane way to slaughter animals than what have worked as OVs in abattoirs, and they tell me that it mainstream abattoirs do today. It is because we respect is more typical that, after around 40 seconds, the animal the religious rights of those communities and we have will collapse and go off its legs, and be supported by the accommodated them in the long-standing derogations restraining pen, and that it will typically then lose that we have in place. consciousness after 1 minute 20 seconds. That is still My hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton quite a lot of time, but it is why France has a cut-off (Miss McIntosh) raised the issue of CCTV, on which we point of 1 minute 30 seconds, after which a post-cut stun have recently had a report from the Farm Animal is required. At the other extreme, I have met former Welfare Committee. It stops short of saying that there staff of the FSA who have told me that they have seen should be compulsory use of CCTV in slaughterhouses. shechita abattoirs do this particularly effectively, with We should recognise that the place in her constituency the animal collapsing within 10 seconds. about which concerns were raised did have CCTV, so it It is also clear that in many of these abattoirs, both is no panacea on its own. However, the FAWC report halal and shechita—the best ones—where anything goes does conclude that many advantages come with CCTV. wrong, they are in quickly with the bolt gun to put the It can also help business managers to manage their animal out of any pain. That is why I want again to talk operation. For instance, it can reveal lameness in sheep about the Animal Welfare Act 2006, under which there in the lairage pens that would not otherwise be detected. is a requirement on an abattoir operator not to cause If used correctly, CCTV can be a very useful tool to any unnecessary suffering to an animal. Where something help business managers to ensure that they are compliant goes wrong—where, for example, it takes up to five or with the regulation and to manage their business operations. six minutes for the animal to lose consciousness—there My hon. Friend also mentioned enforcement. I will come is a clear rationale for an official veterinarian to intervene to that at the end. Labelling was the other issue that a earlier to say that something had gone wrong and that, number of hon. Members raised, and I want to deal with as required under the regulations, the animal should be that. There is a European Commission working group. The dispatched with a bolt gun. shadow Minister asked about the timing of the report. Further to the fact that I have never been able to get a It is one of those EU reports that has been delayed and clear answer on exactly how long it takes for bovines in delayed. We initially expected it last summer, then we particular to lose consciousness, some months ago I expected it in the new year, and the latest update that asked our deputy chief veterinary officer to conduct a I have had is that it is still some months away, which I think piece of work with the FSA to look at the matter afresh reflects the fact that this is a difficult issue to get right. and see whether we can, without changing any laws, ensure that we have consistent application of the existing Let me give some general pointers. First, there is a laws and consistent understanding of when it is appropriate very clear legal definition, both in our own law and in for an OV to require that post-cut shot to be taken. European law, of what stunned means for the purposes of abattoirs. It is rendering an animal insensitive to pain Let me move on to other points. Various hon. Members instantly or almost instantly, so I think that we can be questioned the science of whether it is better for the clear that we could have “Stunned” or “Unstunned” as welfare of the animals for them to be stunned prior to a form of labelling. My right hon. Friend the Member slaughter. In particular, my hon. Friend the Member for for South East Cambridgeshire made a very good point Finchley and Golders Green (Mike Freer) made the about the inability to enforce that sometimes. It would good point, which I will concede, that at the time when not be easy and it would not necessarily protect all halal and kosher were designed, they were very much those people who were buying their food from catering about respect for the animal and sparing it any unnecessary establishments, either. There are difficulties in labelling pain. The genesis of both halal and kosher was about things just as “Halal” or “Kosher”. As a number of hon. animal welfare, albeit that was some time ago. Members pointed out, not all parts of the carcase are I also completely accept that there can be good and deemed kosher, even though the animal may have been bad abattoirs. It may be that conventional abattoirs slaughtered by kosher methods, and there is no single, would also mistreat the animals. I completely recognise uniform interpretation of what halal means. Different the point that there are big differences. The only thing imams have different interpretations of the rules. We that I would say—this is where there is strong cross-party therefore await the report from the European Commission. 43WH Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter)23 FEBRUARY 2015 Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) 44WH

[George Eustice] We have had a very good, informative debate, covering a wide range of issues. It has been a pleasure to be here I have heard it said that there could be labelling that just to debate this issue again. said “Unstunned” if the animal had not been stunned, 7.27 pm but again this, like other issues, is not easy. Mr Hollobone: It is a huge pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the conclusion of the debate, Ms Abbott: I am always gripped by discussions about Mr Havard. We must all thank the petitioners—the the European Commission, but will the Minister comment people who signed the petition to allow us to have the on the point that concerns my constituents, which is debate. Should any of the 116,000 be watching—some that for some of the people involved in the push against very good people have come along to the Public Gallery—I halal and shechita, animal welfare is merely a flag of hope that they will have been impressed by the range of convenience? That is what concerns my constituents. views and the way in which the debate was conducted. They are very happy to make slaughter safer and more A former DEFRA Minister, my right hon. Friend the humane, but they are worried about the motivation of Member for South East Cambridgeshire (Sir James some of the people who are pushing this issue and who Paice), made extremely informative remarks. The Chairman keep coming back to it. of the EFRA Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Miss McIntosh), expressed her George Eustice: I know that the hon. Lady made that constituents’ shock at affairs at Bowood abattoir. The point previously. I do not think that there has been Chairman of another Select Committee, the hon. Member anything in the debate today to suggest that that is the for Liverpool, Riverside (Mrs Ellman), represented the case among hon. Members taking part in it, and indeed Jewish community extremely well. A practising Muslim, the motion itself makes it absolutely clear that it is the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Shabana looking just at the animal welfare issue, so I am not sure Mahmood), expressed the views of those who consume that we should go down that route. halal products. A Jewish MP who does not eat kosher food, my hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Richard In conclusion, as my hon. Friend the Member for Harrington), has beaten the rest of us, because he has Watford (Richard Harrington) pointed out, the Government already taken the case to No. 10 and got the Prime Minister have no plans at all to ban religious slaughter. My right on board. The representative of one of the largest Jewish hon. Friend the Prime Minister has been absolutely communities in the UK, my hon. Friend the Member clear that there is no intention to ban religious slaughter. for Finchley and Golders Green (Mike Freer), stressed However, everyone agrees that we need good enforcement the high standards of training in shechita abattoirs. of our existing legislation. Indeed, three Members have visited abattoirs, and there is nothing like seeing things at first hand. The chairman Huw Irranca-Davies: Does the Minister see any scope of the all-party parliamentary group for beef and lamb, for progress on post-cut stunning, which would be a real my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Honiton step forward? Several hon. Members raised that. (Neil Parish), made an excellent contribution. A former Cabinet member from north Wales, my right hon. Friend the Member for Clwyd West (Mr Jones), also gave us his George Eustice: Yes, and I am going to come to that, views and stressed the need to look at the German but my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton system. mentioned enforcement and I can confirm that today, This issue is not going to go away. No doubt we will following a number of incidents, the FSA has begun a be back in a few weeks’ time with the hon. Member for series of unannounced inspections of GB slaughterhouses, Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott) and by the end of March all approved slaughterhouses representing the 125,000 people who have signed the will have been subject to an unannounced inspection. e-petition in favour of religious slaughter. Labelling is a On the shadow Minister’s point, in the longer term, key issue. The extent of mis-stunning has shocked us we may be able to learn lessons from other countries. all. I have not heard anyone speak out against CCTV in Some other countries have managed to accommodate all slaughterhouses, and a very strong case was made or reconcile the beliefs of Jewish and Muslim communities for post-cut stunning. while having a slightly different approach from us. A I hope the Minister has been impressed by the strength number of countries, including Holland and France, do and variety of contributions made to him. I am sure that have a requirement for a post-cut stun in a particular he will stick to his commitment to look at these issues in time scale. It is not easy to get consensus among the greater detail, because the public out there want Parliament religious communities for that, but we should also —our Parliament—to do something about this. recognise, as I said at the beginning, that in many Question put and agreed to. respects our national rules are better than those elsewhere in Europe, especially on the issue of inversion, which is, 7.30 pm according to all advice, quite serious. Sitting adjourned. 1WS Written Statements23 FEBRUARY 2015 Written Statements 2WS Written Statements Government Lobbying Government Under the last Administration, there was an endemic practice of Government bodies hiring lobbyists to lobby Monday 23 February 2015 the Government and political parties, as illustrated in the answer of 10 October 2013, Official Report, BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS column 395W. In 2010, I instructed all our arms length bodies to cancel such contracts. Competitiveness Council (Pre-Council Statement) Reflecting commitments made by the Conservative party in opposition, the Cabinet Office also subsequently published clear guidance to non-departmental public The Minister for Universities, Science and Cities (Greg bodies to stop payments being made to lobby. This Clark): My noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State includes firms and consultants engaged in the enthusiasms for Business, Innovation and Skills, Minister with of “political consultancy”, “stakeholder management”, responsibility for intellectual property (Baroness Neville- “strategic communications”, “public affairs”, “policy Rolfe) will today make the following statement: tracking”, “advocacy”, “strategic counsel”and “engagement The European Competitiveness Council will take place on with public policy makers and opinion formers”. Monday 2 March and Tuesday 3 March. I will represent the UK In 2011, my Department issued a revised Code of on day one (industry and internal market) and representation on Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity day two (research, innovation and space) is to be confirmed. making it clear that local authorities should not incur The internal market and industry substantive agenda items are any expenditure in retaining the services of lobbyists for the EU single market and EU industrial competitiveness. Under the purpose of the publication of any material designed the EU single market item the Commission will present on single market aspects of the “Annual Growth Survey 2015”, there will to influence public officials, Members of Parliament, be a policy debate on the investment plan for Europe and the political parties or the Government to take a particular presidency is planning to present single market conclusions for view on any issue. adoption. There is nothing wrong with private organisations Under the EU industrial competitiveness item there will be a using their own money to hire commercial firms for presentation from the Commission on the industrial policy aspects advice, provided it is done in an open and transparent of the annual growth survey and a policy debate on industrial manner; and this Government have legislated to put policy within future digital single market strategy. such transparency on a statutory footing. There is one legislative proposal on the agenda presented for public deliberation—the trade mark package. This is an update But “lobbying on the rates” is a wasteful, corrosive on the proposal for amendment of the Regulation on the Community and zero sum game for the public sector. The public Trade Mark and a proposal to recast the directive approximating sector never lobbies for lower taxes and less state spending the laws of member states relating to trade marks. —and is a prime example of “public choice” theory in Our objectives for the internal market and industry day are to: action—state bureaucracies using public funds to expand Agree conclusions on the single market that reflect UK their state empires. priorities; Lobbying by “Sock Puppets” Set out the UK’s position regarding industrial policy and the digital single market; and However, the practice of Government lobbying Government is not just confined to quangos. The Institute Highlight our continued priorities for the trade mark dossier. of Economic Affairs has undertaken extensive research The research, innovation and space day has two substantial on so-called “sock puppets”; they have exposed the policy discussions. There will be a presentation by the Commission extensive practice of taxpayers’ money being given to on the research and innovation aspects of the annual growth survey 2015 followed by a policy debate on fostering innovation pressure groups and supposed charities, in turn being and unlocking Europe’s potential for growth in the European used to lobby the Government and Parliament for more research area. money and more regulation. This is an issue which The second discussion is on unlocking Europe’s digital potential, needs to be addressed. based on a communication from the Commission on “Towards a My Department has set an example to the rest of thriving data-driven economy”. Whitehall by amending our standard grant agreements Our objectives for the research, innovation and space day to impose a new anti-lobbying, anti-sock puppet clause. are to: The simple, short but effective clause says: Intervene to emphasise the importance of co-ordination of “The following costs are not Eligible Expenditure:- Payments policies and investments to promote innovation and growth. that support activity intended to influence or attempt to influence To emphasise the importance of issues such as open data Parliament, Government or political parties, or attempting to and a dynamic and flexible digital single market to an influence the awarding or renewal of contracts and grants, or innovative EU data-driven economy. attempting to influence legislative or regulatory action”. [HCWS293] We hope this can and will be rolled out more widely across the public sector. COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT Lobbying by Local Enterprise Partnerships Protecting Public Money It has come to the Government’s attention that a small number of local enterprise partnerships have been hiring public affair consultancies to lobby the Government The Secretary of State for Communities and Local and Parliament. Government (Mr Eric Pickles): I would like to update BBC “Look East” has recently investigated how the House with steps that my Department is taking to Hertfordshire local enterprise partnership used the lobbyists protect taxpayers’ money. to bid for Government cash and set up meetings with 3WS Written Statements23 FEBRUARY 2015 Written Statements 4WS

MPs, MEPs and civil servants. I am aware of at least early in the programme to de-risk material supply, and a another five local enterprise partnerships which have full joint analysis of programme risk is completed before been paying for lobbyists. awarding a build contract. Using taxpayers’ funds to lobby Government wastes On current planning, and subject to a main gate public money and undermines transparency.Such lobbying decision, this will allow the manufacture phase to commence will not expand the quantum of public funding available in 2016 and maintain scheduled delivery of this new to local enterprise partnerships. Unless action is taken, capability to the Royal Navy in 2022. more local enterprise partnerships may feel pressured to [HCWS289] follow suit, diverting taxpayers’money away from enterprise and regeneration. It is the firm view of the Government that the same Logistics Commodities and Services Transformation principles should apply to local enterprise partnerships, Programme as councils and quangos. Local enterprise partnerships should not be hiring lobbyists to influence the awarding or renewal of contracts and grants, or to attempt to The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence influence legislative or regulatory action. This covers (Mr Philip Dunne): In July 2012, my predecessor, the lobbying in the broadest sense, as defined in the Cabinet hon. Member for Mid Worcestershire (Sir Peter Luff), Office guidance. Any local enterprise partnerships which informed the House about a transformation programme currently have hired lobbyists should terminate their within Logistic Commodities and Services (LCS), part contracts. They should pick up the phone instead. of Defence Equipment and Support. The Minister for Universities, Science and Cities, my The primary role for LCS is to provide support to right hon. Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells military operations by undertaking procurement and (Greg Clark) will be writing to local enterprise partnerships inventory management of commodity items (including shortly. food, clothing, packed fuel, general supplies and medical Lobbying by Local Authorities supplies), and the storage and distribution of these Thanks to the transparency agenda which this commodity items, together with other non-explosive Government have championed, it has also come to my stock across Defence. attention that a number of local authorities may be LCS(T) will provide significant operational effectiveness paying for lobbyists in potential non-compliance with by delivering improved responsiveness and agility. It the Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority will also improve efficiency in storage infrastructure; Publicity. Ministers are prepared to use our powers commodity procurement and logistic processes and under the Local Government Act 1986, as amended by rationalise inventory management and stock control for the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014, to stop commodity products. It is also expected to deliver financial such practices. savings of around £0.5 billion over the next 13 years I hope this sends a clear signal on how this Government ensuring that we continue to meet the needs of the will stand up and protect the interests of taxpayers, and Armed Forces of the future. rein in the spendthrift practices of state bureaucracy. The programme has now completed a very [HCWS292] comprehensive and detailed assessment phase and following a strong and rigorous competition I was pleased to announce last week that Leidos has been selected as the DEFENCE preferred bidder. While I would ordinarily have made such an announcement to the House first, in order to Type 26 Global Combat Ship avoid delaying the commercial process it was necessary to do so during recess. I will make a further statement to the House with final details of the transaction next The Secretary of State for Defence (Michael Fallon): month once contract negotiations have concluded. Today I am providing an update on our plans for taking [HCWS294] forward the Type 26 Global Combat Ship programme. Good progress has been made during the assessment phase on all aspects of the programme, and this work is now sufficiently mature to conclude this phase and TREASURY move forward into the demonstration phase with effect from 1 April 2015. In the demonstration phase, under a contract worth Double Taxation Convention : United Kingdom-Algeria £859 million, we will continue detailed design work and invest in shore-based testing facilities. We will also provide certainty to suppliers by purchasing key initial The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David equipment for three Type 26 GCS vessels. Careful Gauke): A Double Taxation Convention with Algeria negotiations have secured the best possible deal for this was signed on 18 February 2015. The text of the Convention equipment, ensuring that it represents a good investment has been deposited in the Library of both Houses and for the taxpayer. made available on the GOV.UKwebsite. The text will be In parallel, we will continue to work better to understand scheduled to a draft Order in Council and laid before programme schedule, cost and risk. This approach draws the House of Commons in due course. on key lessons from the Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft It is also available online at http://www.parliament.uk/ carrier programme by ensuring that the ship design is writtenstatements. sufficiently mature, the supply chain is fully mobilised [HCWS291] 5WS Written Statements23 FEBRUARY 2015 Written Statements 6WS

JUSTICE Paul Wilson has been appointed for an initial six months while we are recruiting for the permanent Chief Inspector. Chief Inspector Probation Mr Wilson has a track record of senior management within the probation field. He was previously Chief Executive of London Probation Trust. The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice The Justice select committee will be involved in the (Chris Grayling): I wish to inform the House that an appointment of a permanent successor in the usual way. interim Chief Inspector of Probation started on 19 February [HCWS290] 2015.

1P Petitions23 FEBRUARY 2015 Petitions 2P

provide various traffic management measures. We have Petition various publications on our website for the following topics; Monday 23 February 2015 Setting local speed limits - www.gov.uk/government/publications/setting-local- OBSERVATIONS speed-limits The Assessment of Pedestrian Crossings, The Design of Pedestrian Crossings and Traffic Calming – TRANSPORT www.gov.uk/government/publications/local- Traffic safety measures in Cartmel transport-notes The Petition of a resident of the UK, Guidance on the use of prescribed traffic signs – Declares that current traffic safety measures on the www.gov.uk/government/publications/traffic-signs- road outside Cartmel Priory School are insufficient and manual pose a safety risk to pupils and local residents and Mandatory requirements for specific traffic schemes further that a local petition on this matter was signed by such as regulatory traffic signs (speed limit signs) are set 255 individuals. out in current legislation and the advice and guidance The Petitioner therefore requests that the House of that we have published is given to assist local authorities Commons urges the Government to launch an urgent in their statutory duties. strategic review of traffic safety measures in the Cartmel The DFT has also issued an area-wide authorisation area and the implementation of further controls and to all traffic authorities in England which includes a restrictions. part-time advisory 20 mph limit sign for outside schools. And the Petitioner remains, etc.—[Presented by Tim The sign includes flashing school warning signals to Farron, Official Report, 26 January 2015; Vol. 591, draw attention to the static signing and may be placed c. 697.] on one side of the road only. The light signals must not [P001423] be in operation outside of school term times, as drivers may come to ignore them year-round if they are known Observations from the Secretary of State for Transport to operate when children are on holiday. It is not received 13 February 2015: mandatory that traffic authorities should use this or I recognise the importance of the provision of adequate any of the other authorised signs, it is just another measures to ensure the safety of children and all pedestrians signing combination that is available to them. in the vicinity of schools. Local highway authorities are This authorisation issued to Cumbria county council responsible for managing and maintaining the road may be viewed on a database on the DFT website and network in their area and each authority, in this case can be viewed at: Cumbria county council, has a duty to ensure that www.dft.gov.uk/traffic-auths/?search=2678 traffic is managed in such a way as to promote road safety. Measures to achieve this objective are available It is for the council to consider whether to meet the for local authorities to use and might include the setting requests of the petitioners by using any of the above of local speed limits (whether mandatory or advisory), measures to alleviate the problems identified near the placing warning signs near schools, providing crossings school. for children and providing traffic-calming features such In line with the coalition Government’s commitment as humps or chicanes. to localism, Ministers and officials have no remit to The DFT is responsible for setting legislation and for intervene in the day-to-day affairs of local authorities producing guidance to traffic authorities on how to except where specific provision has been made in legislation.

1MC Ministerial Corrections23 FEBRUARY 2015 Ministerial Corrections 2MC

£860 million over five years to tackling it. We are also Ministerial Correction working to increase the reporting of online offences to Action Fraud, and official figures show that the recorded Monday 23 February 2015 number of those crimes has nearly trebled since Action Fraud was set up. [Official Report, 9 February 2015, Vol. 592, c. 542.] HOME DEPARTMENT Letter of correction from Karen Bradley: An error has been identified in the oral answer given to Cyber and Online Crime the hon. Member for Bolton West (Julie Hilling) during The following is an extract from Questions to the Questions to the Secretary of State for the Home Secretary of State for the Home Department on 9 February Department. 2015. The correct response should have been:

10. Julie Hilling (Bolton West) (Lab): What The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the assessment she has made of changes in the level of Home Department (Karen Bradley): We take cyber security cyber and online crime in the last 12 months; and if she very seriously, and the Government have committed will make a statement. [907497] £860 million over five years to tackling it. We are also working to increase the reporting of online offences to The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Action Fraud, and official figures show that the recorded Home Department (Karen Bradley): We take cybercrime number of those crimes has nearly trebled since Action very seriously, and the Government have committed Fraud was set up.

ORAL ANSWERS

Monday 23 February 2015

Col. No. Col. No. DEFENCE...... 1 DEFENCE—continued Armed Forces Covenant ...... 1 Reserve Forces ...... 5 Armed Forces: Diversity ...... 9 Russian-made Military Aircraft: Argentina ...... 14 Armed Forces: Home Ownership...... 7 Service Personnel: Police Cautions...... 15 Defence Equipment Plan ...... 7 Strategic Defence and Security Review ...... 13 ISIL ...... 11 Topical Questions ...... 16 WRITTEN STATEMENTS

Monday 23 February 2015

Col. No. Col. No. BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS ...... 1WS DEFENCE—continued Competitiveness Council (Pre-Council Statement). 1WS Type 26 Global Combat Ship...... 3WS

COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT.. 1WS JUSTICE...... 5WS Protecting Public Money...... 1WS Chief Inspector Probation ...... 5WS DEFENCE...... 3WS TREASURY ...... 4WS Logistics Commodities and Services Double Taxation Convention : United Transformation Programme...... 4WS Kingdom-Algeria...... 4WS PETITION

Monday 23 February 2015

Col. No. Col. No. TRANSPORT ...... 1P Traffic safety measures in Cartmel ...... 1P MINISTERIAL CORRECTION

Monday 23 February 2015

Col. No. HOME DEPARTMENT...... 1MC Cyber and Online Crime ...... 1MC Members who wish to have the Daily Report of the Debates forwarded to them should give notice at the Vote Office. No proofs of the Daily Reports can be supplied. Corrections which Members suggest for the Bound Volume should be clearly marked in the Daily Report, but not telephoned, and the copy containing the Corrections must be received at the Editor’s Room, House of Commons,

not later than Monday 2 March 2015

STRICT ADHERENCE TO THIS ARRANGEMENT GREATLY FACILITATES THE PROMPT PUBLICATION OF THE VOLUMES

Members may obtain excerpts of their Speeches from the Official Report (within one month from the date of publication), on application to the Stationery Office, c/o the Editor of the Official Report, House of Commons, from whom the terms and conditions of reprinting may be ascertained. Application forms are available at the Vote Office.

PRICES AND SUBSCRIPTION RATES DAILY PARTS Single copies: Commons, £5; Lords, £4. Annual subscriptions: Commons, £865; Lords, £600. LORDS VOLUME INDEX obtainable on standing order only. Details available on request. BOUND VOLUMES OF DEBATES are issued periodically during the session. Single copies: Commons, £105; Lords, £60 (£100 for a two-volume edition). Standing orders will be accepted. THE INDEX to each Bound Volumeof House of Commons Debates is published separately at £9·00 and can be supplied to standing order. All prices are inclusive of postage Volume 593 Monday No. 111 23 February 2015

CONTENTS

Monday 23 February 2015

List of Government and Principal Officers of the House

Oral Answers to Questions [Col. 1] [see index inside back page] Secretary of State for Defence

Tax Avoidance (HSBC) [Col. 23] Answer to urgent question—(Chancellor of the Exchequer)

European Council [Col. 35] Statement—(Prime Minister)

Serious Crime Bill [Lords] [Col. 50] As amended, considered; read the Third time and passed

Oesophageal Cancer [Col. 165] Debate on motion for Adjournment

Westminster Hall Animal Welfare (Non-stun Slaughter) [Col. 1WH] Debate on motion for Adjournment

Written Statements [Col. 1WS]

Petition [Col. 1P] Observations

Ministerial Correction [Col. 1MC]

Written Answers to Questions [The written answers can now be found at http://www.parliament.uk/writtenanswers]