Vol. 810 Wednesday No. 200 10 March 2021

PARLIAMENTARYDEBATES (HANSARD) HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICIAL REPORT

ORDEROFBUSINESS

Questions Modern Foreign Languages: Teachers...... 1603 Covid-19: Women...... 1606 Global Navigation Satellite System ...... 1610 Myanmar: Protesters ...... 1613 Northern Ireland Protocol: Grace Period Private Notice Question ...... 1617 House of Lords Commission Motion to Agree...... 1622 Domestic Abuse Bill Report (2nd Day) ...... 1625

Grand Committee Financial Services Bill Committee (6th Day)...... GC 661 Lords wishing to be supplied with these Daily Reports should give notice to this effect to the Printed Paper Office. No proofs of Daily Reports are provided. Corrections for the bound volume which Lords wish to suggest to the report of their speeches should be clearly indicated in a copy of the Daily Report, which, with the column numbers concerned shown on the front cover, should be sent to the Editor of Debates, House of Lords, within 14 days of the date of the Daily Report. This issue of the Official Report is also available on the Internet at https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2021-03-10

In Hybrid sittings, [V] after a Member’s name indicates that they contributed by video call.

The following abbreviations are used to show a Member’s party affiliation: Abbreviation Party/Group CB Cross Bench Con Conservative DUP Democratic Unionist Party GP Green Party Ind Lab Independent Labour Ind LD Independent Liberal Democrat Ind SD Independent Social Democrat Ind UU Independent Ulster Unionist Lab Labour Lab Co-op Labour and Co-operative Party LD Liberal Democrat LD Ind Liberal Democrat Independent Non-afl Non-affiliated PC Plaid Cymru UKIP UK Independence Party UUP Ulster Unionist Party

No party affiliation is given for Members serving the House in a formal capacity, the Lords spiritual, Members on leave of absence or Members who are otherwise disqualified from sitting in the House. © Parliamentary Copyright House of Lords 2021, this publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 1603 Arrangement of Business[10 MARCH 2021] Modern Foreign Languages: Teachers 1604

House of Lords Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, we hope that the increase in trainees will be permanent, but unfortunately Wednesday 10 March 2021 we have had to make some difficult financial decisions The House met in a hybrid proceeding. in relation to the ITT bursary offer. As a result, we are offering the highest bursaries for those subjects where 12 pm it is hardest to attract people, which are STEM subjects, because those graduates can command higher wages Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Worcester. in jobs outside teaching.

Arrangement of Business Lord Judd (Lab) [V]: My Lords, does the Minister agree that if we are to have any hope of fulfilling the Announcement role that our Prime Minister sees for us as a leading 12.07 pm nation in the world, we cannot give too much investment, support and encouragement to the teaching of foreign The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith): languages? For commerce and trade, they are vital. My Lords, the Hybrid Sitting of the House will now Also important—and, in my experience,indispensable—is begin. Some Members are here in the Chamber, while the terrific record built up in international institutions others are participating remotely, but all Members will by those from Great Britain participating as translators be treated equally. I ask all Members to respect social and interpreters. It is a wonderful way of having distancing. If the capacity of the Chamber is exceeded, friendships— I will immediately adjourn the House. Oral Questions willnowcommence.Pleasecanthoseaskingsupplementary The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) questions keep them no longer than 30 seconds and (Con): I am sorry to interrupt the noble Lord, but will confined to two points. I ask that Ministers’ answers he please ask his question? are also brief. Baroness Berridge (Con): We agree with the noble Modern Foreign Languages: Teachers Lord. As part of global Britain, we are encouraging Question the take-up of modern foreign languages. That is why they are included in the EBacc. We want schools to 12.08 pm offer this to all students. Asked by Baroness Coussins Lord Austin of Dudley (Non-Afl) [V]: My Lords, Toask Her Majesty’sGovernment what assessment instead of dealing with different subject areas or areas they have made of the supply chain of teachers of of the curriculum in isolation or piecemeal, do we not modern foreign languages. need a serious, in-depth, cross-party inquiry that includes the teaching profession, business, educational experts Baroness Coussins (CB): My Lords, I beg leave to and so on to work out what young people need to be ask the Question standing in my name on the Order taught and how they should learn it, to equip them for Paper and declare an interest as co-chair of the All-Party the modern economy,to open up opportunity,to promote Parliamentary Group on Modern Languages. social mobility and to enable our country to compete internationally? TheParliamentaryUnder-Secretaryof State,Department for Education and Department for International Trade (Baroness Berridge) (Con): My Lords, we continue to Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, we have looked monitorcloselythemodernforeignlanguage—MFL—teacher at the curriculum over the past 10 years and we responded supply and offer bursaries worth up to £10,000 tax free to the 2015 Ofsted review into the teaching and learning to encourage talented trainees into MFL. In 2020-21, of modern foreign languages with a £4.8 million pedagogy there were 1,687 postgraduate trainees in MFL, an hub to try to increase the standard of teaching of modern increase of 300 on the previous year and accounting foreign languages. for 72% of the annual target that we set for recruiting postgraduate trainee teachers. In 2019-20, 93% of MFL Baroness Hooper (Con): My Lords, given that Spanish trainees gained qualified teacher status and 74% of is a world language—as trade envoy to three countries them started teaching in state schools. in Latin America, I am aware of the focus on the education sector—does my noble friend agree that in Baroness Coussins (CB): My Lords, against that developing institutional links with schools and universities backdrop of a 28% shortfall and a drop of more than in Latin America we should encourage the reciprocal one-third in students doing MFL degrees since 2011, I exchange of teachers in order not only to teach English congratulate the Government on their change of heart in Latin America but to boost the teaching of Spanish in deciding last week to add all MFL teachers to the in our schools? shortage occupations list. This year’s small increase of 300 is by all accounts going to be temporary, so will Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, due to the the Government now also quickly reverse the dramatic recent changes in our immigration law, teachers from cut in MFL training bursaries from £26,000 to only Latin America will apply on a points-based system £10,000, as mentioned by the Minister? MFL is the only with the short-of-supply criterion on the same basis as shortage subject to suffer such a cut. everybody else. Through the Turing scheme, institutions, 1605 Modern Foreign Languages: Teachers[LORDS] Covid-19: Women 1606

[BARONESS BERRIDGE] makes no sense. The bursaries should have been retained including schools, will be able to apply for funds to do as the result of an educational decision. There is a that, but there is currently no arrangement for reciprocal pattern here: the latest figures for the recruitment of teaching exchanges. language teachers showed that only 72% of the target was met, yet the DfE is ending its system of early Lord Flight (Con): My Lords, the volume of foreign career payments of up to £3,000, which were aimed at language graduates has been on a declining trend for aiding teacher retention. As our distance from the EU some time, thus reducing the supply chain of foreign grows, how can the Government justify making a language teachers. I believe that this trend is likely to career as a language teacher less attractive? continue and, as a result, the provision of modern foreign language degree courses will end up being confined to Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, in relation to a limited number of universities specialising in this the applicants we have seen this year, modern foreign territory. Does the Minister agree? language teaching is an attractive option in our country. Wehad to make some difficult choices. STEM graduates Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, as I outlined in command higher salaries outside the teaching sector, the figures, we are seeing increasing numbers of those which was the justification for retaining a similar level applying to teach in our schools. That is important for of bursary for STEM as opposed to MFL. Other initial the supply chain and to make sure that there is good- financial incentives, such as student loan reimbursements, quality teaching, as it is a requirement of the EBacc to are retained for those who are already part of the take a modern foreign language. In addition to initial scheme, but they were ended for all—including STEM— teacher training, there is now the early career framework graduates. There were difficult decisions to be made —professional development support—for two years, across the board. so that this is seen as comparable to professions such as law and accountancy in those terms. Baroness Janke (LD) [V]: My Lords, whole cohorts of children have been denied the rich cultural experience Lord Harries of Pentregarth (CB) [V]: The Erasmus of learning another language since modern foreign programme has been a major driver in sustaining the languages were discontinued from the national curriculum. recruitment of MFL trainee teachers. Will the Turing What opportunities are the Government offering in scheme match Erasmus by facilitating incoming students further and higher education for adults who lost out from the EU, as well as funding outward mobility? on the opportunity to learn another modern foreign language? Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, the Turing scheme is backed by £110 million and we hope to reach 35,000 Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, in relation to students. The funding is for those at UK institutions further and higher education, I believe—I will double- to travel abroad and we expect other countries to fund check this—that there will be entitlement to some their students to do the same. courses to get a first level 3 qualification. In relation to employer-led standards, such as for apprenticeships, if Baroness Gardner of Parkes (Con) [V]: My Lords, employers view that, for instance, there is a need for the British Council’s 2018 annual learning trends survey having Polish in a particular sector, they can include showed that more than two-thirds of schools in the that in their requirements for the qualifications, working state sector and over 75% of private schools employed with the FE colleges. That will then be part of that foreign language teachers who were citizens of EU qualification. countries and that the schools were fearful for the future supply and retention of such teachers. Will the The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith): Minister comment on what has been done since then My Lords, the time allowed for this Question has and what the Government plan to do going forward to elapsed. We now come to the second Oral Question. retain and encourage foreign language teachers to teach in the UK? Covid-19: Women Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, in relation to Question retention, I have outlined the early career framework, but there are now national professional qualifications. 12.19 pm On average, teachers were awarded a 2.7% pay rise last Asked by Baroness Wilcox of Newport year. As I have outlined, teachers from across the world can now apply on a points-based system to To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps come here. We recognise that there is considerable they are taking to ensure that (1) women, and uncertainty due to current restrictions on international (2) groups which represent women, are included in travel. the development of their policies responding to the Covid-19 pandemic. Lord Watson of Invergowrie (Lab): My Lords, the Minister stated in answer to the noble Baroness, Lady TheParliamentaryUnder-Secretaryof State,Department Coussins, that the slashing of bursaries for language for Education and Department for International Trade trainees from £26,000 to £10,000 was the result of (Baroness Berridge) (Con): My Lords, we continue to what she called “difficult financial decisions”. That cut listen to the experiences of women as we respond to 1607 Covid-19: Women [10 MARCH 2021] Covid-19: Women 1608 the Covid-19 crisis. Ministers and their officials carefully Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, it is a key focus consider evidence on how different people have been of the recovery from the pandemic that we see high-skilled, affected by the pandemic. That includes meeting many high-productivity, high-wage jobs. We recognise that women and the groups representing them. I recently girls are less likely to take STEM subjects, so there has met with women from Leicester and Leeds at virtual been a focus that has driven up the number of girls round tables to discuss home-schooling, childcare,flexible taking STEM A-levels in particular. I am happy to say working and parents’ and children’s mental health. that the specialist sixth form maths schools, as part of that outreach, must reach out to girls to ensure that Baroness Wilcox of Newport (Lab) [V]: The Commons there are more girls taking maths at A-level, and further report, Unequal Impact? Coronavirus and the Gendered maths, leading to higher-paid jobs. Economic Impact, found that “the Government’s priorities for recovery are heavily gendered in Baroness Prashar (CB) [V]: The Unequal Impact? nature.” report by the House of Commons Women and Equalities A report published just this morning by the ONS on Committee, which has already been mentioned, highlights the differential impact of the coronavirus pandemic the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on women on men and women said: and states that the schemes which have been put in “While more men died from Covid-19, women’s well-being place in response to the pandemic did not take account was more negatively affected than men’s during the first year of of the specific needs of women. It recommends an the pandemic.” equality impact assessment of schemes and active analysis Does the Minister agree that the Government must of equality impact for every future policy. What steps work harder at addressing this imbalance and that are the Government taking to implement these women, and the views of women, must be included in recommendations and the other 20 recommendations current policy development? of this report?

Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, the effects of Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, there was an the pandemic are indeed differential across a number equality impact assessment of the Coronavirus Act of factors. We have invested half a billion pounds in and each government department, in relation to its mental health services and recognise that women have legislative action, conducts an equality impact assessment taken on more responsibility in the home in terms of of what they propose to enact. The various schemes, childcare and home-schooling, but, thankfully, schools such as the Self-employment Income Support Scheme, are back as of Monday. We are looking closely at the have benefited millions of women. Although fewer data, to then analyse it. That will inform our policy women have benefited from that scheme, it is not out development, as will, as I have outlined, meeting with of proportion with the number of women in that sector. women’s groups. We are watching the data carefully.

Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP) [V]: My Baroness Helic (Con) [V]: My Lords, high-quality Lords, in one of the reports to which the noble Baroness, data is crucial for understanding the impact of the Lady Wilcox, referred, the Women and Equalities pandemic on women and to develop a robust, evidence-led Committee in the other place recommends response. What steps have the Government taken to “a Gender Beneficiary Assessment of investments from the industrial collect data consistently, disaggregated by sex, race, strategy”, disability and other characteristics protected under which are currently going into areas that are well the Equality Act 2010? known to be male-dominated, and “an economic growth assessment of the Women’s Budget Group’s Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, my noble friend care-led recovery proposals.” is correct. We look at this data in terms of those SurelytheGovernmentmusttakethesestepstounderstand protected characteristics, but we are looking beyond the impacts of their policies. those as well, to look at, for instance, geographical disparities of effect. This collection of data, now centrally Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, the Government in the Cabinet Office, has led to certain reports, such are looking at the data and have now got an equality as the second update, just over a week ago, on the data assessment based in the Cabinet Office. We have effect of Covid on the health of black and minority brought together the GEO with the disability and race ethnic populations in the UK. units so that we have all the data to look at. The massive economic package and support that has been in place Baroness Hussein-Ece (LD) [V]: My Lords, the gender- has benefited millions of women, and women are blind Covid policy-making that we have seen from the slightly less likely to be made redundant and slightly Government has not considered the needs of women more likely to be furloughed. and has resulted in disproportionate numbers losing their jobs—particularly in the retail sector—suffering Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen (Con): My Lords, domestic abuse, and their mental health and well-being there is a sharp segregation in subjects chosen by both suffering. What plans are in place for when furlough boys and girls at secondary and university level, with ends, when it will more likely be women who lose their girls shunning STEM and technical subjects. What jobs? With reports that many nurseries will not reopen, policies might the Government put in place so that it will be even harder to get those mothers back into we can look forward to an equitable outcome in the the workplace. If this is being addressed, what plans workplace? are being put in place to mitigate this? 1609 Covid-19: Women [LORDS] Global Navigation Satellite System 1610

Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, there has been Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, I have outlined a dynamic response, particularly to the childcare the increased funding that we have given to the NHS requirements, which is why early years settings were in relation to those budgets. The Government are still open during the third national lockdown. We have aware that if those women were shielding then they supported various charities that offer support to women, will have been particularly affected. That is why one of with investment grants of up to £10 million, and the first things introduced during the first national regarding the end of furlough, at the moment men are lockdown, as we will remember, were bubbles, so that slightly more likely to be made redundant and women people such as the ladies that the noble Baroness has more likely to be furloughed, but we do not know outlined were able to get some support. Then there what will happen when that transition ends. was the development of the childcare bubbles, because we recognise that that cohort of women provides a lot Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con) [V]: My Lords, of informal childcare. what specific meetings has my noble friend the Minister had with women and women representatives to discuss The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith): the economic impact of the pandemic? Does she share My Lords, the time allowed for this Question has my concern that the thousands of jobs lost in retail elapsed. have affected largely women, particularly young women, and the fact that older women are having to work for longer, possibly in part-time positions which does not Global Navigation Satellite System make them eligible for holiday pay, sick pay or auto- Question enrolment in a pension, greatly disadvantages them? 12.31 pm Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, I outlined in Asked by Lord West of Spithead my original Answer two of the round tables that I have held. Additionally, I held a wonderful virtual meeting To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the for National Apprenticeship Week with some women design and development research for the United apprentices who were mainly in STEM roles. I have Kingdom Global Navigation Satellite System has also met with the women’s youth council. We are been completed; and if not, what is the timeline for looking at the impact, and in those sectors that my (1) the development of the requirements, and (2) the noble friend outlines, there has been significant economic procurement, of that system. support. TheParliamentaryUnder-Secretaryof State,Department Lord Bird (CB): The received wisdom increasingly forBusiness,EnergyandIndustrialStrategy(LordCallanan) is that you must be nearer to the problem to come up (Con): My Lords, the space-based positioning, navigation with something that makes it work better. With the and timing programme is one of the key programmes SAGE committee being only 22% women, while we in the Government’s major projects portfolio. This know that women will be hit harder and harder because underscores the importance of strengthening resilience of Covid-19, that women were caring for the children for critical national infrastructure, given the wide use during home-schooling, and that it will hit women in of PNT services. The UK’s requirements for trusted the years to come, is it not possible to move forward services will be confirmed in March as part of a the whole argument about women being involved in the national PNT strategy. In response to the strategy, the decision-making and not leave it almost exclusively to programmewillidentifyinNovemberapreferredspace-based a male world? solution to improve our PNT resilience as part of a mix of technologies. Baroness Berridge (Con): My Lords, the increasing need for women to be represented at all levels of Lord West of Spithead (Lab): My Lords,the outrageous decision-making is taken as read by the Government. behaviour of our European friends over the use of the It has been pleasing to see that at the forefront of Galileo system necessitates our going our own way, or fighting the pandemic it has often been women, when in league with the Five Eyes community, our real you look at the NHS workforce and the education friends, over the provision of additional GPS. Such a workforce. I can only pay tribute to those now household system is critical, as the Minister says, not just for names, Sarah Gilbert and Kate Bingham, who have defence and security but for a broad swathe of things been at the forefront of developing the vaccine that we in this country. There are real concerns over resilience. are so grateful for. There is a great deal of confusion, misinformation and fake news swirling around about OneWeb. It is time to Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Con) [V]: My Lords, get clarity and a sense of urgency. Have we decided on older women are among the groups that have suffered theuseof low-earth-orbitcapabilitiesforasovereign-based most from this pandemic. Many live alone and have PNTsystem,alsoprovidingsecuresatellitecommunications, had to endure months of isolation as well as receiving not least 5G connectivity? very negative messages from the media. Can my noble friend the Minister tell me whether the Government Lord Callanan (Con): I thank the noble Lord for his have communicated and consulted with this group of question. We have always been clear that the possible women, and if so, how have this group of women been provision of PNT services was not the rationale for helped, especially with mental health issues? our investment in OneWeb. The programme is analysing 1611 Global Navigation Satellite System[10 MARCH 2021] Global Navigation Satellite System 1612 a number of ideas for concepts in low earth orbit, and Lord Lennie (Lab) [V]: Following on from the questions OneWeb is of course one of the many companies that from my noble friends Lord West and Lord Stevenson, are contributing to that. does OneWeb have a proven PNT capability? How is the Cabinet Office-led review progressing, who is being Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con) [V]: My Lords, consulted and when will its findings be published? could my noble friend help me and explain why an independent space-based positioning, navigation and Lord Callanan (Con): That is the third time that this timing system is necessary, whether it is affordable question has been asked. Government investment in and whether the investment in OneWeb is a practical OneWeb was for cutting-edge telecommunications and cost-effective means of delivering it? capability based on market analysis. We have always been clear that PNT services were not the rationale for Lord Callanan (Con): I answered the point about this particular investment. OneWeb in the previous answer. That is not the rationale for our purchase of OneWeb. PNT services from space Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Con): My Lords, this underpin all 13 critical national infrastructure sectors, is an ambitious project, but I cannot help but feel that, including national security, defence and transport. on a cost basis alone, it is one that is best pursued with They are an important component of future technologies our allies, perhaps the Five Eyes community. There is such as autonomous vehicles, smart cities and so on, no doubt that we have an enormous amount to offer, so it is essential that we have our own autonomous not just the skills that we hold here in the United Kingdom, capability. but does my noble friend agree that the strategic location of some of our overseas territories in the southern Lord Ravensdale (CB): My Lords, there is increasing hemisphere will make us very attractive partners? concern from the scientific community about the impact of large satellite constellations upon astronomical Lord Callanan (Con): Indeed. I know that my noble observations. What work is being done to address this friend has great experience in these matters.Collaboration aspect of the OneWeb constellation? Specifically, what with partners and industry will be vital for success in measures are being considered in the satellite design this field. A new UK capability could offer opportunities and operation to reduce its albedo? to deliver more on global Britain through strengthening our international relationships. We would most likely Lord Callanan (Con): The noble Lord makes an seek to use our overseas territories for ground-based important point. OneWeb has met the Royal Astronomical stations. Society to discuss the potential impact of its operations on astronomy.We will continue to support that dialogue and wider engagement with the scientific community. Baroness Wheatcroft (CB) [V]: My Lords, it is highly regrettable that our Brexit negotiations failed to secure a deal over Galileo. Are there any plans to try to revisit Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Lab) [V]: My Lords, that and negotiate a deal, rather than ploughing our the Minister said that he was clear that OneWeb was own course? Could the Minister also tell us about the not going to play a significant part in the PNT strategy— National Space Council, which was announced in June while at the same time saying how important that was 2019? How often has it met? Was it consulted over the —but he did not say what exactly it would be doing. purchase, which others have mentioned, of OneWeb, Could he elaborate a little more on where he sees the which was done against the advice of the Civil Service? focus of that £1 billion investment?

Lord Callanan (Con): As I said in answer to the LordCallanan(Con):TheanswertothenobleBaroness’s noble Lord, Lord West, we have been clear that the first question is no. The UK National Space Council, possible provision of PNT services was not the rationale chaired by the Prime Minister, will continue to play an for our investment in OneWeb. OneWeb is primarily a important role in future government affairs. telecommunications operation and that is what its primary focus will be. However, we are not ruling out Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I that it may play a role in future services to come. refer to my interests in the register. The Blackett review into critical dependency on the GNSS was Lord Fox (LD): My Lords, the cost of OneWeb published in January 2018. What progress has been does not stop with the Government’s share of $1 billion. made on the review’sfirst recommendation that operators In order to complete the array, the chairman of Bharti of this critical national infrastructure should report Enterprises says that a further $2.5 billion will be on how vulnerable their systems are to a failure or required, for which the Government are on the hook interruption of the GNSS network? The Cabinet Office for $600 million. Given that that has to happen soon, was tasked with assessing our overall dependency on where in the Budget is that line for the Government’s these systems. When will this be published, along with investment, and what value are UK taxpayers going to an action plan to remedy any weaknesses and the get from that huge amount of money? proposals for back-up systems called for by Oliver Dowden, then the Cabinet Office Minister? Lord Callanan (Con): We will be setting out a strategy for OneWeb in the future. We have made an Lord Callanan (Con): The UK PNT strategy group investment in OneWeb and we are looking for alternative is developing the UK’s first national PNT strategy, sources of finance to come. which includes a review of critical dependencies and 1613 Global Navigation Satellite System[LORDS] Myanmar: Protesters 1614

[LORD CALLANAN] to initiate an immediate Security Council visit to actions. Decisions on the publication of the strategy Burma, and to galvanise international pressure on the and leadership for implementation are subject to a military leaders to reinstate the democratically elected wider review of PNT governance being led by the Cabinet Government? Office. Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, I Lord Campbell of Pittenweem (LD): My Lords, the assure the noble Baroness that at the UN, during both Government paid £400 million for a minority interest our presidency and the current US presidency, we have in a failing company whose satellites, as we have heard, already convened meetings. A statement has yet to be are for communication, not navigation. What kind of agreed, but the focus of the Security Council is very investment was that? much on the situation on the ground. The noble Baroness mentioned Dr Sasa, who is well known in this country; Lord Callanan (Con): I outlined in answer to three he will always be an important voice. A mission to other questions the rationale for our investment in Myanmar would be a decision for the SG, but of course OneWeb. we are working closely with his office.

Lord Walney (Non-Afl): Further to what a number Baroness Nye (Lab) [V]: My Lords, the Burma of speakers today have said, could the Minister clarify Campaign UK, in which I declare an interest as a whether the Government are pursuing a formal board member, is receiving increasingly desperate calls partnership with our Five Eyes allies? Would that not from the brave activists in Burma who do not understand be a good idea for our long-term security? why there is not more concerted international action. Does the Minister agree that if the UK Government formally supported the Gambia in its ICJ case against Lord Callanan (Con): That is indeed one of the Myanmar, it would be a strong signal that we are not points that are being considered in the review, which ignoring the awful events unfolding in Burma and that will be reporting at the end of March. We will then there is no impunity for the crimes of the Tatmadaw? outline a business case and, if there can be collaboration with our Five Eyes partners, I am sure we would want to go down that route. Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, on the noble Baroness’s substantive point about the ICJ, The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith): we are reviewing the situation. We are supportive of My Lords, all supplementary questions have been asked. the action of the Gambia and looking at interventions where they will best serve the purpose of the people of Myanmar. On international action, we have secured Myanmar: Protesters two G7 statements and are working through the UN Question Security Council and with partners such as the US and Canada, as well as those in the region, to ensure 12.39 pm that there is international condemnation and that the focus continues. Asked by Baroness Cox Toask Her Majesty’sGovernment what assessment Baroness Northover (LD): My Lords, what action they have made of the use of force by the Myanmar are the Government taking with our allies, especially military against protesters in that country. the EU and the Five Eyes, to place effective sanctions on those running military companies that are still doing business with the military in Myanmar? The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon) (Con): My Lords, we are deeply concerned by the ongoing Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, I assure use of force against peaceful protesters. The situation the noble Baroness that we are working closely with in Myanmar has deteriorated significantly over the our allies. She will have noticed the nine individuals last few weeks and we have been clear, including who have been sanctioned recently, in addition to the through the G7 and the UN Security Council, that the 16 who already were. She makes a very valid point violent crackdown must end. I am sure I speak for all about the companies, particularly those linked to the in your Lordships’ House when I say that our thoughts military. We are focused on that and future sanctions go to all those families and people who have lost their policy will be part of that consideration. lives—and their wives—protesting against this coup. Lord Sarfraz (Con): My Lords, several diplomats Baroness Cox (CB) [V]: My Lords, I greatly appreciate from Myanmar are now making the brave choice to the Minister’s condemnation of the military’s reign of speak out against the violence. Can my noble friend terror,which includes the imprisonment of democratically the Minister tell the House what status and protection elected political leaders and the shooting of civilian is awarded to these diplomats, and what the Government’s protesters. Does he agree with Burma’s newly appointed position is on CDC’s investments in the country? special envoy to the United Nations, Dr Sasa, that the crisis is now so severe that it requires a much more Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, on robust response from the UK? Will Her Majesty’s my noble friend’ssecond point, we are currently reviewing Government therefore urge the UN Secretary-General all our trade because of the situation on the ground in 1615 Myanmar: Protesters [10 MARCH 2021] Myanmar: Protesters 1616

Myanmar, and certainly not continuing it until such key priority for us and we continue to work with time as we see democracy restored. On the point about international authorities for their safe and voluntary the ambassadors and others, at the UN and here in the return. However, the situation in Myanmar is dire at UK, I stand for their courage and bravery—I am sure the moment, not just for them but for everyone. I speak for everyone in your Lordships’ House in that. They continue to represent the people of Myanmar in The Lord Bishop of St Albans [V]: Is the Minister this country and elsewhere. aware that in addition to the military’s crackdown on protesters, military offensives are taking place in northern Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB): My Lords, I declare Shan, Kachin and Karen states, causing the mass an interest as vice-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary displacement of civilians? What are Her Majesty’s Group on Democracy in Burma. Can I return the Government doing to ensure the protection of these Minister for a moment to the question from my noble civilians and to allow for urgent humanitarian assistance friend Lady Cox, specifically calling for a high-level to reach them? United Nations Secretary-General-led visit to the region and ask whether he will press that? On the question by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, the the noble Lord, Lord Sarfraz, will the Minister look right reverend Prelate again brings the focus on to the particularly at the nonrecognition of the credentials of humanitarian assistance. I assure your Lordships’House the junta’s appointees to the United Nations and to that we are working—not through government agencies the Court of St James in the United Kingdom? but through international NGOs—to ensure that those corridors of humanitarian assistance can be kept open. Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, on But we have seen an uptick in violence being perpetrated the noble Lord’s second point, I have already said that against protesters in Myanmar. Particularly worrying the current ambassador to the UN and the ambassador are the recent actions taken by the military and security to the Court of St James continue to be the representatives forces during the night. of Myanmar in this country and at the UN. On the high-level visit, as I have said before, we are working Lord Marlesford (Con) [V]: My Lords, did HMG through the Security Council and I will update noble note the piece in the 13 November issue of China Lords accordingly. Daily, welcoming the renewed mandate of Aung San Suu Kyi and her success in the election, and quoting Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab): My Lords, I was President Xi Jinping as having said: pleased that the United Kingdom promoted a draft “China supports Myanmar following the development path of Security Council resolution this week, but disappointed its own choice and is ready to consolidate and deepen the friendship that no consensus has yet been reached. What steps between the two countries”? will the United Kingdom now take, within the Security Do my noble friend and Her Majesty’s Government Council and with allies, and will they include building believe that China could have a role in the ending of a coalition of countries to impose a global arms embargo? military rule and restoring Aung San Suu Kyi’s National Can the Minister provide an assurance that United League for Democracy to government? Kingdom businesses are no longer trading with military- owned companies? Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, I totally agree with my noble friend: China has an important Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, on role. The statement that he quoted is of course welcome. the noble Lord’s second point, I have already spoken Equally, referring to the question raised by the noble of the sanctions that we have taken against military Lord, Lord Hussain, China’s intervention in resolving individuals. We are looking at companies specifically the situation for the Rohingya is also an important to target those with military links within Myanmar part of finding a lasting solution for all in Myanmar itself, and advising British business appropriately. On and in the region. building international coalitions, I believe I have already answered that question, but we are also strengthening our alliances, including at the Human Rights Council. Lord Berkeley of Knighton (CB) [V]: My Lords, does the Minister consider that recent events in Myanmar Lord Hussain (LD): My Lords, while the whole go some wayto explaining the otherwise rather inexplicable world’s attention is drawn to the clashes between the behaviour of Aung San Suu Kyi in terms of the military junta and the pro-democracy protesters in persecution of the Rohingya Muslims? Myanmar, what is our Government’s latest assessment of the safety and security of the ethnic Rohingya Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, during community, which has suffered genocide and forced Aung San Suu Kyi’sleadership of Myanmar,we continued migration during the previous military rule in Myanmar? to raise the issue of the Rohingya community and will continue to do so. It is important that lessons are Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): The noble Lord learned from the past, and we hope that democracy is quite right to draw the House’s attention to the will return so that we can look specifically at the plight situation and the continuing challenges, including the of the Rohingya community as well as others. discrimination towards and persecution of the Rohingya community within Myanmar and the suffering that Lord Dubs (Lab) [V]: My Lords, will the Government continues, including for those who have managed to say clearly that the real difficulty is the attitude of escape to Bangladesh. The support we offer them is a China, notwithstanding the quotation from the China 1617 Myanmar: Protesters[LORDS] Northern Ireland Protocol: Grace Period 1618

[LORD DUBS] to recognise legitimate unionist concerns and to see Daily that we just heard, and that if the Chinese the Belfast agreement through all of its strands—an Government were adamant that they were going to agreement that its intransigence now threatens to shift the military dictatorship, then it would happen? undermine? In addition, can my noble friend assure Is not the truth that they are holding up progress at the me that this unionist Government will robustly defend UN Security Council? any legal actions brought by the EU and that they will take whatever measures are necessary to guarantee Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con): My Lords, the Northern Ireland’s place as an integral part of the UK role of China in the context of the region and, as the internal market? noble Lord rightly points out, on the UN Security Council, is an important one. I assure the noble Lord, Lord Frost (Con): I thank my noble friend for his as well as your Lordships’ House, that we will continue words of support for the decisions taken by the to engage with China to find a resolution to the Government last week. Our overriding aim is to protect restoration of democracy in Myanmar and a long-term the Belfast/Good Friday agreement in all its dimensions— solution for the safe, voluntary and dignified return of all the strands, north-south and east-west. The protocol the Rohingya community. was designed to achieve this. All sides need to be sensitive to the social and political realities, and the The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith): fact that the operation of the protocol rests on the My Lords, all supplementary questions have been confidence of both communities in Northern Ireland. asked. I reassure my noble friend that we will consider any legal process launched by the EU very carefully; we 12.50 pm will defend our position vigorously. The protocol is explicit in respecting the territorial integrity of the UK Sitting suspended. and we will ensure that is sustained.

Arrangement of Business Lord Adonis (Lab): My Lords, I join in very warmly Announcement welcoming the noble Lord to the House. Does he accept that behind this trade crisis in Northern Ireland is his own hostility to the European Union? He has 1 pm taken Britain out of the customs union and single The Deputy Speaker (Lord Duncan of Springbank) market and therefore necessitated these trade controls. (Con): My Lords, the Hybrid Sitting of the House will Is he aware that Margaret Thatcher, who largely created now resume. I ask Members to respect social distancing. the single market, said: “How we meet the challenge of the Single Market will be a major factor, possibly the major factor, in our competitive position Northern Ireland Protocol: Grace Period in European and world markets into the twenty-first century. Private Notice Question Getting it right needs a partnership between government and business”? 1 pm Does the noble Lord agree with Lady Thatcher? Asked by Lord Caine Lord Frost (Con): I thank the noble Lord for his Toask Her Majesty’sGovernment what assessment question. We developed a model of Brexit and they have made of the response of the European implemented it on the back of the election victory in Union to the United Kingdom’s decision to extend December 2019, which is about leaving the customs until October the grace period for checks on certain union and single market. We believe that the United goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland. Kingdom will benefit from control of its own laws, trade policy and money. That situation will give us The Minister of State, Cabinet Office (Lord Frost) benefits. We would like a constructive relationship (Con): My Lords, we have noted the position set out with the European Union and I will be working to ensure by Vice-President Šefcˇovicˇin his statement on 3 March that happens. about the limited and temporary operational measures the Government announced last week. These measures Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD): My Lords, I also welcome are lawful and consistent with the progressive and the noble Lord to the Dispatch Box. We knew that good faith interpretation of the Northern Ireland businesses which export out of the UK to the EU protocol. We will carefully consider any further steps required an HMRC EORI number, but now businesses the Commission decides it needs to take. need a Northern Ireland EORI number to trade internally in the UK with Northern Ireland. The noble Lord, Lord Caine (Con): My Lords, I warmly welcome my Lord Grimstone, stated in a letter to me on 11 February noble friend to the Front Bench and congratulate him that, of the 770,000 trading businesses in the UK, only on his appointment. I strongly support the actions 58,000 have a Northern Ireland XI EORI number. taken by the Government in recent days as a necessary, Why would businesses in the UK require export proportionate and lawful response to the situation in registrations to trade with other parts of the UK? If which we currently find ourselves. Does my noble there is unfettered trade within the UK, why do only friend agree that the somewhat hysterical reaction of 12% of UK businesses currently have the capability to the EU yet again demonstrates its one-sided inability trade with Northern Ireland? 1619 Northern Ireland Protocol: Grace Period[10 MARCH 2021] Northern Ireland Protocol: Grace Period 1620

Lord Frost (Con): This Government are working working through the joint committee mechanisms since extremely hard to ensure the fair and free flow of trade the beginning of the year and before. The measures between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. We have taken last week were operational, technical and temporary. provided more than £200 million to support businesses We informed the Commission of those through the through the trader support service and processed appropriate channels and at the appropriate level before declarations for over 200,000 consignments. Some 34,000 the decision was made public. businesses are registered and 98% of declarations are handled within 15 minutes. An EORI number is part Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab): My Lords, I think of the requirement to trade now that we have left the we all welcome that the noble Lord, Lord Frost, is customs union, but we are doing our utmost to ensure now able to answer Questions from the Dispatch Box the free flow of trade between Great Britain and and we look forward to an ongoing dialogue with him Northern Ireland as the protocol requires. about his Cabinet responsibilities. His role in the negotiations has been credited with getting the agreement Lord Birt (CB) [V]: My Lords, I was heavily exposed and the Northern Ireland protocol over the line. He to the Troubles across the whole span of my broadcasting would have been aware then of all the implications. career, so I am particularly alert to the delicacy of the Given that he supported the creation of, and now current situation in Northern Ireland. The Governments co-chairs, the Joint Committees he has referred to, of John Major and Tony Blair invested enormous which are designed to resolve such disputes, would not political capital in resolving the tensions there. Will this the most mature and pragmatic way to deal with this Government? issue be to continue with that process? Does he understand that the unilateral action he is championing is a double Lord Frost (Con): I thank the noble Lord for his threat? It jeopardises the European Parliament’s question. Our overriding aim is to protect the peace ratification of his own agreement and damages our process in Northern Ireland and the Belfast/Good Friday international reputation if we cannot be trusted to agreement. That is an avowed and primary purpose of keep our word. the Northern Ireland protocol. As we implement the protocol in a pragmatic and proportionate way, we do Lord Frost (Con): I thank the Baroness and I look so very mindful of the considerations he has in mind forward to answering many more Questions from this and protecting all aspects of the peace process. Dispatch Box about our approach to the relationship with the European Union. We would like to see a LordHannanof Kingsclere(Con):MyLords,temporary constructive relationship with the European Union in derogations, waivers or exemptions are by definition future. The difficulty we are faced with this year is that not a long-term solution to the problems intrinsic in the EU’s decision to invoke Article 16 in Northern the protocol. Will my noble friend the Minister address Ireland has created a new and very difficult situation the asymmetry—the absurdity—at the heart of the that has undermined cross-community confidence and protocol: its contention that checks on goods between we have been trying to deal with that. We would like to Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland undermine do so in a constructive and consensual way but we also the Good Friday agreement and may even jeopardise have to have to regard to the situation and the need to peace, but checks between Northern Ireland and Great maintain confidence and consent across both communities Britain have no such consequences? in Northern Ireland. Lord Frost (Con): My noble friend makes a very good point. The protocol was designed to deal with Baroness Suttie (LD) [V]: My Lords, I also welcome the very complex reality to which he alludes. It needs the Minister to the Dispatch Box. Can he confirm to be implemented in a way that takes account of all exactly how and when the Irish Government were the strands of the Good Friday agreement—east-west informed about the decision unilaterally to extend the as well as north-south—and enables cross-community grace period? consent for those arrangements to be sustained. That means that the smooth flow of trade between Great Lord Frost (Con): My Lords, I thank the noble Britain and Northern Ireland needs to be preserved, Baroness for her question. We do not go into the detail as well as an open border between Northern Ireland of diplomatic communications at the highest level but and Ireland. I can confirm that the Irish Government were informed of this decision before it was made public by my right The Earl of Kinnoull (Non-Afl): I also congratulate honourable friend the Secretary of State for Northern the Minister on his new appointment and thank him Ireland on 3 March. for engaging afresh with the EU Committee in his new capacity. How was the joint committee apparatus, Lord Kilclooney (CB): My Lords, likewise, I welcome including the joint consultative working group on the the noble Lord to his position at the Dispatch Box. As withdrawal agreement, used to discuss and disseminate one living near the border between the Republic of the Government’s decision on grace periods before its Ireland and the United Kingdom, and as a former announcement? Further, given the furore, if they had MEP, I am very conscious that border issues can their time again, would they have played things differently? destabilise Northern Ireland. I am disappointed that the European Union does not recognise that. I am Lord Frost (Con): I thank the noble Earl for his even more disappointed that the House of Lords question, and I look forward to appearing before his European Union Committee did not recognise the committee again in the near future. We have been tensions and trading problems that the protocol would 1621 Northern Ireland Protocol: Grace Period[LORDS] House of Lords Commission 1622

[LORD KILCLOONEY] Lord Frost (Con): My Lords, there were already create. Today the Vice-President of the European challenges in the operation of the protocol in early Commission, Šefcˇovicˇ, is addressing the friends of the January this year and they were already having a direct Republic of Ireland in the Congress in Washington. I and disproportionate impact on citizens in Northern hope he will ensure that he gets a report from our Ireland. The EU’s decision to invoke Article 16 embassy in America on what is said. In so far as the compounded the difficulties and undermined cross- future is concerned— community confidence. Our actions have been aimed at restoring confidence and minimising disruption to A noble Lord: Question! the everyday life of people in Northern Ireland. That is what this Government will work to ensure. Lord Kilclooney (CB): My question is this. In so far as the future is concerned, there must be agreement between the United Kingdom and the European Union. The Deputy Speaker (Lord Duncan of Springbank) Will the Government ensure that the common travel (Con): My Lords, I am afraid that the time allowed area will be secured, that all three strands of the Belfast for this Question has now elapsed. My apologies to agreement will be supported and that the sovereignty the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, and the noble Baroness, of the United Kingdom will extend throughout Northern Lady Altmann. Ireland? I am going to take a moment or two to allow the Chamber to clear a bit before we move on to the next Lord Frost (Con): My Lords, I thank the noble business. There is a moment or two for you to shuffle Lord for his question. I agree very much that all sides out. must be sensitive to the social and political realities in I think everyone has now shuffled. We now come to Northern Ireland and to the need for the consent the Motion in the name of the Senior Deputy Speaker. of both communities if it is to work effectively.Our actions have been aimed at restoring that confidence. Indeed, I can reassure the noble Lord that we will protect the House of Lords Commission common travel area—which is specifically protected in Motion to Agree the protocol—but our overriding aim is to protect the Belfast/Good Friday agreement and the territorial 1.18 pm integrityof theUK.NorthernIreland’splaceinthecustoms Moved by The Senior Deputy Speaker union and single market will be protected. ThattheReportfromtheHouseof LordsCommission Lord Dobbs (Con) [V]: My Lords, I add my Access and use of facilities by retired members be congratulations to my noble friend and wish him well agreed to (2nd Report, HL Paper 233). in the task that lies ahead. Following on from the questions of my noble friends Lord Caine and Lord The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith): Hannan of Kingsclere, can he tell me—I fear I may be My Lords, this report addresses an anomaly in the a little simple and he will have to be patient with me treatmentof Memberswhoretirebeforetheyaresuspended —what evidence has been put forward by those who or expelled from the House. The issue is simple. When insist that checks on goods crossing the land mass of a Member retires from the House, the House has Ireland undermine the prospects of peace while, by agreed that they should enjoy certain privileges. These contrast, checks on goods crossing the Irish Sea do include a parliamentary pass, access to the Chamber not? Can he explain why Brussels can simply stop trade and the ability to use, and bring guests to, certain in vital goods such as vaccines to Northern Ireland, catering facilities. When a Member is suspended or but threatens us for doing business with our own expelled their pass is revoked and they cannot access people? Am I simple or is it all a rotten case of double the estate or the services of the House. standards? In recent times, some Members facing suspension Lord Frost (Con): My Lords, my noble friend makes or expulsion have retired before the House approved a very acute observation about the situation. As I have such a sanction. The default position is that Members noted, the protocol must be implemented in a way in this position enjoy all the usual privileges of a retired that takes account of all strands of the Good Friday Member. The House of Lords Commission has, on a agreement—that is, east-west as well as north-south. case-by-case basis,agreed to remove these rights.However, The EU’s decision to activate Article 16 in January, this ad-hoc approach can lead to delay and uncertainty however briefly, has compounded the difficulties and for the House and its staff about the rights available severely shaken confidence. We would obviously prefer for such Members. it if the EU would reckon with the situation it has To address this, it is proposed that the removal of created and work with us to ensure that trade can flow retired Members’ rights in these circumstances should in all directions, including to Northern Ireland, in a be automatic upon the House agreeing the Conduct free and fair manner. Committee’s report. In the case of a recommendation to suspend, the removal of rights would last for the Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op): My Lords, duration of the proposed suspension but the commission further to the question from my noble friend Lady may agree a longer period in exceptional circumstances. Smith, does the Minister not now regret taking unilateral If the recommendation was to expel the Member, the action against an agreement which he was party to? removal of rights would be permanent. This would Does he not worry that no one will accept or trust his ensure a consistent approach and provide certainty to word ever again? Members, staff and others on the estate. I beg to move. 1623 House of Lords Commission[10 MARCH 2021] House of Lords Commission 1624

The Deputy Speaker (Lord Duncan of Springbank) looking at. We need to consider very carefully how we (Con): One individual has requested to speak: the noble deal with these issues. In particular, mixing up non- Lord, Lord Balfe, whom I now call. attendance with a term of imprisonment shows that whoever wrote the report is not filled with kindness, Lord Balfe (Con): I will put one or two questions to whatever else they may have. the Senior Deputy Speaker. I realise that it would be foolishtotrytodividetheHousebecauseitisaunanimous The Deputy Speaker (Lord Duncan of Springbank) report by everyone who counts in the place. However, (Con): I have received a request to speak from the paragraph 5, on Members who are “suspended or noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Basildon, whom I now expelled”, begins: call. “Members who lose their membership as a result of non- attendance”. Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab): I have a question. Non-attendance is being neither suspended nor expelled. I am sure the noble Lord, Lord McFall, will be able to What attempts, if any, are made to discover why people deal with the issues raised by the noble Lord, Lord Balfe, are not attending? In particular,I have in mind a situation but I wonder whether the latter was slightly confused where someone is ill and it falls off the horizon. For in his comments. What is before us today,as I understand instance, if someone had a stroke and was in hospital, it—perhaps the noble Lord, Lord McFall, could confirm does anyone try to check why non-attendance happens, this—is not the issues raised around Members who andistheMembergivenanywarningthathisorhernon- have been suspended or expelled in the past but whether attendance is about to lead to the suspension of rights? it is appropriate that those Members who seek to retire Even if they are, if you lose your seat as result of early should be treated in the same way as other non-attendance, surely it is a little different from “a Members who have been expelled or suspended from sentence of imprisonment” or being “expelled or your Lordships’ House. suspended”, as paragraph 5 continues. I see no reason, As such, it is not that the points he raised were other than an exceptional one, why people who lose wrong, but they are not relevant to the decision before their seat because of non-attendance should be effectively us today, which looks only at whether Members who banished from the estate. retire because they are facing investigation or sanction Secondly,on the “practical consequences”of expulsion from the Conduct Committee should not be treated or suspension, paragraph 6(b) says that differently but should be subject to the same sanctions. “the Member may not enter the House of Lords Estate as the I will raise one point about those Members who guest of another Member or otherwise”. lose their membership as a result of non-attendance. This is surely a bit over the top. We recently suspended Obviously, this has been a difficult Session for some the membership of the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis. Members, but my understanding is that the Clerk of He and I agree on virtually nothing, in our social the Parliaments and all the individual groups have views of the world, but I respect his work in Northern contacted several times any Members who may have Cyprus, particularly in standing up for the many soldiers been affected by that—and that they have co-operated in British uniform killed during the troubles in Cyprus. with them in terms of their membership of the House. As such, I regard him as a friend whom I totally No one wants to see someone leave, or be automatically disagree with on a lot of things, but I am really quite suspended from, the House just because of the current shocked that I cannot even bring him into the place for Covid situation. My understanding, which the Senior a cup of tea; this seems over the top and an infringement Deputy Speaker can confirm, is that this has been on individual Members’ rights. addressed by both the Clerk of the Parliaments and However, it is not only that. Has it been legally individual group leaders and Whips. checked that we can stop a member of the public—that is what they are—coming to the Gallery to watch a The Deputy Speaker (Lord Duncan of Springbank) debate? Do we have the right to single out citizens of (Con): There being no one else present in the Chamber the United Kingdom to be barred from Parliament? I who wishes to speak, I now call the Senior Deputy would like an assurance that legal efforts will be put Speaker. into dealing with that. I repeat my concern that the way in which this The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord McFall of Alcluith): disciplinary procedure is working is unsatisfactory. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Balfe, and the noble There is no opportunity for any sort of public input: Baroness, Lady Smith, for their questions. On the things are just put to the vote, and, of course, the vote issue of the commission removing rights from Members, is carried. I would like a review of the whole process to we had two cases when I chaired the Procedure and see whether natural justice is fulfilled. I suspect that, if Privileges Committee: first, that of Lord Lester of Herne anyone ever went to judicial review, they would probably Hill and, secondly, that of Lord Ahmed in December win, due to the way in which this is structured. I look 2020. The cases were recorded in the public minutes of again at the case of the noble Lord, Lord Maginnis: the commission, but there was a sanction pending and the parliamentary commissioner suggested a sanction the Members retired, and it was with that in mind that that the committee, without giving any reasons, promptly we addressed that particular position. As such, the noble doubled. This is not transparent and not the way to Baroness is correct on that point. run the place, in my view. On the first point made by the noble Lord, Lord Balfe, As such, I ask the Senior Deputy Speaker to look at about the House authorities notifying Members who these things. I will not press this to a vote because, may be at risk of losing their membership through apart from anything else, I would lose—but it needs non-attendance, yes, the House authorities work with 1625 House of Lords Commission [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1626

[LORD MCFALL OF ALCLUITH] (2) But subsection (1) does not require the Commissioner to the usual channels to do this. Information is given at report on the need for, or provision of, services provided that time, so he need not worry that an arbitrary decision to people who reside in relevant accommodation (within may be made with no one knowing about it. Indeed, the meaning of section 55(2)). this would come to my office at some stage, and I (3) In subsection (1)— engage regularly—at least every month—with all the “domestic abuse services” means any advice, advocacy usual channels, be it the Leader’s Office or the Chief or counselling services provided, in relation to domestic Whips. This issue would come up if that was pending. abuse, to victims of domestic abuse or their children; “the relevant period” means the period of 12 months The answer to his second point—whether Members beginning with the day on which this section comes covered by the provisions in the report can still attend into force (but see subsection (4)). the Palace as guests of another Member—is no: the (4) The Secretary of State, with the agreement of the House Committee decided that Members who are Commissioner, may by regulations extend the relevant suspended or expelled should not attend the House as period for a further period of up to 6 months. the guest of another Member. I am sure that the (5) The power conferred by subsection (4) may be exercised legality of that has been checked but, just to reassure only once.” the noble Lord, I will take that back and write to him Member’s explanatory statement on that point. This new Clause requires the Domestic Abuse Commissioner Lastly, on the point about whether the provisions in to prepare and publish a report on the need for certain domestic the report capture those Members whose membership abuse services in England and the provision of such services. The is ended by virtue of non-attendance over the full report must be published no later than 12 months after this new Clause comes into force. course of a Session, my answer is no: this applies only to Members sanctioned by the Conduct Committee. However, the noble Lord will be aware that Members The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Williams who cease to be so because they do not attend the of Trafford) (Con): My Lords, this group of amendments House during the Session do not have the privileges of brings us back to the provision of community-based a retired Member. support for victims of domestic abuse and their children. I hope that answers the questions, but if any issues I share the ambition of my noble friend Lord Polak, have been left hanging, I will certainly respond in writing the noble Lords, Lord Hunt and Lord Rosser, and all to the noble Lords. noble Lords to ensure that domestic abuse victims receive the support that they need, regardless of where they Motion agreed. reside. The provisions in Part 4 of the Bill, which relate to the provision of support within safe accommodation, Domestic Abuse Bill are a major step towards meeting that goal. Report (2nd Day) The issue before us is whether we can and should now be legislating for a parallel duty in respect of 1.30 pm community-based support, whether by extending the provisions in Part 4, as Amendment 31 seeks to do, or Relevant documents: 21st and 28th Reports from by making freestanding provision, as in Amendment 85. the Delegated Powers Committee The Government remain firmly of the view that the The Deputy Speaker (Lord Duncan of Springbank) necessary groundwork for such legislation has yet to (Con): My Lords, I will call Members to speak in the be undertaken and, accordingly,that it would be premature order listed. Short questions of elucidation after the to legislate in this Bill by either method. Minister’s response are discouraged. Any Member I can see the attraction of Amendment 31, put wishing to ask such a question must email the clerk. forward by the noble Lord, Lord Hunt. It seemingly The groupings are binding. Participants who might wish accepts the government argument that we do not yet to press an amendment other than the lead amendment know how we should frame the duty in respect of in the group to a Division must give notice in the community-based support, so a regulation-making power debate or by emailing the clerk. Leave should be given affords a mechanism to come back to this once the to withdraw amendments. When putting the Question, domestic abuse commissioner has completed her mapping I will collect voices in the Chamber only. If a Member work and the Government have consulted. taking part remotely wants their voice accounted for, Let me make a couple of observations about if the Question is put, they must make this clear when Amendment 31. First, your Lordships’ House and the speaking to the group. Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee are regularly critical of the Government for coming Amendment 17 forward with skeletal delegated powers such as in the amendment. The framework for the provision of safe Moved by Baroness Williams of Trafford accommodation support is on the face of the Bill and 17: After Clause 18, insert the following new Clause— it is right that any parallel duty in respect of community- “Duty to report on domestic abuse services in England based support should also be set out in primary legislation. (1) The Commissioner must, before the end of the relevant Secondly, even if the route of delegated legislation period, prepare and publish a report under section 8 was, in principle, an acceptable way forward, until we on— have developed and consulted on a scheme for that (a) the need for domestic abuse services in England, provision of community-based support, we simply do and not know how properly to frame a regulation-making (b) the provision of such services. power to ensure that we have the necessary vires to 1627 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1628 give effect to a set of proposals post-consultation. The This amendment will therefore set out a clear roadmap landscape for the provision of community-based support for the Government to set out definitive proposals for ismorecomplexthanthatinrespectof safeaccommodation- addressing the gap in the provision of community-based based support, as Amendment 85 recognises, so a support. power simply to extend the provisions of Part 4 is not, Amendments 20, 22 and 24 to 29 address the concerns in our view, the right approach. raised in Committee that the new duty in Part 4 of the Amendment 85, put forward by the noble Lord, Bill may have unintended consequences regarding Lord Rosser, and in Committee by my noble friend, community-based support that is currently provided seeks to navigate the complexities of the current provision or funded by local authorities. I know that my noble of community-based support by placing a new duty friend Lord Polak was particularly concerned about on local authorities in England, local policing bodies this. As a result of the £125 million funding that we in England and Wales and clinical commissioning are providing to tier-1 local authorities to support the groups in England. This may or may not be the right delivery of Part 4, we think that such concerns are approach, but I do not think that we are in a position unfounded. However, we recognise that there would to make that judgement yet. If the duty is to be split be merit in making provision in Part 4 to monitor any three ways, we need to know how the discharge of the unintended impact. These amendments do just that. duty is to be co-ordinated between the three agencies The amendments will also ensure that the domestic to ensure that there is not overlapping provision or abuse local partnership boards, provided for in Clause that support for some victims does not slip through 56, play an active part in such monitoring and that the the cracks. In applying the duty across three agencies, results are recorded in tier-1 local authorities’ annual Amendment 85 risks creating an environment in which reports under Clause 57. These annual reports will accountability is unclear, presenting challenges for all feed into the work of the ministerially led national bodies in ensuring that the necessary services are expert steering group, of which the domestic abuse provided to those who need them. commissioner will be a member, so that the impact, if It is the Government’s clear view that there are no there is any, of the Part 4 duty on the provision of ready-made solutions such that we would be in a domestic abuse support to people in the community position to legislate here and now. We need to better by local authorities can also be monitored. understand the existing landscape and the gap in The Government are ready to take one further step. provision, which is whythe domestic abuse commissioner’s I can say that the Government are now committed to mapping work is so vital. We need to draw on the consulting on the provision of community-based domestic evidence provided by that work and other sources, abuse services in the upcoming victims law consultation. consult widely and then come forward with proposals I recognise the concerns about missing the legislative that command widespread support and, most importantly, bus and the suspicion—it is unfounded—that the deliver the necessary support in the most effective and Government will kick this into the long grass. The efficient way possible. government amendments that I have outlined will As part of this work, we need properly to understand ensure that that does not happen, as will our commitment the resource implications of any new duty. The to consult on a victims law later this summer. £125 million of new money that we have provided to As to the concerns that this is all too far off and fund the duty in Part 4 shows both the level of our victims need support now, there is already significant commitment and the significant cost of any parallel provision. Since 2014, Ministry of Justice funding has new duty in relation to community-based support. helped police and crime commissioners to support Women’s Aid has suggested that some £220 million is victims of crime within their local areas, addressing needed. I make no comment on that or the accuracy the specific local needs identified within their communities. of that estimate, but it at least demonstrates that This core grant will be around £69 million in 2021-22, Amendments 31 or 85, were either to be passed, would which includes an uplift for child sexual abuse services. have significant financial implications, which this House Additionally, the Government have committed a further should be alive to. £40 million, which includes £9.7 million for domestic Recognising that the House is reluctant to let this abuse community-based services commissioned by PCCs Bill pass without it containing some provision that for the coming year,as well as £8 million for independent recognises the problem and provides a pathway to the domestic violence advisers, the support of which will solution, the Government have brought forward be felt mostly in the community. This does not take Amendments 17, 20, 22, 24 to 29 and 99. Amendment 17 account of support provided by local authorities, clinical places a duty on the domestic abuse commissioner to commissioning groups and others. It may not be enough, prepare and publish a report under Clause 8 of the Bill but these sums demonstrate the significant levels of on the need for community-based domestic abuse community-based support that are already available services in England and the provision of such services. for domestic abuse victims and their children, and for As with the provisions in Part 4 of the Bill, we have other victims of crime. limited this duty to the provision of community-based I am very much looking forward to hearing the services in England in recognition of the fact that we other contributions to the debate on these amendments. are generally dealing here with devolved matters in I reiterate my thanks to my noble friends Lord Polak Wales. The commissioner will be required to deliver a and Lady Sanderson, who are in the Chamber now, Clause 8 report on this issue within 12 months of and to other noble Lords who have engaged so commencement and then, by virtue of the provisions constructively on this. I hope that what I have said in Clause 16, Ministers will be required to respond to today is evidence of our intent and that the House will any recommendations directed at them within 56 days. support this approach. I beg to move. 1629 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1630

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I A key theme from the NAO case study discussions, welcome the Government’s amendments, but I am not stakeholder interviews and workshops is the long-lasting yet convinced they go far enough. As the Minister impact that the pandemic is likely to have on authorities’ explained, Part 4 places a duty on local authorities finances. It is little wonder that, with the priority the in England to deliver support to victims, including Bill gives to accommodation-based services, there is children, in accommodation-based services such as real concern that community services will be starved refuges. There is a risk though that, as the duty applies of funds in the future. only to accommodation-based services, it could have My two amendments attempt to deal with the problem. the unintended consequence of diverting funding from Amendment 30 would give protection to community community-based services to ensure the duty is met. It services. As part of the public sector equality duty under would indeed be a perverse incentive, resulting in Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010, public authorities victims having only one option left if they need support are required to have in accommodation-based services. Most victims— … … around 70%—currently remain at home or in the wider “due regard in particular, to the need to take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic community, accessing community-based support. This that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it”. can be through independent domestic violence advisers, outreach support and child specialist workers, helplines Many domestic abuse services are specifically aimed at and perpetrator programmes, as well as specialist local supporting people with protected characteristics,including agencies offering drop-in services for children. women. The Equality and Human Rights Commission stresses the important role played by specialist “by As SafeLives commented: and for”services,run by and for the users and communities “We have very serious concerns that, while well intended, the Government’s duty will push Local Authorities into reducing, they aim to serve. These include community-based rather than sustaining, vital services, leaving more vulnerable services such as outreach, advocacy, information and people in abusive situations … We know the financial pressure advice services. that Local Authorities are under, and a number have said that they … My aim, through Amendment 30, is to support the can now only provide minimum requirements and nothing further.” Government’s objective of inaugurating a more strategic The domestic abuse commissioner has similar fears. approach to accommodation-based support, while at The amendments that the Government have laid the same time making sure that local authorities that are clearly welcome in requiring the commissioner to commission services are not deflected from their equality prepare and publish a report under Clause 8 on the duty to cater for all the needs arising from protected need for community-based domestic abuse services in characteristics. That is what my amendment seeks to England and the provision of such services. It is also do. It does not alter the public sector equality duty, good to see that local authorities will be required to but clarifies the way in which the duty applies to publish a strategy under Clause 55 to keep under domestic abuse services. It does not touch, let alone review any effect of that strategy on community-based conflict with, the Bill’s Clause 55 provisions on support in their area. However, welcome as they are, accommodation-based services, and it does not depend these amendments do not guarantee the maintenance in any way on the commissioner’s mapping exercise. or enhancement of community services, nor is there any guarantee that, following the commissioner’s review My second amendment, Amendment 31, is very of the landscape of provision, action would then be taken much related to the commissioner’s mapping exercise. by the Government. It would give the Government the ability, through secondary legislation, to extend Part 4 to community I thought it was telling that the submission we services.So if the commissioner finds that local authorities received from the Local Government Association seemed are neglecting community services, a legislative vehicle rather lukewarm about these amendments. It said that would be immediately available to do something nothing in the amendments provides long-term or about it. sustained investment in these services. This morning, the National Audit Office report on I listened with great interest to the Minister when local government finance spelled out the financial she commented on this. It is very unusual for a Minister challenge local authorities face. They will be under to turn down an extension of executive power, which significant pressure in the next financial year and are I am very generously urging the House to give her. I likely to be operating with reduced tax bases and confess that I am normally opposed to the extension increased service demand as their local communities of such executive powers, but needs must. In a situation and businesses recover from the pandemic, and this is where the mapping exercise has not been completed likely to go on for a number of years to come. and the financial consequences of it have therefore not been calculated, it seems to me that there is a strong 1.45 pm argument to say that the Government need some The NAO survey indicates that 94% of respondents legislative provision in order to implement a policy in from single tier and county councils, and 81% from the light of that mapping exercise. district councils, expect to reduce service budgets. I listened very carefully to the Minister, and it was Some respondents considered that service users would very helpful when she said that consultation on the be affected by their savings plans, due to reduced victims’ law would be extended to embrace this. Clearly, service levels from cutting staff and other efficiencies we could see potential legislation in the future, but it that they have to make. In other cases, authorities will take time. Local authorities are under huge funding indicated that specific savings or income-generation constraints, and I think there is a case for giving measures would have direct and immediate effects on ourselves the ability in the Bill to ensure that, if service users. community services are starved of funds as a result of 1631 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1632 the prioritisation of accommodation-based services, Like the noble Lord, Lord Polak, I was impressed we have immediate levers to step in and deal with it. I by the Barnardo’s press release last Thursday, with all hope the Minister will, even at this late hour, consider the different voices speaking in unison. My own experience these amendments sympathetically. of dealing with voluntary organisations over many years is that hell hath no fury like different voluntary organisations in pursuit of similar goals and, in particular, Lord Polak (Con): My Lords, I was pleased to table similar pools of funding. Peace seems rather dangerously my amendment in Committee. I welcomed the debate to have broken out in this case. I hope it will continue. and the overwhelming support from around the House. In particular, I acknowledge the support of the noble I thank the Government for listening. It was a bit of Lords, Lord Russell of Liverpool and Lord Rosser, a no-brainer with a Bill in which 25% of the and the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Derby. accommodation-based services for domestic abuse victims were dealt with but 75% were not. That was an open I am, perhaps, even more pleased that I have not goal waiting to be filled. I am grateful that the Government tabled it again on Report. I am grateful to my noble have acknowledged this and acted on it. friend and her ministerial colleagues for giving so much of their time to meet and discuss this; for the Like the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, I took note of the amendments tabled in the name of my noble friend; National Audit Office investigation and report into and for confirming the Government’s commitment to the state of local authority funding. I have observed a address issues around community-based services in a variety of individuals in this House—some of whom letter to me last Thursday. I have worked in co-operation with—who, for the best We all agree that community-based services are of reasons, ceaselessly plead with the Government to vital in supporting the majority of domestic abuse put more and more statutory duties on local authorities victims who remain at home. Government amendments in a whole variety of different areas. In a sense, this is to ensure that local authorities monitor and report on dangerous because, in a situation where local authorities the impact of their duties under Part 4 on other service are under the strains and stresses that they are, piling provision, are most welcome, as is the Government’s even more statutory duties or guidance on them commitment to consult on the provision of community- runs the risk of mission failure and initiative fatigue. based domestic abuse services in the upcoming victims I am very conscious of this. It requires a joined-up law consultation this summer. These have been welcomed approach from the different parts of Her Majesty’s not just by me but in a press release, published under Government. the leadership of Barnardo’s, by the domestic abuse The Home Office is doing its bit. The Ministry of commissioner, the Victims’ Commissioner for England Justice is going to do what may not come easily to it and Wales, domestic abuse campaigner Charlie Webster, and talk more openly with the communities department Imran Hussain at Action for Children, the End Violence —and vice versa. It was not terribly helpful that the Against Women coalition, the NSPCC and SafeLives. Secretary of State, while acknowledging the councils’ I congratulate my noble friend the Minister on uniting problems, could not resist the political dig of accusing these groups and organisations in welcoming the them of poor management. This is a bit rich coming Government’s commitments. This is an incredibly from a national Administration who have spent the important step forward in understanding and addressing amount of money they have on initiatives such as test the provision of community-based domestic abuse and trace, or who have presided over the highest services, so that all victims, especially children, will be number of deaths per million in the world during the able to access support, regardless of where they live. current pandemic. Before one starts throwing political I hope the consultation will take a holistic approach missiles at one’s opponents, it does one a lot of good to tackling domestic abuse, carefully considering what to look in the mirror and have a degree of humility. is needed to support children and adults, as well as None of us gets it right all the time. programmes to tackle the behaviour of perpetrators When the domestic abuse commissioner comes back and break the cycle of domestic abuse. I am certain with her recommendations, I would plead with the that my noble friend the Minister and her colleagues, various parts of national government and the local working with the professional and deeply impressive authorities to talk to one another, agree, buy into domestic abuse commissioner—who I thank for her whatever is recommended, and put in place properly advice—will place community-based services on the thought-through, long-term plans to deliver on this same statutory footing as accommodation-based services. strategy and to fund it properly. I appeal for her office to be properly and adequately funded. Lord Rosser (Lab) [V]: My Lords, government Again, I thank my noble friend the Minister for her Amendment 17 requires the domestic abuse commissioner time and for the helpful letter she sent me. I am pleased to prepare and publish a report on to support the amendments in her name. I look forward “the need for domestic abuse services in England, and … the to continuing to work with her and with all noble provision of such services.” Lords as this important Bill becomes law. The report must be published no later than 12 months after this new clause comes into force. Lord Russell of Liverpool (CB): My Lords, I shall be Other government amendments require local extremely brief, not least because of the happy coincidence authorities to keep under review the impact of the that the noble Lords, Lord Hunt and Lord Polak, have duty to provide accommodation-based services on largely said what I was going to say. I thank them. their provision of other domestic abuse services in the I can now go and have a late lunch. community. 1633 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1634

[LORD ROSSER] tomorrow to provide the necessary additional resources Amendment 30, in the name of my noble friend for the future provision of much-needed and enhanced Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, makes it clear that the community-based services. public authority may not prioritise accommodation-based support services for persons with a protected characteristic Baroness Bertin (Con) [V]: My Lords, it is a great over other support services for the same person, except honour to follow the noble Lord, Lord Rosser. I am in so far as those persons have a greater need for greatly relieved that he said what he said—he made accommodation-based services than for other support some powerful points—but it is right that we back the services. government amendments. I will speak to that today. Amendment 31 would give the Secretary of State The Bill’s commitment to giving refuges statutory power through regulations to extend the duty in Part 4 status is vital, but we knew that giving no statutory to include community services, instead of just recognition anywhere in the Bill to community-based accommodation-based services. I agree with the points services posed a clear risk to inadvertently downgrading made and the concerns raised by my noble friend Lord their status, which we absolutely had to prevent. I Hunt of Kings Heath in his powerful contribution. believe that these amendments do that, but I agree that Amendments 85 and 86 in my name are the community we will all keep a close eye on their execution to check service amendments from the noble Lord, Lord Polak, that they genuinely safeguard the status of community re-tabled. We tabled them pending sight of the services. Government’s specific commitments and amendments. I thank the designate domestic abuse commissioner, I will not move them. Like others in the House and as well charities such as Barnardo’s and SafeLives and outside, we welcome the Government’s amendments my noble friend Lord Polak, for being so determined and commitment to consult on community-based services and tenacious. I am greatly relieved that these charities as part of the consultation on the victims law. I pay have welcomed these amendments. I know that they tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Polak, and to other are satisfied and greatly relieved, but of course we will noble Lords, as well as to all the organisations which have to keep a close eye on whether they do the job. I have worked on this issue. I also pay tribute to the also extend my thanks to my noble friend the Minister. shadow Minister in the Commons, Jess Phillips, who She has given us a lot of time on this issue and genuinely pursued the proper provision for community-based cares about it. I know that she was integral to getting services with some vigour and determination during these amendments over the line. the Bill’s passage through the other House. I back other Peers’ calls to make sure that the We now need to see the Government’s words and domestic abuse commissioner’s office has the proper commitments translated into real progress and meaningful resourcing to carry out these additional responsibilities. action. The key to achieving this is for services, victims Throughout this Bill’s passage, we have been sending and perpetrators to be looked at holistically; to see her more and more work, so reasonable adjustments what needs to be done in the round to prevent abuse, should be made. Helping victims to stay in their homes, and to support victims who experience it. This also stemming the abuse before it damages families beyond means providing services for children who are victims, repair and prevention must be at the heart of our for older victims and for perpetrators, as well as ensuring strategy over the coming years. These amendments that there are specialist services for black and ethnic point to that. I fully support them and urge noble Lords minority victims. Healthcare services are also vital. to do the same.

2 pm Baroness Butler-Sloss (CB) [V]: My Lords, I will The government amendments also require local speak to Amendments 31 and 85. I underline that authorities to keep under review the impact of the domestic abuse services, which I very much support, duty to provide accommodation-based services on should include victims being forced into marriage. I their provision of other domestic abuse services in the particularly have in mind the special needs of those community. We do not regard the current level of being forced into marriage who are under the age of community-based domestic abuse services as sufficient, 18. I know that the Minister is well aware of the points so I simply register that, if local authorities conclude that I am making. I am sorry to keep pressing them, that carrying out their duty to provide accommodation- but I want them on the record. based services has no adverse impact on their current provision of other domestic abuse services in the The Deputy Speaker (Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall) community, we would not regard that as meaning that (Lab): The noble Baroness, Lady Goudie, has withdrawn, those community-based services do not need enhancing so I call the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb. and extending. The welcome commitments that the Government Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP): My Lords, have now given will result in meaningful change and having listened to other speeches from noble Lords, I improvement for victims of domestic abuse only if the realise that the comments that I have prepared are far necessary financial and human resources are made too mild. I was just going to congratulate everyone available to increase and extend community-based who has campaigned and fought for proper provision services. I am sure that we will not be the only ones in and thank the Government for working constructively. this Chamber or outside it who will press the Government It is not often that I find myself on the mild end of to ensure that welcome and worthy intentions today things. I think that there is now a clear understanding are not thwarted by an unwillingness by Government of the need for community services, including supporting 1635 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1636 survivors of domestic abuse in their own homes. I feel Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con) [V]: My Lords, strongly that the abusers should have to leave and not I will speak briefly in support of my noble friend the the survivors. The Green group is very supportive of Minister and congratulate her on bringing forward Amendment 85 from the noble Lord, Lord Rosser. I this group of amendments. It shows that a serious am sure that we will come back to it at another time in issue has been raised and the Government have risen another place. In the meantime, well done everyone. to the challenge and addressed it. It is extremely important, for the reasons that others have set out. I Baroness Sanderson of Welton (Con): My Lords, it congratulate my noble friend Lord Polak and others is an honour to follow the noble Baroness and her mild on the work that they have done in bringing us to this comments. I will speak to and welcome Amendments 17, place. 24 and 28. As we have said many times before, this was I will raise one concern with my noble friend the already a very good Bill. I thank the Government and Minister, which was addressed by the noble Lord, particularly my noble friend Lady Williams for the Lord Hunt, and which I think we are all aware of. We lengths to which she has gone to improve it further. are yet to assess the implications of the pandemic and She has been unstinting in her determination to address the recent Budget on local government finances. I seek many of the outstanding issues, always putting the assurance from my noble friend because there is a victims’ needs first. With these amendments, I believe genuine concern out there. I know that many authorities, that the Government have addressed the potential such as North Yorkshire and many others in rural unintended consequences of a two-tier system. areas, prioritise the most vulnerable in society—young The Government are wary of specifying what the people, children and the elderly—but there is concern independent commissioner should and should not report that their budget and resources are severely stretched. on, and I agree with them. The Minister has also made WhileIwelcometheamendments,particularlygovernment the point that the commissioner is already undertaking Amendment 17 and the others set out by my noble the relevant mapping exercise. None the less, Amendment friend, we are entirely dependent on local authorities 17 sends a signal about the importance of community- having the provision to make this happen. Is she based services. Together with the requirement for local entirely convinced that they will have the resources to authorities to assess the impact of the duty under Part enable them to do so? 4 and the further requirement, via Amendment 28, for local partnership boards to advise on other local The Deputy Speaker (Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall) authority support, I believe that this provides a robust (Lab): My Lords, I should make it clear that the noble and, importantly, ongoing mechanism and structure Baroness, Lady Watkins of Tavistock, has withdrawn for ensuring that community-based services are not from the debate, so we shall not be hearing from her adversely affected by the duty. on this occasion. I call the next speaker, the noble I welcome the Government’s commitment to consult Baroness, Lady Finlay of Llandaff on the provision of community-based services and congratulate my noble friend Lord Polak on all the work that he has done in this area. I also welcome the Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB) [V]: My Lords, I amazing number of charities and stakeholders that should declare that I chair the Commission on have welcomed these amendments. As I have said before, Alcohol Harm. I added my name to Amendment 31 I understand why the Government cannot extend the in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings duty in this Bill. On this issue and so many others, Heath, and the noble Baronesses, Lady Goudie and they have come forward with significant changes. They Lady Hollins. It is very welcome that the Bill will, for have moved where they can and altered their position the first time, give local authorities a formal role in the in areas where we thought that they would not. provision of domestic abuse support. The voluntary I realise that I am still relatively new to this House. I sector has done a heroic job in protecting survivors, also realise that no Bill will ever be perfect and that victims and their families, but this vital task should not noble Lords will fight for the changes that they think be left to the voluntary sector alone. are right, but this Bill has cross-party support, and for The words of the Minister were welcome, reflecting very good reason. It will create a genuine step change her deep and sincere commitment to tackling domestic in the way we tackle domestic abuse. It has already abuse. The government amendments recognise the raised so much awareness. Someone who works on the need to ensure that regulation will meet need and are front line said to me on seeing the raft of government certainly to be supported. If I heard correctly, some of amendments: the additional finance will apply only to England. “Youshould see the amazing survivor messages I’m seeing this How will parallel community services be financially morning. I’m quite emotional seeing their excitement. We feel the supported in Wales? Without that additional funding tide is turning.” also coming to Wales, there will be a serious risk that The tide is turning but, as we all know, we have only a women fleeing abuse will also have to flee Wales to get limited period to get this Bill through. I believe it is the support they need. now up to us to bid it safe passage. We must not ignore those outside refuges, some of whom are turned away due to their alcohol and The Deputy Speaker (Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall) substance-use needs, which makes them ineligible for (Lab): I call the noble Baroness, Lady Watkins of support from their local authority. However, they still Tavistock. No? Perhaps we should hear from the noble need support. The amendment of the noble Lord, Baroness, Lady McIntosh of Pickering, since she is Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, is needed in addition to with us. the Government’s amendments. It would ensure that 1637 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1638

[BARONESS FINLAY OF LLANDAFF] barring of services experienced by the trans community. the necessary support is available and would support The message was clear: that RISE should stop mainly the whole scoping exercise without any discrimination. focusing on women victims of domestic abuse. RISE I really urge the Government to support it. has an LGBTQ domestic abuse casework service and it has co-piloted an LGBTQ refuge.Surely,its women-only Baroness Fox of Buckley (Non-Afl): My Lords, the services should not need to be anything other than new statutory duty on local authorities to provide safe exemplary for women, whether accommodation-based accommodation-based services for victims of domestic or community-based. However, the council was clear abuse and their children is widely welcomed, but I am that the contract would not be continued because still sympathetic to the ongoing fears that this might RISE is primarily a service for women. As Women’sAid’s mean local authorities simply redistributing funding Nicki Norman said: away from community services in order to meet that “We are at serious risk of losing our network of refuges run statutory need. I welcome these thoughtful amendments by women for women.” and the discussion that focuses on protecting specialist We should not be naive or disingenuous here. One community service provision. While I am still not sure reason why there is a coy reluctance to demarcate whether this issue should be dealt with through legislation, services for women only is the controversies over it is very important that it has come up. I am minded definitions of a woman, as defined by biological sex. to consider seriously Amendments 30 and 31 in particular. Gender neutrality can become a shield to avoid any However, there is one category of specialist services accusations of transphobia, and councils can hide that I am worried the Bill has inadvertently not focused behind that. Even this Bill, in its attempts at being on: women’sdomestic abuse services, whether community gender neutral, seems reluctant to defend or bolster or accommodation-based, which are under threat. the women’s refuge movement or women’s services in Ironically, council funding does not help. The Bill’s the community, without which, to be honest, the whole increase in funding and the new legal duty on councils issue of domestic abuse would not even be on the will not resolve this issue. There seems to be some political agenda at all. muddled thinking about how councils should deliver Perhaps the Minister can just assure us that the Bill specialist services more broadly. I would appreciate it will not lead to a new type of procurement of less- if the Minister would take that into account in this set specialised service provision or the downgrading of of amendments or in guidance notes. essential services for women, whether accommodation- I declare a minor interest, in that I am a long-standing based or community-based, and that communities will columnist for the MJ – for the uninitiated, the Municipal not lose the unparalleled expertise, garnered over decades, Journal. It has been eye-opening watching councils in of women’srefuges and women’sservices in the enthusiasm recent years trying to negotiate equalities legislation in to hand over funding and procurement to councils. the context of new political trends such as gender-neutral Do not forget some of the risks involved in that. policies. The Equality Act 2010 clearly protects single-sex exemptions that allow women to have legitimate access The Lord Bishop of Gloucester [V]: My Lords, my to women-only services and spaces: gyms, hospitals, friend the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Derby, changing rooms and, of course, crucial services such who regrets that she cannot be here today, was pleased as Rape Crisis, women’s refuges and women’s advice to support the noble Lord, Lord Polak, when his services. The newly launched organisation Sex Matters amendment on specialist and community-based services notes that rules and explanations are now confused was discussed in Committee. Wereally warmly welcome and controversies around gender identity mean that the government amendments, which represent significant organisations can be reluctant to communicate their improvements on the Bill. All that being said, I am glad women-only services clearly, and, when they do, councils thatthenobleLord,LordRosser,introducedAmendment can use this against them. This needs to be clarified 85 so that we might just press a little further. I do not as we go forward; otherwise, all the good will will be want to repeat what other noble Lords have said, so I undermined. will make just a few brief comments. One example of the unintended consequence of We have heard repeatedly in debates in this House fudging championing women’s refuges is how councils of the value of specialist and community-based services are interpreting equalities impact assessments. In the which allow survivors to remain in their homes and drive for more inclusive, non-gendered service provision retain their community, their faith links and their that caters for the needs of all protected characteristics, workplaces and to keep children in their schools. women’s refuges are in danger of losing funding for Finding a long-term solution, as others have said, to not being inclusive enough. supporting these services is essential. With colleagues on the Bishops’ Bench, I look forward to engaging 2.15 pm with the victims’ law consultation and to reviewing the One recent example that I mentioned in relation to promised Clause 8 report from the domestic abuse another Bill is the Brighton-based organisation RISE, commissioner to Parliament on the provision of, and which has lost a contract worth £5 million over seven need for, community-based support services. years. After 26 years of stalwart work, its existence is I look forward to the excellent intentions being now threatened. RISE is predominantly, but not translated into provision of what is much needed. exclusively, a women-for-women service, but the briefing from Brighton & Hove City Council’s bids evaluation team explained that RISE needed to cater more for Baroness Benjamin (LD) [V]: My Lords, I will refer heterosexual and gay men and specifically address the to Amendments 20, 22, 24 and 29. 1639 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1640

I understand that the Minister has committed to connected to their school friends. These are clear consulting on community-based domestic abuse services objectives that can be distilled in demonstrating what as part of the victim’s law consultation this summer; a community-based model looks like. The services that is extremely welcome. I thank the Government for also offer places of safety through a scheme in which this, and thank the noble Lord, Lord Polak, for his they provide safe accommodation in the form of individual commitment to this issue. I also thank the Minister, properties for victims and their families, who can access who rightly responded to concerns raised by Barnardo’s—I this accommodation alongside outreach support. declare an interest as the vice-president of that charity— We are talking about specialist services that are and many other charities and organisations representing there to support victims of domestic abuse aged 16 adult and child victims. As we know, children are often and over. They provide help desks, phone lines, specialist the hidden victims of domestic abuse. Can the Minister group work and independent domestic violence advisers confirm that a statutory duty to deliver community-based to support victims in the courts.They provide independent services is a possible outcome to ensure that the majority advisers to support young people and encourage them of victims are supported in future? to confront the perpetrators and the type of behaviour that is developing. They also work with the health The Deputy Speaker (Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall) services and GPs to identify domestic abuse and respond (Lab): The noble Lord, Lord Randall of Uxbridge, has to it rapidly. withdrawn so I call the next speaker,the noble Baroness, This model is not unique to Gloucestershire. The Lady Primarolo. Government have enough to make provisions in Amendments 30 and 85 to move us forward. This does Baroness Primarolo (Lab) [V]: My Lords, like the not mean that the services will be available tomorrow, other speakers this afternoon, I welcome the Government’s but it does mean that we understand what types of amendments. However, I remain concerned about two services are necessary. Even at this late stage, with the matters, to which I will speak briefly; I will also ask excellent work that has been undertaken by many noble the Minister to try to assure the House on them. Lords in this area, I sincerely hope that the Government Many speakers have mentioned my first concern. will think again, give a much clearer lead on the Although having a statutory duty on local authorities pathwaytodeliverjointlycommissionedcommunity-based to provide accommodation is welcome, if we do not services and make the provision of such services a deal with the question of community-based services, statutory duty. there is—as the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, said—a huge danger of money being transferred into the provision Baroness Burt of Solihull (LD): My Lords, in of the accommodation and away from such services. Committee, the need to consider help for victims in The Minister, who has done an excellent job on this the wider community as well as in refuges was raised Bill, has not explained clearly to the House why again and again. These amendments put other local Amendment 30 in the name of the noble Lord cannot authority services for domestic abuse victims and their be accepted so as to protect these services in the children front and centre, giving them the recognition interim while the commissioner undertakes her mapping and attention they deserve. However, it must be said exercise. If she is not prepared to accept that amendment, that concerns have been expressed across the House will she explain to the House what steps the Government about funding because we cannot enforce the provisions will take to protect community-based services in the in the Bill and in these amendments without it. period when the mapping will be undertaken? We already know that most help and services are The second area that I want to refer to briefly is accessed in the community; the noble Lord, Lord Russell, that of joint commissioning and the work being done described it as a no-brainer. I am therefore absolutely in localities to provide these valuable services.The Minister delighted by the Government’s response. I want to touched on the lack of clarity over what this meant. I give the Minister full credit for the way in which she made inquiries of these services in Gloucestershire, a has listened and acted. large county where localities have been undertaking I support government Amendment 99, which would, community-based commissioning since 2013; this involves for the first year only, give six months’ leeway for the working across local authorities, health authorities, Government’s new clause duty to report on domestic the police and crime commissioner and other services. abuse services in England. That seems entirely reasonable The joint commissioning model has enabled them to to me. Who knows what challenges and obstacles the offer far more women help than would be possible first report will encounter? under an accommodation-based offer only.The service, This has been an extremely useful and succinct they tell me, has taken referrals for 6,000 women in the debate. When I looked at the number of speakers, I past year, whereas an accommodation-based model thought “Oh my goodness, we’re going to be here a would not have been able to deal with more than around while”, but we have not. I hope that noble Lords, both 100 a year. those in the Chamber and those listening from home, When we understand this perspective of the importance will appreciate that we have a lot to get on with; their of community-based services and how they support succinct comments are very welcome. victims and their families, it is incumbent on the I will take a leaf out of their book and conclude by Minister to explain why she is not prepared to take the saying that peace has broken out. This debate is an route of Amendment 85. In Gloucestershire, the emphasis example of the Lords working at its best. I congratulate is on safely keeping victims in their homes, allowing noble Lords, the Minister and all the charities and them to maintain family and community networks organisations that have worked together in the best and avoid isolation, and enabling their children to stay way possible to ensure that we have got to this situation. 1641 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1642

2.30 pm The statutory duty on the domestic abuse commissioner to publish and lay before Parliament the Clause 8 Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con): My Lords, the report on the provision of and need for community-based noble Baroness, Lady Burt, is absolutely right to say support services, and the statutory duty on tier 1 local that peace has broken out, but I do not think that your authorities to monitor and report on the safe Lordships were ever at war. We have all been seeking accommodation duty on the provision of community- the same ends. This has been a good and succinct based support in their area, will together ensure that debate—long may that last—and from what several noble the Government have all the information they need to Lords have said I know that they will keep a close eye protect and support safe accommodation and services on developments over the next few months. in the community. In addition, I have committed The noble Baronesses, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb today to consulting this summer on a statutory duty and Lady Primarolo, made specific points about around community-based services in the upcoming perpetrators being brought to book and that victims victims’ law consultation. This is a commitment to should be able to stay in their own home. The importance explore precisely the issues that noble Lords have of community-based services for the victims of domestic highlighted in this debate. It will give us the time to do abuse and their children is unquestionable. We share them justice. To rush legislation now would, as I have noble Lords’ambitions to see all the victims of this terrible said, risk solidifying into statute the wrong framework crime being supported. and accountability mechanisms, as well as the wrong It might assist the House if I briefly recap the arrangements for ensuring that responsible public Government’sreasoning on whynow is not the appropriate authorities collaborate to ensure that victims receive time to legislate on this issue. I shall return to the point the services that they need. made by the noble Lord, Lord Hunt. The current We also cannot take a shortcut with a regulation- landscape is complex. Unlike accommodation-based making power, as suggested by the noble Lord, Lord services, those in the community are funded and Hunt. As I said in my opening speech, your Lordships’ commissioned not only by PCCs but by local authorities House does not like the kind of skeletal powers that and clinical commissioning groups. Further, as another would be provided for in Amendment 31. Any new noble Lord said, the third sector is prominently involved duties in respect of community-based support should in this. Introducing an undeveloped statutory duty in be set out in primary legislation, as we have done for the Bill would run the risk of cementing in legislation accommodation-based support in Part 4. This issue a complex landscape that we are working hard to simplify. must be given thorough and thoughtful consideration. Equally, placing the duty on only one of these public We will use the consultation to interrogate fully the bodies would be to risk legislating for responsibility in current landscape of community-based services and the wrong place. This is far too important an issue on to develop effective proposals on how we might ensure which to legislate in a rush. that it remains robust and effective in order to give all Several noble Lords, including the noble Lords, victims access to these vital services. Lord Hunt and Lord Russell, the noble Baronesses, My noble friend Lord Polak pointed to the fact that Lady Primarolo and Lady Burt of Solihull, and my Amendment 85 also seeks to make provision for noble friend Lady McIntosh talked about the funding perpetrator programmes. I agree entirely that more is behind this, which is crucial. In fact, it has gone to the needed here. The noble Baronesses, Lady Primarolo heart of the position taken by the Government. We and Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb, also talked about must understand fully the cost of such a duty before the issue. I will set out our plans in this area when we we can implement it. The MHCLG duty has been come to debate other amendments tabled by the noble funded at a cost of £125 million, so any action around Baroness,LadyRoyall,andthenobleLord,LordStrasburger. community-based services must be funded appropriately. The needs of victims and perpetrators are clearly of a As I have said, significant government funding is different order, but we recognise that both issues need already provided for these services, with an additional to be addressed. However, we are not persuaded that £17.7 million for them having been announced only they should be conflated in a single provision such as last month. The results of this funding will be a that provided for in Amendment 85. further crucial piece of information to help us understand further need. I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady I turn finally to Amendment 30. I say to the noble Jones of Moulsecoomb, and others that funding for Lord, Lord Hunt, that for the reasons I have explained, the commissioner also has to be in place. we would not expect local authorities to give priority toaccommodation-basedsupportservicesovercommunity- The noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, asked about the based services, so the circumstances addressed in the position in Wales and Amendment 17 placing a duty amendment should not arise. In response to his question, on the domestic abuse commissioner to prepare and once the new duty under Part 4 becomes law the public publish a report under Clause 8 on the provision of sector equality duty will apply to local authorities in domestic abuse services in England. As with the provision delivering their functions under it. made in Part 4, we have limited the duty to the provision of these community-based services in England In assessing needs, local authorities will consider in recognition that generally we are dealing here with the differing requirements of all victims. This goes to devolved matters in Wales. However, the noble Baroness the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Fox, is absolutely right to ask the question. We recognise because that will include those with relevant protected the concerns raised by noble Lords, which is why we characteristics under the Equality Act 2010, as well as have tabled amendments to demonstrate our commitments victims who might come in from outside the specific in this space. local authority area. As set out in the draft statutory 1643 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1644 guidance, tier 1 local authorities should make it clear Clause 37: Breach of order in their strategies how they plan to make support services available that will meet the needs of all victims. Amendment 18 The strategy should set out the support needs that Moved by Baroness Hamwee have been identified as part of the local needs assessment, along with a clear breakdown of the differing needs of 18: Clause 37, page 23, line 28, leave out “without reasonable excuse the person fails” and insert “the court is satisfied beyond victims’ groups such as, but not limited to, those from reasonable doubt that the person has without reasonable excuse BAME backgrounds or who identify as LGBT, and failed” how they will address the barriers faced by victims Member’s explanatory statement with relevant protected characteristics and/or multiple This amendment applies the criminal standard of proof to a or complex needs. I hope that that will answer the breach of a domestic abuse protection order. point put by the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss. Baroness Hamwee (LD) [V]: My Lords,this amendment raises the relationship between the civil order and the We want the same outcomes here. I think and hope criminal conviction that can result from a breach of it. that the road map that I have set out, underpinned by I hope that this debate is as constructive as the last our amendments, has reassured noble Lords that the one, because my intention is not to divide the House Government are committed to taking this issue forward but to get on record the explanation of how a DAPO—a at pace. I therefore ask the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, domestic abuse protection order—and the breach of it not to move his amendment. I thank all noble Lords will work. for taking part in what has been an incredibly constructive debate and I hope that these government amendments The order may be made if the court is satisfied on will be universally supported. the balance of probabilities, which is the civil standard of proof, that an individual has been abusive to someone with whom he or she has a personal connection— The Deputy Speaker (Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall) I find it difficult to use “they” of the singular. It is also (Lab): I have received a request to ask the Minister a a condition that the order is short question from the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of “necessary and proportionate to protect that person from domestic Kings Heath. abuse, or the risk of domestic abuse”. The civil court can impose requirements and the Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I Bill gives examples, such as non-contact, not going to want to ask the Minister a couple of quick questions. specified premises and electronic monitoring. If the The first relates to the additional money she mentioned subject of the order fails to comply with a requirement, today and in Committee that is going to local authorities without reasonable excuse, it is an offence of which he to help to implement the legislation. Given what the or she may be convicted. If found guilty, he or she is NAO has said this morning, is she confident that local liable to a fine or imprisonment up to five years. authorities will actually spend the money in the areas WedebatedprotectionnoticesandordersinCommittee. in which the Government wish them to? Secondly, on The Minister, the noble Lord, Lord Wolfson, in a long the question put by the noble Baroness, Lady Fox, about and helpful reply, said that he agreed with the aims of the jeopardy that women-only spaces in refuges are our amendments and he summarised them correctly as: coming under because of local authority commissioning “to ensure procedural fairness so that criminal liability and punishment policies, will the Minister remind those authorities of for breach of a DAPO will occur only where the breach is proved the need to implement fully the Equality Act 2010 and to the criminal standard of proof”. not try to reinterpret it? He also said: “One of the strongest elements of a DAPO is that it is a civil order, made on the civil standard of proof. That means that if a Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con): My Lords, I victim is not able to, or chooses not to, seek remedy through the will answer the last question first. The Equality Act criminal justice system, they can still access protection from the 2010 is of the utmost importance here. Whether or not court.”—[Official Report, 1/2/21; cols. 1950-51.] I actually remind every local authority of its obligations I wonder whether the Minister can unpack that “not under that Act, they have statutory duties, and under- able”—why not? And “chooses not to”—why would pinning the work of every single local state body is the we not require that course to be pursued? I understand, Equality Act. as much as someone who has not been in this situation Will local authorities necessarily spend the additional can, the difficulties facing someone going through money on what they have been tasked with spending it everything in a court, which is an issue that we will on? It is being given to them in conjunction with a come to later. It is important to enable a victim to duty. I know, because of what she has said, that both pursue both justice and protection, but it is also important the domestic abuse commissioner and the local boards to have regard to the rights of an alleged perpetrator, will be scrutinising the spending and commissioning which is about the standard of proof to be attained. of those services locally. 2.45 pm The Minister wrote after the last stage, and I thank Amendment 17 agreed. him for that, referring to a question that I asked in Committee about the experience of applying the The Deputy Speaker (Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall) alternative of contempt of court to punish the breach (Lab): We come now to the group consisting of of an order. The letter did not answer that point, and Amendment 18. Anyone wishing to press this amendment that may be because it is not known how often that to a Division must make that clear in debate. route is taken in the case of comparable civil orders. 1645 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1646

[BARONESS HAMWEE] fear that the police may choose to use breaches of an He said—and this is another aspect of my questions—that order as an easier alternative to proving charges for choosing not to pursue a breach as a criminal matter more serious criminal offences, such as assault or allowed victims to obtain protection criminal damage. A lower threshold may imply that “based on their individual circumstances.” something has been done by the authorities—as it Can he amplify on that? How does it come about? Do were, ticking a box—but perhaps more should be the police advise victims on their choice? Is there done. If the police go about choosing an easier tick-box guidance or a code of practice? Does the CPS get solution, without the nuisance of gathering evidence involved at this stage? that can be tested, that is a bad outcome, so we must The primary reason for the amendment is to ask the ensure that order breaches are not used as an alternative Minister to repeat, from the Dispatch Box, the clear to pursing criminal charges where appropriate. statement that he made in his letter about standard of It is also nerve-racking that some breaches of an proof. He wrote emphasising order may be relatively minor and very far from criminally “that a breach will not result in an automatic prosecution. … the threatening to anyone, least of all the person the order breach will need to be reported to the police, who will then is protecting. Some fear that alleged victims may be investigate and refer to prosecutors for a decision on whether to deterred from reporting breaches if that automatically pursue a prosecution. Criminal sanctions will only be imposed criminalises their partner or their ex-partner, who following a conviction for the breach offence in the criminal might perhaps be the parent of their children. court, which would need to be proved to the criminal standard in the usual way. By this, I mean that the matter will be dealt with by The worry is that those who the Bill seeks to protect a criminal court which will automatically apply the criminal are being sidelined in the process and potentially standard of proof when deciding whether to convict.” disempowered. Their agency is potentially undermined That was reassuring, but it is better to have it on by decisions taken by the police or third parties who record in the Official Report. Therefore, I beg to move. can use breaches of an order to criminalise alleged perpetrators, regardless of what the victim wants or of however minor the breach. If that were to happen, the Baroness Fox of Buckley (Non-Afl): First, I thank main loser would ultimately be due process. I therefore the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, for such clarity in support this amendment wholeheartedly and look forward raising some of my concerns. My enthusiasm for the to the Minister clarifying this or reassuring us that this Domestic Abuse Bill is somewhat muted by the worrying is not a way of avoiding a criminal burden of proof. trend from the Government more broadly to use civil protection notices and orders to expand the coercive Lord Paddick (LD) [V]: My Lords, I want to go one powers of the state, criminalising a greater range of step back and start with domestic abuse prevention behaviours without the bother of reaching the burden notices. These can be given by a relatively junior police of proof of criminal law. officer, despite what the legislation describes as a To be honest, I was surprised that those who usually “senior police officer”—I was a police inspector at the speak up on civil liberties in this place seemed rather age of 23—on the basis that he has reasonable grounds quiet on this, which is why I was glad to see this to believe that P has been abusive towards another amendment. I know that the issue of domestic abuse is person aged 16 or over to whom P is personally emotive and sensitive, and that we all want to do what connected and reasonably believes that the notice is we can to oppose it, but due process is important too, necessary to protect the person from abuse by P. If P so I warmly welcome this amendment and thank the breaches the notice, P can be arrested and must be noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, and the noble Lord, held in custody before they can be brought before the Lord Paddick, for raising it. court. That is a lot of power invested in a relatively It is a crucial amendment, because it aims to ensure junior and potentially inexperienced police officer, that a criminal standard of proof is applied to a with serious consequences for P.A practical alternative breach of a domestic abuse order. That is just not clear might be to seek the authority of a magistrate, in a as the legislation is written. It seems an important similar way that the police might seek a search warrant, protection for justice and the rule of law. The danger which can be done at short notice, on a 24/7 basis. Did of any hybridisation of civil and criminal instruments the Government consider such an alternative? is that criminal penalties can be given out without As my noble friend Lady Hamwee said, domestic satisfying the criminal burden of proof, which means abuse prevention orders can be made by a court on that someone can effectively be found guilty of a crime application, and must be applied for if P is already and labelled as a proven abuser without a legal test or subject to a domestic abuse protection notice. The representation. That feels far too subjective in the Bill, orders are made on the basis that the court is satisfied as it stands. on the balance of probabilities, the civil standard of Of course, I understand that breaches of orders proof, that P has been abusive towards a person aged must have consequences. They are not just a piece of 16 or over to whom P is personally connected and the paper; they are not just there for show. The amendment order is necessary and proportionate to protect that seeks to clarify how the judgment of a “reasonable person from domestic abuse, or the risk of domestic excuse” for a breach in the legislation, or that it was abuse, carried out by P. “beyond reasonable doubt”, is arrived at. It must be The order can be made in the absence of P, and it the role of the courts, but it is just not clear. can impose a range of prohibitions and requirements. Dispensing with the criminal burden of proof can If P fails, without reasonable excuse, to comply with have some unintended consequences that are not in the order, he commits a criminal offence and can be the interests of the victim either. Some campaigners imprisoned for up to five years. Normally an accused 1647 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1648 person is convicted of a criminal offence only if the perpetrator present. The alleged perpetrator will be offence is proved beyond reasonable doubt, and while told of it and given an opportunity to come to court I accept that a breach of the order might be so proved, and argue against the imposition of a non-molestation the basis upon which the order is given is on the order, but the reason the process is as I have described balance of probabilities. is to protect the woman, as it is usually. I understand When this House debated knife crime prevention that the purpose of the DAPN and the DAPO is to orders, we discussed whether the breach of what is supersede the arrangements we have in place. effectively a civil order, granted on the balance of I understand the points the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, probabilities, should result in a criminal offence, rather made about the appropriateness of these sorts of than a fine or a term of imprisonment for contempt of orders when compared to ASBOs and community court without a criminal conviction being recorded protection notices. They are points he has made before against the perpetrator. In that case, the Government and they are interesting. Nevertheless, as I said in my claimed that it was the police who said that a criminal opening, I see that the purpose of this short debate is sanction was necessary, rather than a civil penalty, in for the Minister to put on the record the contents of order for perpetrators to take them seriously. What is the letter he has written to the noble Baroness, Lady the Government’s reason this time? Hamwee, to make crystal clear the standard of proof As we discussed then, Parliament changed a similar that would be necessary to get a conviction for breaching regime introduced under the Crime and Disorder Act these orders. 1998 and the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, whereby breach of the civil order resulted in the criminalisation 3 pm of many young people with no previous convictions The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry for breach of an anti-social behaviour order or ASBO. of Justice (Lord Wolfson of Tredegar) (Con): My Lords, Parliament replaced ASBOs with anti-social behaviour as I indicated in Committee, I agree with the general injunctions and community protection notices—a purely aim of the amendment, which is to ensure that criminal civil process—by means of the Anti-social Behaviour, liability and punishment for a breach of a DAPO should Crime and Policing Act 2014. occur only if the breach is proved to the criminal On the basis of hearsay, potentially a malicious standard of proof. I heard from the noble Baroness, allegation, someone could be given a domestic abuse Lady Hamwee, and a number of other contributors to protection order, breach of which may result in a this short debate that the essential purpose of the criminal conviction and a term of imprisonment. Can amendment is for me to repeat from the Dispatch Box the Minister please explain why it is necessary for a what I set out in a letter. I will aim to do just that. criminal record to be created when there is a breach of I therefore make two main points. First, a breach of the civil domestic abuse prevention order when it is a DAPO is a criminal offence. As with all criminal not necessary in relation to anti-social behaviour offences, this will require the police to investigate the injunctions and community protection notices? case and refer it to prosecutors, who will decide whether to pursue a prosecution. Secondly, the fact that a Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I breach of a DAPO is a criminal offence means that, as am speaking to this amendment on the basis that the with all criminal offences, the criminal standard of noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, said that she will not proof will apply automatically when the court is dealing be moving it to a vote, and that what she is seeking is, with the case. A criminal conviction cannot be entered, essentially, for the Minister to read into the record the or criminal sanctions imposed, unless and until the contents of the letter the noble Baroness received, in criminal standard of proof has been met. which the Minister explained the nature of the process The criminal standard of proof applies, therefore, when people breach the DAPO. when we are dealing with a breach of a DAPO. It does I thought I would address a couple of the points not apply when we are dealing with the making a made by the noble Baroness, Lady Fox, when she DAPO. When we look at whether a DAPO should be opened her contribution, in her typically provocative made, the civil standard of proof applies—that is, the way, by saying she feared that the state was expanding balance of probabilities. But in order to impose criminal its coercive powers. In some ways, the situation is more sanctions for its breach, the criminal standard of proof extreme than she or the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, will apply—that is, beyond reasonable doubt. I hope said. that has set out the position clearly and unambiguously. I remind the House that I sit as a magistrate in Picking up on the point made by the noble Baroness, family and criminal cases; in particular, I sit on domestic Lady Fox of Buckley, “beyond reasonable doubt” is abuse-related criminal cases. In domestic abuse criminal the standard of proof; “without reasonable excuse” is cases, if we find a perpetrator not guilty, we still an element of the offence, which would have to be occasionally give them what is now called a restraining proved to that standard. That is the difference between order. We do that because although the necessary the two phrases. standard of proof has not been met, the alleged victim We have taken this approach to the DAPO because is clearly vulnerable, so we put a restraining order in we want to send a clear message to perpetrators that place in any event. In the family court, we use non- breach of an order is a serious matter and will be acted molestation orders. on. As I stated in Committee and during my engagement The purpose of the DAPO is to supersede restraining with the noble Baroness and others since, this approach orders and non-molestation orders, but we very frequently is similar to other civil protective orders that carry put non-molestation orders in place without the alleged criminal liability for breach, such as the non-molestation 1649 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1650

[LORD WOLFSON OF TREDEGAR] As for the question on going to the magistrates’ order,stalking protection order and knife crime prevention court, one of the strengths of this order is that it can order. The approach is therefore consistent with our be issued quickly in response to a crisis incident, as existing legal framework. with the existing domestic violence protection order. The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, asked why As the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, said, some victims may not want to go for criminal sanctions. ultimately,we are dealing with the question of protection That might not be their preference for a number of for victims. reasons. First, they may be concerned about the possible I hope that my explanations on the standard of consequences for their partner or ex-partner and would proof in this short debate, alongside the explanations I not want them criminalised for a breach or, indeed, if provided in Committee and my subsequent discussions the point of the question was, “Why isn’t the original with noble Lords, have been helpful. I hope that what order criminal?” I have said today has been clear and unambiguous. Fundamentally, the proposed orders are intended I therefore respectfully invite the noble Baroness to to be preventive and not punitive. They will enable withdraw her amendment. courts to impose positive requirements which can help to achieve long-term sustainable behaviour change Baroness Hamwee (LD) [V]: My Lords, I think my and challenge perpetrators to address their abusive noble friend Lord Paddick’squestion about the underlying behaviour.For example, the perpetrator might be required architecture, if that is the right phrase, still stands, but to attend a behaviour change programme or an alcohol I will not pursue it now. I am grateful to the Minister or substance misuse programme, or undergo a mental for all he said about the application of the provisions. health assessment. That may help those victims who I did not make myself as clear as I should have done wish to maintain a relationship with their partner or about what he explained as someone not wanting to family member but want the abuse to stop. It is a go for criminal prosecution. That was not quite my strength of the DAPO that it is such a flexible remedy. point, which was about inability and due process, The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, raised contempt which is a term we would do well to keep in mind—due of court. If a victim wanted a breach of an order other process for both parties. than one made in a magistrates’ court to be dealt with The Minister has been very clear in his explanation as a civil contempt of court, they could make a committal of the standard. I am conscious of how much business application to the court, including for an arrest warrant, the House has to get through today, so I will not if necessary. In those circumstances, the court has the prolong this. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. power to remand the perpetrator on bail or in custody. Wewould expect that victims’views would be considered, Amendment 18 withdrawn. together with other questions of public interest, when deciding which sanction for breach is appropriate. The Deputy Speaker (Lord Faulkner of Worcester) On her point about the guidance, the noble Baroness, (Lab): We now come to the group beginning with Lady Hamwee, will recall that in Clause 48 there is a Amendment 19. I point out to the House that Amendment provision for guidance to the police, and in Clause 73 98 should also be considered in this group. It was left there is provision for guidance to others, including victims. out inadvertently. This is one of the strengths of the DAPO when compared to other existing orders used in these cases, Amendment 19 such as the domestic violence protection order. The Moved by Baroness Newlove responses to our consultation highlighted that the absence of a criminal sanction following breach of the DVPO 19: After Schedule 1, insert the following new Schedule— limits the effectiveness of that order. We have therefore “SCHEDULE ensured that non-compliance with a DAPO is met STRANGULATION OR SUFFOCATION: CONSEQUENTIAL with the appropriate consequences. In that regard, I AMENDMENTS reiterate a point I made in Committee: in its report, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 the Joint Committee did not raise issues with using the 1_ In section 65A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act civil standard of proof for making a DAPO when 1984 (qualifying offences for the purposes of Part 5 of examining the draft Bill. that Act), in subsection (2), after paragraph (r) insert— “(ra) an offence under section 75A of the Serious As the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, noted, the Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation).” noble Lord, Lord Paddick, raised on a number of Housing Act 1985 occasions that we are making a move from civil standard 2_ In Schedule 2A to the Housing Act 1985 (absolute to criminal standard when breached. With respect, I ground for possession for anti-social behaviour: serious have set out the Government’s position in response to offences), after paragraph 14 insert— that on a number of occasions. We are satisfied that “14A_ An offence under section 75A of the Serious the system we have in the Bill is appropriate. There is Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation).” nothing in the point, I would respectfully say, that Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 there is something wrong with criminal sanctions on 3_ In Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Criminal Justice and breach for an order made on the balance of probabilities. Public Order Act 1994 (offences in England and Wales They are two conceptually distinct questions First, for which cross-border powers of arrest available), for what is the standard for the order to be made? Secondly, paragraph 24 substitute— what do you have to prove for criminal sanctions when “24_ An offence under either of the following provisions there is a breach of that order? of the Serious Crime Act 2015— 1651 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1652

(a) section 45 (participating in activities of organised 35A_ An offence under section 75A of the Serious crime group); Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation).” (b) section 75A (strangulation or suffocation).” Sentencing Act 2020 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 12_(1) The Sentencing Act 2020 is amended as follows. 4_(1) Section 29 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (2) In section 67 (assaults on emergency workers), in (racially or religiously aggravated assaults) is amended subsection (3), after paragraph (a) insert— as follows. “(aa) an offence under section 75A of the Serious (2) In subsection (1), after paragraph (b) (but before the Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation);”. “or” following it) insert— (3) In Part 1 of Schedule 18 (violent offences for which “(ba) an offence under section 75A of the Serious extended sentence of imprisonment available), after Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation);”. paragraph 25 insert— (3) In subsection (2), for “or (b)” substitute “, (b) or (ba)”. “Serious Crime Act 2015 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 25A_ An offence under section 75A of the Serious 5_(1) Schedule 1A to the Youth Justice and Criminal Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation).”” Evidence Act 1999 (proceedings in which witnesses are Member’s explanatory statement automatically eligible for assistance on grounds of fear The new Schedule amends other legislation in consequence of or distress about testifying) is amended as follows. the proposed new Clause in the name of Baroness Newlove that (2) After paragraph 29 insert— provides for an offence of strangulation or suffocation. “Serious Crime Act 2015 29A_ An offence under section 75A of the Serious BaronessNewlove(Con)[V]:MyLords,theamendments Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation) in a in this group are government amendments tabled in case where it is alleged that— my name. The principal amendment in this group is (a) the accused was carrying a firearm or knife at any Amendment 49, which is also in the names of the time during the commission of the offence, and noble Baronesses, Lady Wilcox and Lady Meacher. (b) a person other than the accused knew or believed at Amendments 19, 89, 95, 98, 100, 101 and 106 are any time during the commission of the offence that consequential amendments. Amendment 49 establishes the accused was carrying a firearm or knife.” a specific offence of strangulation or suffocation. My (3) In paragraph 30, after “paragraphs 1 to 8” insert “or noble friend the Minister has added his name to this 29A”. group of amendments and has indicated to me the Sexual Offences Act 2003 Government’ssupport for them. I thank my noble friend 6_ In Schedule 5 to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (cases and welcome his support. where sexual harm prevention orders may be made), after paragraph 63B insert— I am grateful to the Government for listening to this House and to the many organisations which have “63C_ An offence under section 75A of the Serious Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation).” worked tirelessly for this vital change. I thank especially the women who have shared with me and other Criminal Justice Act 2003 organisations their horrific experiences of strangulation 7_ In Part 1 of Schedule 15 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and suffocation; this has helped make the case for this (violent offences specified for purposes of certain custodial sentences), before paragraph 63G insert— change in the law. One such woman is Rachel Williams. Rachel was strangled and then later shot by her partner. “63FA_ An offence under section 75A of the Serious Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation).” She was severely injured. I put on record my thanks to her for her tireless work in getting this offence recognised, Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 as well as in supporting other victims through the 8_ In section 6A of the Domestic Violence, Crime and organisation she has set up, Stand Up to Domestic Victims Act 2004 (evidence and procedure in cases of serious physical harm: England and Wales), in subsection Abuse. This year, 2021, is the year when we can be so (2), at the end insert— proud to say to the thousands of victims and survivors “(c) an offence under section 75A of the Serious Crime who have suffered from this brutal act, and to their Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation).” families, that your Lordships’ House is making this Children Act 2004 change. 9_ In section 58 of the Children Act 2004 (reasonable I also pay tribute to all those who have worked side punishment: England), in subsection (2), after paragraph (c) by side with me since Committee to ensure that a insert— suitable amendment came together, as we have in front “(d) an offence under section 75A of the Serious Crime of us today. They include my successor as Victims’ Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation).” Commissioner for England and Wales, Dame Vera Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 Baird; the domestic abuse commissioner designate, 10_ In section 98 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Nicole Jacobs; the noble Lords, Lord Marks, Lord Act 2008 (violent offender orders), in subsection (3), Anderson, Lord Blunkett and Lord Trevethin and after paragraph (d) insert— Oaksey, and the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of “(da) an offence under section 75A of the Serious London. Last but not least, I give a huge thank you to Crime Act 2015 (strangulation or suffocation);”. Professor David Ormerod. I am most grateful to all Modern Slavery Act 2015 noble Lords around the House who have indicated to me their full support during the debates that we have 11_ In Schedule 4 to the Modern Slavery Act 2015 (offences to which defence for slavery or trafficking victims under had. section 45 of that Act does not apply), after paragraph I know that I would not have got here without the 35 insert— incredible work of Nogah Ofer and the Centre for “Serious Crime Act 2015 Women’s Justice, and Dr Cath White, the clinical 1653 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1654

[BARONESS NEWLOVE] of this violence through pornography. They may not director of SAFE Place Merseyside, whose detailed be aware of the serious harm that this causes; even research and understanding of these cases has produced death can be caused in a matter of seconds. In a BBC a strong case for reform. I am very conscious that they survey of over 2,000 participants, 38% of women have done much of this work in their own time and my under 40 had experienced strangulation during sex; thanks go to them personally as well as to their for women aged 18-24, this rises to 54%. Of the organisations.Moreover,the work of the charity Advocacy women who had been strangled or experienced other After Fatal Domestic Abuse has been pivotal in getting violence during sex, 53% had at least sometimes not us here today.I have huge respect for the chief executive consented; 42% of them said that on some or all Frank Mullane, who works tirelessly to help support occasions they had felt pressured, coerced or forced. traumatised families and ensures that professional My warning to those considering consenting is that training is given towards understanding domestic homicide there is no evidence that strangulation improves the reviews. sexual experience for women, but there is evidence It is now accepted that our existing laws on assault that men routinely use strangulation as a method of are a very poor fit for strangulation and suffocation. assault, and it is dangerous. When people speak of Current laws focus on visible injuries, but with strangulation for sexual gratification, they really mean strangulation and suffocation there can be a high level sexual gratification of men at the expense of women’s of violence but few or no visible marks. Having a safety. stand-alone offence will make assessing cases much It is important that where consent is raised and more straightforward for the police as well as prosecutors. disputed, the CPS opposes such defences robustly to Implementation will be crucial. There will need to be get across the message that strangulation can be very appropriate training for police officers, the CPS, medical dangerous, and that using it is reckless as there is staff and domestic abuse workers. This will, of course, always a risk of harm because you are depriving the need financial resourcing. However, such investment brain of oxygen. Restricting oxygen to the brain, even into stopping domestic abuse at the very first opportunity for a short time, can have long-term consequences will save countless lives of misery and the far greater such as neurological damage. costs of addressing further horrific crimes, including However, within domestic abuse most cases of homicides, as well as suicides where domestic abuse is strangulation are not to do with sex. In these cases, the a factor. Implementation needs to be thorough and strangling is usually part of an episode of aggression consistent across England and Wales. and the issue of consent is not raised by the police or 3.15 pm the CPS. This new offence will make it clear that it I am concerned that many police forces’ specialist must be taken seriously, not dismissed because there or dedicated domestic abuse units have been disbanded are no visible marks. The offence heightens the level of or so downsized that they cannot provide the service risk for the victim of further abuse. that victims have every right to expect. If this new If the implementation of the Bill is properly resourced offence within this landmark Bill is truly going to and monitored, this will really be the start of a tangible cause a sea-change in attitudes—a change that we change in attitudes towards a particularly horrifying desperately need—domestic abuse in all its forms must form of domestic abuse. I hope we will see the culture become a priority for all police forces, so that victims shift so that such abuse becomes unacceptable to everywhere feel their voices are heard with dignity and everyone. The new offence is just one part of the respect and they are given the support that is needed changes needed, and I urge all noble Lords to support for them to feel confident in and trust the criminal the amendments. I beg to move. justice system. I will leave it to the Minister to deal with the Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I technicalities of the amendments but there are some warmly commend the sterling efforts of the noble obvious changes from Committee.The maximum sentence Baroness, Lady Newlove, to see the introduction of proposed here is five years, rather than seven, to bring new offences of non-fatal strangulation or suffocation. it in line with the normal maximum sentence for The noble Baroness generously mentioned a number actual bodily harm. The provision now includes the of organisations and people who have helped her but offence when carried out abroad by a UK national, she deserves huge credit for the way in which she has which it is right to catch under this legislation. The championed this action, which I am delighted to see in new amendment introduces a limit on the consent today’s amendments. normally allowed in law, so that a defendant cannot The noble Baroness’s speech was very powerful. rely on a defence of consent if serious harm is caused, The statistics that she shared with us about the relationship even if the defendant did not intend to cause the harm between strangulation and sex were shocking but, as but was reckless; that is, they were aware that there she said, it goes much further beyond that as well. was a risk of harm when they strangled someone but Indeed, she has explained at previous stages of the Bill disregarded it. This limit to the defence of consent is that non-fatal strangulation and suffocation have the in line with the “rough sex” defence amendment, unique characteristic of being extremely harmful physically which has become Clause 65 of the Bill. I accept the and psychologically but often with no external physical need for consistency, and I know that strangulation signs. Because of the lack of observable injuries and and suffocation can be part of rough sex. the lack of understanding of the seriousness of the Personally, I am concerned that many young people offence, strangulation when charged is generally pursued consent to violent acts because they feel pressured or as a summary offence of common assault in the coerced by partners and because of the normalisation magistrates’ court. Undercharging limits sentencing 1655 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1656 options, and a summary offence also deprives the falling within that category. That is because all cases victim and the defendant of the greater resources and of strangulation or suffocation are required to be treated attention devoted to a Crown Court prosecution. Without as specific offences, for the reasons that I mentioned the establishment of a separate offence, those unique earlier. characteristics mean that more victims would suffer I am grateful for the advice of Professor David and be killed in future. Ormerod, the former criminal law commissioner at the The amendment tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Law Commission, for his help with the drafting. He Newlove, creates a new criminal offence of strangulation changed my view on the consent issue; I had originally or suffocation. The offence will apply where a person been of the view that consent should be no defence, intentionally strangles another person, but it will also but it is right that there is a defence of consent—to cover a range of behaviours, including suffocation and cover, for example, cases of sporting contests that lead other acts that affect the person’s ability to breathe to injury—provided that serious harm was unintended. and which amount to battery. Alongside the new That proviso is elegantly drafted in the amendments offence must go training and strong guidance to police before us. I know the Government are also grateful for forces and other statutory agencies about how it is to the generosity with which he gave his advice, and for be implemented, but today is a very significant step the advice of the Law Commission. forward. I am grateful to the Government for responding In my view, the broad definition of “serious harm” to the noble Baroness, Lady Newlove, and I warmly in proposed new subsection (6) to include actual bodily welcome the amendments. harm is right. It will be less difficult to prove, in cases of both physical and psychiatric injury, than if the Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD): My Lords, only harm that met the required criteria were those for I too welcome the amendments. I welcome the new grievous bodily harm or wounding offences under offence of non-fatal strangulation and suffocation. I Sections 18 and 20 of the Offences against the Person echo the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, in Act. It is also right that the new offence has extraterritorial saying that this is a very significant achievement for application under the new Section 75B, and we welcome the noble Baroness, Lady Newlove. As she generously that. said in opening the debate, many have helped to bring I commend the Government on behalf of these this new offence to the statute book, but she has been Benches for their comprehensive and well-modulated the driver throughout. This has not been for herself; response to this new offence, and to the amendments her motivation has been to relieve the suffering of by the noble Baroness, Lady Newlove. I congratulate victims. her once again. It is a victory for her but also for the We on these Benches have given the noble Baroness many victims of this horrible crime. It is to be hoped our wholehearted support throughout. It was always that this provision will ensure that many others are an extraordinary anomaly that non-fatal strangulation spared both strangulation offences and the possible was not a specific offence. As discussed in Committee, escalation to fatal violence thereafter. cases of strangulation were generally charged, and therefore sentenced, as assault occasioning actual bodily 3.30 pm harm at most—for the reason, which she explained, that they often left little or no mark. The result was Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP): My Lords, I that strangulation and suffocation were undercharged will keep my remarks short, in view of the amount of and underpunished, and indeed often not punished work to get through today. I congratulate the noble at all. That was all despite the appalling truth that Baroness, Lady Newlove, who has shown the most strangulation was so much the marker of more generalised incredible tenacity to get to this point. It is absolutely domestic abuse, and despite the tragic fact that so often amazing, and an example to us all. Also, if I can say it turned out be a predictor of future killing. this without sounding anodyne or even boring, I I am very grateful to Ministers for engaging with so congratulate the Government on picking this up. It many of those concerned with the promotion of these was the right thing to do, and I am delighted. It opens amendments.The noble Lord, Lord Anderson of Ipswich, the way for survivors of domestic abuse to seek justice and I had the opportunity to discuss the legal aspects and have a legal pathway to see their abusers punished. of the new proposed offence with Ministers, and the In later amendments, I will pick up on other areas Government quickly saw the strength of the argument where women are legally discriminated against very for a specific offence. It is a credit to Ministers that, seriously, but for the time being, this is a fantastic after initial hesitation, they decided to include the new move by the Government. offence in the Bill and resisted the temptation to put it off to a future date. Because of the strong connection Lord Blunkett (Lab) [V]: My Lords, in view of the with domestic abuse, it is an offence that sits clearly pressure of time, I shall be brief, but I could not allow within the Bill, but it was the right decision to work on this amendment to pass without congratulating all this with the speed that we have. That decision must those who have played such a significant part. The have saved many victims from further serious harm noble Baroness, Lady Newlove, has shown enormous and has almost certainly saved lives. tenacity. There are times in all our parliamentary, It is right that the new offence is of general application, public and political lives when we suddenly realise that not just limited to domestic abuse. It would not have we can make a real difference to the well-being, and in been appropriate to confine it to cases within the this case the lives, of others. I congratulate her from statutory definition of “domestic abuse” contained in the bottom of my heart. I pay tribute to those whom the Bill, despite the overwhelming majority of cases she generously paid tribute in her speech, and also to 1657 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1658

[LORD BLUNKETT] the noble Lord, Lord Parkinson. We are very lucky to her co-signatories, my noble friend Lady Wilcox and have those Ministers in this House and I pay credit the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, who have stuck to them. with this all along. Unusually for these Benches, I congratulate, as my Baroness Burt of Solihull (LD): My Lords, like noble friend Lord Hunt did, the two Ministers, who others who have spoken, I am absolutely delighted at have been assiduous in their preparedness to listen, this outcome and grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady respond and be flexible. This is the House of Lords at Newlove, and the two Ministers for addressing this its best. Parliament is at its best when people listen to gap in the legislation by giving this cruel and dangerous each other, where divides are narrowed and overcome, offence its rightful place as a crime in its own right. I and where people of good will are prepared to find a congratulate all outside and inside this place who have way forward in the interests of the people whom we campaigned for years to bring non-fatal strangulation seek to serve in the country as a whole. on to the statue book. This will make a huge difference, I have played a very small part in this, but I like to as others have said, to the police, who will be given the think that the Minister, as I said to him on another confidence to arrest perpetrators. Judges will be able occasion, would not wish to put his parliamentary to bring the full force of the law on these sadistic, colleagues in the House of Commons in the invidious controlling criminals, who threaten, hurt, maim and position of voting down such an important and critical kill their terrified victims. measure. He certainly listened, as have the Government. Nothing that I can say can add to the cogent, clear Will we be able to do so on other issues? contribution of the noble Baroness, Lady Newlove. As Today there will be many votes. It should not diminish my noble friend Lord Marks said, this is a victory not the importance of the Bill that we have continuing only for her, but for all those victims from the past and issues to raise, because this is a really important piece the future who will now get justice, as well as greater of legislation. I have one thing to put on the record on awareness that this is not okay, and, as the noble Lord, the statistics that the noble Baroness, Lady Newlove, Lord Blunkett, says, is nothing about love. gaveusthisafternoon.Thisisaboutpoweranddomination, never about love. It is about people who are prepared Baroness Wilcox of Newport (Lab) [V]: My Lords, to use their manhood for ill, not for good. It is about the important issue of non-fatal strangulation has inadequates who then inflict their inadequacy on the been powerfully supported by the noble Baroness, Lady people they claim to love. If we can put that message Newlove, throughout the passage of this Bill, and she out to young men in particular, we will have done a deserves every plaudit available to her for taking this very proud job of work this afternoon. through. I add my thanks to the Ministers engaged in I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Newlove, for what this matter and echo the comments of my noble friend she has done. Many people will have cause to thank Lord Blunkett, which emanate from his huge experience her in years to come. in the Commons. This is indeed the House of Lords at its best, and I am delighted that the Government have listened and introduced Amendment 49. Baroness Meacher (CB) [V]: My Lords, this Bill will Having the separate offence of non-fatal strangulation be remembered in years to come for the many important on the statute book will help the police to stop domestic changes and reforms that will be introduced through abuse and coercive control. One of the UK’s leading it, but without doubt one of the most welcome changes domestic abuse campaigners is Rachel Williams, whom will be the recognition of non-fatal strangulation in I got to know very well during my time as leader of law and, we hope, the effective response by the criminal Newport City Council. She lobbied me at every justice system. I say“welcome”; this particular amendment opportunity on these matters. She currently has a will be most welcomed by the most severely abused petition running on change.org to ask the Prime Minister women who suffer this particularly horrible crime. As to amend the law on non-fatal strangulation. She says others have said, the noble Baroness, Lady Newlove, in her petition: has done a superb job, supported by some pretty superb people, in steering the amendment to this “Strangulation is a very symbolic act of control which leaves its victim in no doubt that there is a real and visceral threat to point. She has said pretty well all that I would have their life. If you put your hands on someone’s throat and squeeze said, and therefore I will be extremely brief. the message and terror for the victim is clear.” The only point that has not been mentioned is that As a survivor of domestic violence, Rachel really knows if we really want the amendment to achieve what it what impact that has. should achieve, which is the appropriate response by Strangulation is a very particular form of assault the police, the courts and so on, then training police for three reasons: it is likely to cause serious injury or officers so that they are aware of this stand-alone death, it is perceived by the victim as a direct threat to offence will be very important, and maybe a little their life, and it is highly predictive of future homicide. training for doctors, although they should certainly be A separate offence on the statue book will give the aware of what a strangulation looks like. Can the power to the police and the justice system to treat Minister say anything about that? these offences with the seriousness that they deserve. I Like others, I say a tremendously sincere thank you am delighted to tell Rachel, and the 108,609 people to our Ministers, who have really listened. The noble who had signed her petition when I last checked, that Baroness, Lady Williams, has been a marvellous Minister this amendment will ensure that the law is indeed in this House for a long time now, and we now have changed, and that non-fatal strangulation will become the benefit of the noble Lord, Lord Wolfson, as well as a stand-alone offence on the face of this landmark Bill. 1659 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1660

Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, first, I by the noble Lord, Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames, congratulate my noble friend Lady Newlove on bringing this offence is not restricted to domestic abuse situations forward these amendments, which, as she said, will but it is quite right that it is in this Bill, because it is create a new criminal offence of strangulation and often found in those situations. suffocation. A number of tributes have been paid to Although such criminal behaviour can currently be my noble friend; they are all well deserved and I captured under the offence of battery or, where more associate myself and the Government with them. If I serious harm is caused, via the offence of causing may pick up one phrase used by the noble Lord, Lord actual bodily harm under the Offences against the Blunkett, she has made a real difference and, moreover, Person Act 1861, the Government have been persuaded in a really important area. I assure him and the House of the need to distinguish such crimes through a that we listen. I will listen to noble Peers on this and stand-alone offence. Serious offences against the person on other matters. We will not always agree but I will currently require actual bodily harm, which can make always listen. cases of strangulation or suffocation potentially difficult There have been a number of powerful and brief to prosecute. That is because the victim may have no, contributions. The noble Baroness, Lady Jones of orlimited,signsof injury.Theproblemcanbecompounded Moulsecoomb, was kind enough to thank the by the fact that the existing charge of battery, which Government, which is very welcome. I will seek to make carries a penalty of six months’ imprisonment, does it a more regular occurrence but it is warmly accepted. not enable the seriousness of the offence as experienced As the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, by the victim—the terror caused during the assault or mentioned, and as my noble friend Lady Newlove the often long-lasting psychological effect of it—to be identified, a number of organisations have worked suitably punished. hard in this area. Their names are on the record and Unlike the summary-only offence of battery, the they deserve the credit as well. new offence of strangulation or suffocation will not be I am also personally grateful to the noble Lord, time-limited if a prosecution does not commence within Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames, for the discussions six months of the offence. But perhaps of greater which he and I have had on this matter, together with importance here, as my noble friend Lady Newlove the noble Lord, Lord Anderson of Ipswich. They have identified, the new offence will expose the defendant been extremely useful to me. Perhaps I may also pick to a more serious sentence than the current six months’ out some good discussions I have had with somebody imprisonment for battery. That is because the nature who did not contribute to this debate but has worked of the harm required to qualify for the maximum hard in this area: the noble Baroness, Lady Bertin. She five-year penalty has been reduced. certainly improved my knowledge of and focus on this matter. 3.45 pm My noble friend Lady Newlove has highlighted to As is the case under the law for other assaults, the the Government why this new offence was necessary. new offence will also provide a defence for the perpetrator She has engaged with me and my officials, to whom I to show that the victim consented to being strangled. should also pay tribute for working at significant However, and importantly, that defence of consent will speed, together with Professor David Ormerod—I think not apply if the victim suffers serious harm, including I can now say Professor David Ormerod CBE. This is where the perpetrator intended to cause serious harm not the first time, and will not be the last, that he has or was reckless as to causing harm, regardless of the contributed significantly to the criminal law of this victim’s consent to those acts. country.Iwilltakeafewmomentstoexplainthearchitecture Noble Lords may ask why consent needs to be of the offence, because it is a new offence. addressed here at all. The reason is that the law has to The key amendment in the group is Amendment strike a balance. On the one hand, it must not interfere 49, which provides for the substantive new offence. with an individual’s Article 8 ECHR rights to respect Strangulation and suffocation are always dangerous for their private life; we also do not want to criminalise and, subject to the issue of consent, which was raised low-risk consensual activity. But, on the other hand, by a number of noble Lords and which I will come we must ensure that any activity which causes serious back to, they are wholly unacceptable. Strangulation harm is punished. We have sought to strike that balance can not only injure but be used by perpetrators to in a manner which reflects the current law of the land. cause fear or exert control over their victim, as part of That was established by your Lordships’ House in its an abusive relationship. previousjudicialfunction,whichsomeof usstillremember, Amendment 49, as I have stated, seeks to create a in its decision in 1993 in the case of R v Brown. new offence of non-fatal strangulation or suffocation If I can summarise a very long decision in one in England and Wales. It applies to behaviour which is sentence, it would be this: where a victim consents to currently criminal, so the aim is to improve the ability an act that amounts to no more than a battery, the to prosecute such offences effectively—a point made consent of the victim can be a valid defence for the by a number of noble Lords. The offence is designed perpetrator. Subsection (3) of proposed new Section to deal with assaults on any person where this affects 75A, however, also gives effect to the other aspect of their ability to breathe, whether by application of R v Brown in that a person ordinarily cannot consent force to the neck—that is, strangulation—or by any to having serious harm inflicted upon them. This is other act; for example, by suffocation or constriction. linked to Clause 65 of the Bill, which lists the three The offence applies to all cases where strangulation or assault offences for which, to cite R v Brown, consent suffocation takes place, including those that occur in a to serious harm for sexual gratification is not a defence. domestic abuse situation. To pick up the point made That, of course, ties into the point made by the noble 1661 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1662

[LORD WOLFSON OF TREDEGAR] completely involved with and I have been blown away Baroness, Lady Burt, when she said that this is nothing by the experience, knowledge and huge support I have about love. Importantly, exceptions that are recognised received from each and every noble Lord. separately under the common law in relation to sports I thank my noble friend the Minister and my noble and other activities will not be affected and will also friend Lady Williams because they have truly listened apply here. In such cases, where serious harm is caused and taken everything that has been discussed on board. the courts will consider this offence inapplicable where I am not a lawyer or barrister so I thank those I call an existing public policy exemption applies. my “legal eagles”— I mean them no disrespect by that The extraterritoriality point was raised by a number —who have the brains to narrow this down and support of contributors. A new Section 75B is to be inserted the victims of this horrific and violent offence. into the Serious Crime Act 2015, providing extraterritorial I have goosebumps about what has been said. I think jurisdiction for the offence created by new Section 75A. the best words were from the noble Lord, Lord Blunkett, It will mean that where the offence of strangulation or when he said that this shows the House at its best. suffocation is committed outside the United Kingdom When we listen, we learn, and we can resolve to get by a UK national or a person habitually resident in what is needed for the victims on the ground. I especially England or Wales, they can be prosecuted for the thank the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, who has offence in England and Wales as if they had committed been by my side throughout this passage of the Bill. I the offence in England and Wales. appreciate her expertise and, more importantly, her Finally, given that the creation of a new offence of support. I also thank the back-room staff and the strangulation or suffocation is being achieved here, a government lawyers, who have worked really quickly number of consequential changes are required, including for us to get to this point today. a new schedule and a change to the Long Title. These To all the victims and survivors who have challenged are set out in Amendments 19, 89, 95, 98, 100, 101 and for change to get this support for many years, I say: 106. The amendments in the new schedule add this this is your day, you are the heroines of what we are new offence to existing lists of mainly violent offences discussing. All of us across the Chamber, no matter which trigger special consequences; for example, at our political party, have achieved the very best we can paragraph 12(3) of the schedule it becomes a violent for you on strangulation and suffocation. It is for you, offence for which an extended sentence of imprisonment the victims of these horrific offences, that I urge all is available. noble Lords to support these amendments. The noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, who has also The one thing I would like to ask—and the best put her name to Amendment 49, asked about training. thing I have always said throughout my journey—is In short, whenever there is a new offence, the police that we treat victims and survivors with dignity and and CPS consider training for that new offence. Such respect. One of the sincerest forms of respect is listening training is a matter for them but I am sure that all to what another has to say, to hear them and help those involved in the criminal justice system will be alive them, so that they will no longer struggle on a daily to the point that she made. basis as we progress this Bill. I hope that noble Lords I hope it is not impertinent to say, as a recent arrival will support these amendments. in your Lordships’ House, that I respectfully endorse the comment made by the noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox Amendment 19 agreed. of Newport, who also put her name to Amendment Clause 55: Support provided by local authorities to 49. She said that the amendment—and, if I may say, victims of domestic abuse the work that has led up to it—has shown the House at its best. As a new Minister, it has been a pleasure to work with everybody involved in this matter. I am very Amendment 20 conscious that I am taking some of the credit for work Moved by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar done by other Ministers, including my predecessors. 20: Clause 55, page 35, line 25, leave out “domestic abuse” and To conclude, it is important when considering the insert “accommodation-based” creation of any new criminal offence that the offence is Member’s explanatory statement proportionate, and that it allows for more prosecutions This amendment, and the Minister’s amendment at page 35, to brought and convictions secured. As I stated in line 30, would change the current label of “domestic abuse support” Committee, there were several difficult legal and technical in Clause 55 to “accommodation-based support” and are consequential on the Minister’s other amendments to Clauses 55 issues which needed to be considered, particularly and 56 relating to “other local authority support”. matters such as consent and the application of existing public policy exceptions, including those that exist for Amendment 20 agreed. sports. The Deputy Speaker (Lord Faulkner of Worcester) The Government are happy to agree that the (Lab): We now come to the group consisting of amendments now address those points while ensuring Amendment 21. Anyone wishing to press this amendment that crimes of strangulation or suffocation can be to a Division must make that clear in debate. prosecuted, with the perpetrators of such crimes more readily brought to justice. I therefore join my noble friend in commending these amendments to the House. Amendment 21 Moved by Baroness Finlay of Llandaff Baroness Newlove (Con) [V]: My Lords, I thank 21: Clause 55, page 35, line 28, at end insert— everybody in the Chamber and speaking virtually for “( ) ensure all child contact centres and organisations their very kind words. This is the first Bill I have been that offer child contact services are accredited in 1663 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1664

accordance with national standards in relation to Service checks that were not up to date and poor safeguardingandpreventingdomesticabuseasspecified storage security of personal information and records. in regulations made by the Secretary of State.” After the removal of accreditation, the centre accepted a high-risk supervised referral where the father was on Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB) [V]: My Lords, I the sex offenders register, but the centre could not am most grateful to the Minister for meeting me and provide adequately supervised services. It continues to the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby,and the noble Baronesses, advertise as NACCC-accredited and take referrals Lady McIntosh of Pickering and Lady Burt of Solihull, from solicitors. over this vexed issue of child contact centres. There are also a significant number of child contact A little history is important here. In 2007 the centres with no website presence. In the time available, Department for Education commissioned the National the NACCC could do only a desktop study and so Association of Child Contact Centres, the NACCC, could not ascertain how many are still operating. For to develop national standards for child contact, but no example, I have been informed by the NACCC of at regulatory framework was created. The NACCC and least two that are operational, but their details cannot the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support be found anywhere online. Service,Cafcass,agreed a memorandum of understanding on service delivery accreditation standards and safe- Without oversight and clear standards, there is no guarding protections to keep children safe.This cross-party way of verifying how these child contact centres and amendment builds on the work of both. They, along services are operating, and no levers to close them down. with Women’s Aid, Family Action and Barnardo’s, all Compounding this, the courts’ awareness of the judicial support this amendment. protocol on child contact is patchy, so inappropriate referrals continue to be made. The amendment aims to ensure that these standards protect children wherever they have facilitated contact. The motivation behind this amendment is to ensure The NACCC, Cafcass and key sector providers, including the safest environment in child contact cases, to allow the Salvation Army, Barnardo’s, Family Action, Relate, regular contact between absent parents and children, Action for Children and Core Assets,all do an outstanding and to ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place. job and these third sector organisations agreed by All this amendment does is provide the Secretary of consensus in 2019 that regulation is required by the State with powers to specify regulations and delivery sector. standards. We cannot let a Bill on domestic abuse proceed without ensuring the safeguarding of those Accredited child contact centres and services have children, already victims in family breakdown, in situations clear procedures and staff training and support staff where abuse may be ongoing. in decision-making where risk may be present, including in safeguarding children and preventing domestic abuse. Sadly, it is not uncommon for one or both parents to 4 pm have deep-seated problems, including risks of problems I hope the Minister will be able to tell me that this with alcohol and/or drug abuse, and the risk of ongoing amendment will be accepted or that the Government abusive behaviours. will return at Third Reading with an amendment of However, many centres and services currently fall their own, or give a firm undertaking to bring forward outside the oversight of local authorities, NACCC or the necessary regulatory standards. At the moment, Cafcass because the current regulatory framework is children are at risk in unsupervised and dangerous only voluntary and patchy. Such unregulated provision situations. The specific question is therefore this: when of centres and voluntary child contact services will the Government lay before Parliament the regulations unfortunately leaves this field open to those of malintent, required to protect children in child contact services? including paedophiles and those from extremist factions. Without an answer to this, I will feel forced to test the I ask noble Lords to ask themselves why anyone opinion of the House. I beg to move. who really cares about children would not want to be fully trained in child development and safeguarding. Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con) [V]: My Lords, Is it acceptable to leave children already traumatised I declare my interests as vice-president of NACCC by being victims of or watching abuse in situations of and the co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group increased risk? The amendment closes the loophole by on Child Contact Centres. I am delighted to join the providing the Secretary of State with powers to specify noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, and the noble Baroness, regulations and delivery. Lady Burt, in supporting the noble Baroness, Lady As the Minister requested in Committee, we provided Finlay, in this amendment. I thank her for bringing an initial review of evidence to the Minister. I am most forward Amendment 21 at this stage. I refer to my grateful to the Minister for meeting us. In the list of previous attempt to plug this legislative loophole in over 50 centres advertising on the internet, we found the Private Member’s Bill that I brought forward in some operating without oversight. Local authorities 2016-17. have a duty when commissioning under Section 34 of Life is full of choices, and, regrettably, children do the Children Act 2004, but financial stringencies and not choose when their families will split and break the lack of universal standards contribute to variability. down and their parents separate. What is important Importantly, not all services are local authority- for children’s well-being, and in keeping with the United commissioned. Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, is that For example, one child contact centre had NACCC children continue to have contact with both parents accreditation withdrawn due to safeguarding and health following a family breakdown. Often at that time, the and safety concerns, including Disclosure and Barring absent parent in particular may suffer severe stress 1665 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1666

[BARONESS MCINTOSH OF PICKERING] haven in which to meet the absent parent. If there is from the family breakdown and encounter substance anything short of a full commitment from the Minister or alcohol abuse. It is extremely important in those in these circumstances, I urge the noble Baroness, circumstances where a child cannot see the absent Lady Finlay, to test the opinion of the House. parent in their own home that they have a safe haven of a secure contact centre, or related services are Baroness Burt of Solihull (LD): My Lords, I thank provided, where contact can safely take place. That is the Minister for meeting the noble Baroness, Lady why the terms of this amendment are so important. It Finlay,and other supporters of this amendment, including is a very simple, straightforward amendment to ensure me. There is no agenda here: we just need children to that all child contact centres and organisations that be safely supervised during contact by properly trained offer child contact services are accredited in accordance people who can spot the signs of stress and distress in with national standards in relation to safeguarding children. and preventing domestic abuse, as specified in regulations On the first day of Report, I spoke to Amendment made by the Secretary of State. 15, in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Armstrong, I too am grateful to my noble friend the Minister about the need for training for all who come into for the two meetings he has held with us and for contact with victims. Child contact centres are a very sharing the text of the letters he proposed to send, strong and sensitive example of the need for training. which I will come on to in a moment. At present, as As the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay said in Committee, the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, has explained, while the quiet child is not necessarily the happy child. the National Association of Child Contact Centres Trained professionals know how to spot the difference has been asked to set standards, the regulations required and what to do. There are many examples like this, have not yet been put in place. This remains one area where a trained professional could, and should, intervene of family law which is unregulated. It is essential that to help, to signpost and to stop potential harm being the memorandum of understanding between Cafcass done. and NACCC, to which the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, The main issue here revolves around whether referred, be respected by all referrals, and that the unaccredited centres are operating and in what judicial protocol also to be followed by family courts circumstances. We know that court referrals should be is adhered to in all referrals. made only to accredited centres, but does every member I am concerned that my noble friend the Minister of the judiciary know? The Minister has attempted to appears not to appreciate that child contact centres reassure us about that. What about non-court referrals? are the only group that do not have requirements in I discussed this with Barnardo’s. Anyone can make a law, whereas all others—for instance, childminders referral to a child contact centre—a social worker or and nurseries—do. At the moment, anyone can set up other professional working with the family, a parent, a child contact centre. The amendment seeks to ensure the child who wants contact with their parent, and that the standards for public and private law provision Barnardo’s itself. Who is making them pick an approved are the same. centre, especially when they are likely to be more costly? There is evidence that court referrals are, at times, Anyone can start up a contact centre. The noble to centres that are not accredited by NACCC or Lord, Lord Wolfson, in his remarks in Committee, overseen by local authorities, as is required by the asked for proof that unapproved child contact centres judicial protocol. It is also true that awareness by were operating. As the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, courts of the judicial protocol on child contact is, at said earlier, this has proved difficult to obtain, because times, patchy. there is no obligation on them to register. The motivation behind the amendment is to ensure In January,the Government launched an independent the safest environment in child contact cases, to allow review into children’s social care. Will the Minister regular contact between absent parents and children, commit to including child contact centres in this review? and to ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place, As it stands, this is not good enough. If the noble including in instances where a parent may have alcohol Baroness, Lady Finlay, decides to put this to a vote, we or substance abuse issues, as I set out earlier. on these Benches will support her. While I welcome the proposal of my noble friend the Minister to write to the President of the Family Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab) [V]: My Lords, Division and the chief executive of Cafcass, I believe as the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, said, the Minister that this is not going far enough. We have a one-off has been generous with his time and has spoken with opportunity here to plug the legislative gap, and letters the group twice. The purpose of this amendment is alone will not implement the provisions and put in well understood by the contributors to this short place the legal framework that we seek to achieve. debate and by the Minister. The purpose is simple: it is I end with a plea to my noble friend the Minister, to close a loophole, to make sure that all child contact and all noble Lords, to ensure two things: first, that centres reach the necessary standard, that there is the same standards will apply for both public and some form of overview and accreditation and that private provision for all child contact centres and there are consequences if that standard is not reached. services; and, secondly, to accept Amendment 21, As the noble Baroness, Lady Burt, succinctly put it, providing the legal basis to bring forward the regulations we know that, as far as the courts are concerned, only required to achieve this. I believe that this is the only accredited child contact centres should ever be used. way that we are actually going to do justice to providing However, what about other referrals to child contact a safe environment for the innocent children in a centres? What about private referrals or referrals by family breakdown, by providing them with a safe local councils or other organisations such as Barnardo’s? 1667 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1668

In the discussions that we have had with the noble the CEO of Cafcass, requesting that they raise awareness Lord, Lord Wolfson, he has asked for proof that there among their colleagues and officials of the judicial is a problem. As the noble Baroness, Lady Burt, said, it protocol and memorandum of understanding that has is difficult to provide proof, because you are looking been agreed between the NACCC and Cafcass. The for organisations and child contact centres that do not protocols that are in place require the judiciary,magistrates necessarily advertise their services. If they run into and Cafcass family court advisers to refer parties to problems, they can easily withdraw the advertising and accredited child contact centres only. I have shared the re-emerge in another form, but with the same people draft text with relevant Peers and I will send letters to running them. At the moment, there are no consequences the President of the Family Division and the CEO of for people playing fast and loose with the system, if I Cafcass after this debate. may put it like that. There needs to be some consistency Again, as I detailed in Committee, local authorities across the range of services and regulated services that are able, in limited circumstances, to commission children use. This anomaly needs to be addressed and I unaccredited child contact services. However—and this can see no better place to do it than in this Bill with this is an important point—any services that they commission amendment right now. I and my party will support the in discharging their statutory duty to allow reasonable amendment if it is moved to a vote. contact between a child in their care and parents fall within Section 22(3)(a) and Section 34 of the Children LordWolfsonof Tredegar(Con):MyLords,asIindicated Act. Those provisions require local authorities to ensure in Committee, I fully recognise that the provision of consistency with safeguarding and promotion of the child contact centres is extremely important to supporting child’s welfare. Therefore, respectfully, I do not agree families and enabling parents to have contact with their that there is a legislative gap in this area or, to use the children,whileatthesametimeprovidingasafeenvironment word used by the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby of that protects children and adults from potential harm. Shulbrede, a loophole. Rather, the Government remain As the noble Baroness, Lady Burt, put it, there is no convinced that, given the regulatory and compliance agenda here, in the sense that we all have the same aim. mechanisms already in place with regard to local The question is the best means of achieving it. authorities, a requirement of mandatory accreditation It is essential that all children experience the same for such services would impose an additional layer of high level of care and safeguarding where circumstances costs and bureaucracy on local authorities, which already have necessitated their involvement with the family face significant resourcing pressures. justice system and child contact centres or services. I As I indicated in Committee, the Government continue thank noble Lords and the National Association of to be willing to work with the NACCC and other Child Contact Centres for their engagement with me interested parties to keep the situation regarding child and my officials since Committee. I have met, on a contact centres and services under review. The work number of occasions, several noble Lords who have undertaken by the NACCC provides a good starting spoken in support of this amendment. I have found point from which to build a more robust evidence base those discussions extremely helpful and I am grateful around this issue, which would cover both public and to them for the time that they gave to discussing the private law. However, I am not persuaded, despite the issue with me in more detail. rapid and, as I have said, informative work of the This amendment differs from the amendment debated NACCC following Committee, that we today have in Committee, because it provides that the child contact enough evidence on which to legislate for the accreditation centres should be accredited in accordance with national of child contact centres and services at this time. standards to be specified in regulations laid by the Secretary of State. The amendment in Committee did Given what I have said this afternoon and my clear not specify who would set the accreditation standards. commitment to follow up on this debate with the I continue to question whether the statutory accreditation President of the Family Division and the chief executive proposed in this amendment is required or would of Cafcass, I hope that, despite the comments that she provide a more effective form of regulation than that made in her speech introducing the amendment, the noble which currently exists through the NACCC accreditation Baroness, Lady Finlay, will be content to withdraw it. framework and the statutory regulations governing local authorities. The Deputy Speaker (Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall) I extend my sincere thanks to the NACCC for the (Lab): I have a request to ask the Minister a short useful overview of the current landscape of unaccredited question from the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh of child contact centres and services in England and Pickering. Wales that it produced following Committee. That review was conducted at some pace and has been used Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con) [V]: My Lords, to inform further discussions on this matter. While I may I address head on two points that the Minister accept and take on board the point made by the noble has raised? First, the case has been made of how Baroness, Lady Burt, and the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby difficult it is to access the evidence and whether it is in of Shulbrede, that it is hard to identify evidence in this the public interest to put this in the public domain. area, it is fair to say that the work that was done was at This is an extremely sensitive area and we have done a somewhat high level. our best to provide the evidence on the two occasions when my noble friend has requested it. Secondly, there 4.15 pm is a legislative loophole. The Government undertook Since the last debate, and following meetings with to come forward with regulations to establish the the noble Lords sponsoring this amendment, I committed regulatory framework to set the standards in place to writing to the President of the Family Division and and they have failed to do so. For what reason have the 1669 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1670

[BARONESS MCINTOSH OF PICKERING] Bryan of Partick, B. Hamwee, B. Government not brought forward these regulations Bull, B. Hannay of Chiswick, L. and why are they not prepared to bring them forward Burnett, L. Hanworth, V. at this time? I am at a loss to understand why that is Burt of Solihull, B. Harries of Pentregarth, L. Butler-Sloss, B. Harris of Haringey, L. the case. Cameron of Dillington, L. Haskel, L. Campbell of Pittenweem, L. Haworth, L. Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): I will be brief. On Campbell of Surbiton, B. Hay of Ballyore, L. the first point that my noble friend raised about evidence, Campbell-Savours, L. Hayman, B. I accept that people have done their best in the short Carey of Clifton, L. Hayter of Kentish Town, B. time available. However, with respect, the points that I Carlile of Berriew, L. Healy of Primrose Hill, B. Carter of Coles, L. Hilton of Eggardon, B. made about the high-level nature of that evidence Cashman, L. Hogan-Howe, L. stand. At the moment, we are not persuaded that there Cavendish of Little Venice, B. Hollick, L. is a need to legislate in this area. On the second point Chakrabarti, B. Hollins, B. about the loophole, I would be repeating what I said Chapman of Darlington, B. Hope of Craighead, L. earlier. For the reasons that I set out, the position at Chartres, L. Hoyle, L. the moment is that the use of unaccredited child services Chidgey, L. Humphreys, B. Clancarty, E. Hunt of Kings Heath, L. is rare. In circumstances where they are used by local Clark of Calton, B. Hussein-Ece, B. authorities, that would be covered by their statutory Clark of Kilwinning, B. Hutton of Furness, L. duty under the Children Act. In those circumstances, Clark of Windermere, L. Inglewood, L. we are not persuaded that the amendment is required Clement-Jones, L. Janke, B. or would even necessarily be effective. Cohen of Pimlico, B. Janvrin, L. Collins of Highbury, L. Jay of Paddington, B. Colville of Culross, V. Jolly, B. Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB) [V]: I am most Cooper of Windrush, L. Jones of Cheltenham, L. grateful to the Minister for his fulsome reply and for Corston, B. Jones of Moulsecoomb, B. trying to get to grips with this issue, but I point out Cox, B. Jones of Whitchurch, B. that it has been 14 years since the need for standards Craig of Radley, L. Jones, L. was originally raised. I did not mention some cases in Craigavon, V. Jordan, L. Crawley, B. Judd, L. my speech today because I have not been able to check Cunningham of Felling, L. Kennedy of Cradley, B. them out in detail—we could not track down the Davidson of Glen Clova, L. Kennedy of Southwark, L. details of the services—but I have names of services Davies of Brixton, L. Kennedy of The Shaws, B. that I would be prepared to share in confidence with Davies of Oldham, L. Kerr of Kinlochard, L. the Minister. I believe that there is evidence that this Davies of Stamford, L. Kerslake, L. Deech, B. Khan of Burnley, L. area is unregulated, that there is a gap and that children Derby, Bp. Kilclooney, L. are at risk now, today. If we are dealing with domestic Devon, E. Knight of Weymouth, L. abuse, we must not leave children vulnerable. Therefore, Dodds of Duncairn, L. Kramer, B. I wish to test the opinion of the House. Donaghy, B. Laming, L. Donoughue, L. Lawrence of Clarendon, B. 4.21 pm Doocey, B. Layard, L. D’Souza, B. Lea of Crondall, L. Dubs, L. Lee of Trafford, L. Division on Amendment 21 Eames, L. Leitch, L. Eatwell, L. Lennie, L. Contents 310; Not-Contents 237. Evans of Watford, L. Levy, L. Falkner of Margravine, B. Liddell of Coatdyke, B. Amendment 21 agreed. Faulkner of Worcester, L. Liddle, L. Featherstone, B. Lipsey, L. Division No. 1 Field of Birkenhead, L. Lister of Burtersett, B. Filkin, L. Loomba, L. CONTENTS Finlay of Llandaff, B. Ludford, B. Adams of Craigielea, B. Berkeley, L. Foster of Bath, L. Lytton, E. Addington, L. Bichard, L. Foulkes of Cumnock, L. MacKenzie of Culkein, L. Adonis, L. Billingham, B. Fox, L. Mackenzie of Framwellgate, Alderdice, L. Birt, L. Freyberg, L. L. Allan of Hallam, L. Blackstone, B. Gale, B. Mair, L. Garden of Frognal, B. Mallalieu, B. Alli, L. Blower, B. German, L. Mandelson, L. Alliance, L. Blunkett, L. Glasgow, E. Mann, L. Anderson of Ipswich, L. Boateng, L. Glasman, L. Marks of Henley-on-Thames, Anderson of Swansea, L. Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury, Gloucester, Bp. L. Andrews, B. B. Goddard of Stockport, L. Massey of Darwen, B. Armstrong of Hill Top, B. Bowles of Berkhamsted, B. Golding, B. Mawson, L. Bach, L. Bowness, L. Goldsmith, L. Maxton, L. Bakewell of Hardington Boycott, B. Goudie, B. McAvoy, L. Mandeville, B. Bradley, L. Grantchester, L. McConnell of Glenscorrodale, Bakewell, B. Bradshaw, L. Greaves, L. L. Barker, B. Brinton, B. Greengross, B. McCrea of Magherafelt and Bassam of Brighton, L. Broers, L. Greenway, L. Cookstown, L. Beecham, L. Brooke of Alverthorpe, L. Grender, B. McDonagh, B. Beith, L. Brown of Cambridge, B. Grey-Thompson, B. McIntosh of Hudnall, B. Benjamin, B. Browne of Belmont, L. Griffiths of Burry Port, L. McIntosh of Pickering, B. Bennett of Manor Castle, B. Browne of Ladyton, L. Grocott, L. McKenzie of Luton, L. Berkeley of Knighton, L. Bruce of Bennachie, L. Hain, L. McNicol of West Kilbride, L. 1671 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1672

Mendelsohn, L. Smith of Gilmorehill, B. Brookeborough, V. Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, Miller of Chilthorne Domer, Smith of Kelvin, L. Brougham and Vaux, L. L. B. Smith of Newnham, B. Brown of Eaton-under- Hogg, B. Mitchell, L. Snape, L. Heywood, L. Horam, L. Monks, L. Soley, L. Browning, B. Houghton of Richmond, L. Morgan of Drefelin, B. Somerset, D. Brownlow of Shurlock Row, Howard of Lympne, L. Morris of Aberavon, L. Southwark, Bp. L. Howard of Rising, L. Morris of Yardley, B. St Albans, Bp. Buscombe, B. Howe, E. Morrow, L. St John of Bletso, L. Butler of Brockwell, L. Howell of Guildford, L. Murphy of Torfaen, L. Stair, E. Caine, L. James of Blackheath, L. Neuberger, B. Stephen, L. Caithness, E. Jenkin of Kennington, B. Newby, L. Stern of Brentford, L. Callanan, L. Jopling, L. Northover, B. Stevenson of Balmacara, L. Carrington, L. Judge, L. Nye, B. Stone of Blackheath, L. Cathcart, E. Kakkar, L. Oates, L. Stoneham of Droxford, L. Chalker of Wallasey, B. Kalms, L. O’Loan, B. Storey, L. Chisholm of Owlpen, B. Kamall, L. O’Neill of Bengarve, B. Strasburger, L. Choudrey, L. Keen of Elie, L. Paddick, L. Stunell, L. Clarke of Nottingham, L. King of Bridgwater, L. Palmer of Childs Hill, L. Suttie, B. Colgrain, L. Kirkham, L. Pannick, L. Taverne, L. Colwyn, L. Kirkhope of Harrogate, L. Parekh, L. Taylor of Bolton, B. Cormack, L. Lamont of Lerwick, L. Parminter, B. Taylor of Goss Moor, L. Courtown, E. Lancaster of Kimbolton, L. Patel of Bradford, L. Thomas of Cwmgiedd, L. Couttie, B. Lang of Monkton, L. Pendry, L. Thomas of Gresford, L. Crathorne, L. Lansley, L. Pitkeathley, B. Thomas of Winchester, B. Cruddas, L. Leigh of Hurley, L. Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L. Thornhill, B. Cumberlege, B. Lexden, L. Prashar, B. Thornton, B. Davies of Gower, L. Lilley, L. Primarolo, B. Thurso, V. De Mauley, L. Lindsay, E. Prosser, B. Tope, L. Deighton, L. Lingfield, L. Purvis of Tweed, L. Touhig, L. Dobbs, L. Liverpool, E. Radice, L. Truscott, L. Duncan of Springbank, L. Livingston of Parkhead, L. Ramsay of Cartvale, B. Tunnicliffe, L. Dunlop, L. Lucas, L. Ramsbotham, L. Turnberg, L. Eaton, B. Lupton, L. Randerson, B. Tyler of Enfield, B. Eccles of Moulton, B. Mackay of Clashfern, L. Ravensdale, L. Tyler, L. Eccles, V. Mancroft, L. Razzall, L. Uddin, B. Empey, L. Marland, L. Rebuck, B. Vaux of Harrowden, L. Evans of Bowes Park, B. Maude of Horsham, L. Redesdale, L. Walker of Aldringham, L. Fairfax of Cameron, L. McColl of Dulwich, L. Rennard, L. Wallace of Saltaire, L. Fairhead, B. McDonald of Salford, L. Ritchie of Downpatrick, B. Wallace of Tankerness, L. Farmer, L. McGregor-Smith, B. Roberts of Llandudno, L. Walmsley, B. Fellowes of West Stafford, L. McInnes of Kilwinning, L. Robertson of Port Ellen, L. Watkins of Tavistock, B. Fink, L. McLoughlin, L. Rooker, L. Watson of Invergowrie, L. Finkelstein, L. Mendoza, L. Rosser, L. West of Spithead, L. Finn, B. Meyer, B. Rowe-Beddoe, L. Wheeler, B. Fleet, B. Mobarik, B. Rowlands, L. Whitaker, B. Flight, L. Mone, B. Royall of Blaisdon, B. Whitty, L. Fookes, B. Montrose, D. Russell of Liverpool, L. Wigley, L. Forsyth of Drumlean, L. Morgan of Cotes, B. Scott of Needham Market, B. Wilcox of Newport, B. Foster of Oxton, B. Morris of Bolton, B. Scriven, L. Willis of Knaresborough, L. Fox of Buckley, B. Morrissey, B. Sharkey, L. Wills, L. Framlingham, L. Moylan, L. Sheehan, B. Wilson of Dinton, L. Frost, L. Moynihan, L. Sherlock, B. Winston, L. Fullbrook, B. Murphy, B. Shipley, L. Wood of Anfield, L. Gadhia, L. Nash, L. Sikka, L. Woodley, L. Gardiner of Kimble, L. Neville-Jones, B. Simon, V. Wrigglesworth, L. Gardner of Parkes, B. Neville-Rolfe, B. Singh of Wimbledon, L. Young of Hornsey, B. Garnier, L. Nicholson of Winterbourne, Smith of Basildon, B. Young of Norwood Green, L. Geddes, L. B. Smith of Finsbury, L. Young of Old Scone, B. Geidt, L. Noakes, B. Glenarthur, L. Northbrook, L. NOT CONTENTS Gold, L. Norton of Louth, L. Goldie, B. Parkinson of Whitley Bay, L. Aberdare, L. Bhatia, L. Goldsmith of Richmond Patel, L. Agnew of Oulton, L. Black of Brentwood, L. Park, L. Patten of Barnes, L. Anelay of St Johns, B. Blackwell, L. Goodlad, L. Patten, L. Arbuthnot of Edrom, L. Blackwood of North Oxford, Grade of Yarmouth, L. Pearson of Rannoch, L. Arran, E. B. Griffiths of Fforestfach, L. Penn, B. Ashton of Hyde, L. Blencathra, L. Grimstone of Boscobel, L. Pickles, L. Astor of Hever, L. Bloomfield of Hinton Hailsham, V. Pidding, B. Baker of Dorking, L. Waldrist, B. Hamilton of Epsom, L. Polak, L. Balfe, L. Borwick, L. Hammond of Runnymede, L. Popat, L. Barran, B. Botham, L. Hannan of Kingsclere, L. Porter of Spalding, L. Barwell, L. Bottomley of Nettlestone, B. Harris of Peckham, L. Powell of Bayswater, L. Bates, L. Bourne of Aberystwyth, L. Haselhurst, L. Price, L. Benyon, L. Brabazon of Tara, L. Hayward, L. Rana, L. Berridge, B. Brady, B. Helic, B. Randall of Uxbridge, L. Bertin, B. Bridgeman, V. Henley, L. Rawlings, B. Bethell, L. Bridges of Headley, L. Herbert of South Downs, L. Reay, L. 1673 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1674

Redfern, B. Stroud, B. It is not only perpetrators who drink. Women who Renfrew of Kaimsthorn, L. Stuart of Edgbaston, B. have experienced extensive physical and sexual violence Ridley, V. Sugg, B. are more likely to use alcohol or drugs harmfully than Risby, L. Suri, L. Robathan, L. Swinfen, L. women who have not. They might do so in an attempt Rock, B. Taylor of Holbeach, L. to self-medicate and cope with their experiences, or Rose of Monewden, L. Taylor of Warwick, L. drink with their partner as a form of bonding. Substances Rotherwick, L. Tebbit, L. may be part of the abuse itself, and perpetrators may Sanderson of Welton, B. Trefgarne, L. use alcohol to control victims. ONS figures show that Sarfraz, L. Trenchard, V. Sassoon, L. True, L. around 10% of those accessing domestic violence support Sater, B. Ullswater, V. services have an alcohol use need, many times higher Scott of Bybrook, B. Vaizey of Didcot, L. than the rate for the general population. Around Seccombe, B. Vere of Norbiton, B. 6% have a drug use need and around 40% a mental Selkirk of Douglas, L. Verma, B. health problem. Given the difficulties people with Shackleton of Belgravia, B. Vinson, L. Sharpe of Epsom, L. Wakeham, L. additional needs have in accessing domestic violence Sheikh, L. Warsi, B. support, these figures may well underestimate the scale Shephard of Northwold, B. Wasserman, L. of the problem. Sherbourne of Didsbury, L. Wei, L. Indeed, survivors may have been forced to choose Shields, B. Wharton of Yarm, L. which of their needs they are able to get help with. Shinkwin, L. Whitby, L. Shrewsbury, E. Willetts, L. Alcohol treatment is desperately underfunded, and Smith of Hindhead, L. Williams of Trafford, B. there simply are not enough alcohol treatment services Spencer of Alresford, L. Wolfson of Tredegar, L. set up to help domestic abuse survivors. For example, Stedman-Scott, B. Wyld, B. female survivors of male violence may not feel able to Sterling of Plaistow, L. Young of Cookham, L. receive treatment in a mixed space; yet less than half Stewart of Dirleton, L. Younger of Leckie, V. of local authorities in England and Wales have provision for women-only substance use services. Women may [Owing to an administrative error, the total number of also find that their drinking can prevent them accessing Members voting Content was misreported as 310. The a safe space, with some turned away from refuges due correct total was 311.] to drinking or drug use. Only about one-quarter of refuges in London, when asked the question, stated 4.33 pm that they “always” or “often” accept women who use alcohol or other drugs. Amendment 22 Following a very constructive and productive meeting Moved by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar with the Minister last week, she has written reassuring me that this is a priority for the Government. She has 22: Clause 55, page 35, line 30, leave out first “domestic abuse” and insert “accommodation-based” agreed to address the issue of alcohol and domestic abuse in statutory guidance and in the domestic abuse Member’s explanatory statement strategy, which will set out a comprehensive framework See the explanatory statement to the Minister’s amendment at page 35, line 25. for responding to and supporting victims. I welcome the Minister’s recognition of the seriousness of the Amendment 22 agreed. problem and her attempts to resolve it. In her letter, she also set out the opportunities created by the new integrated care systems to allow for greater joined-up The Deputy Speaker (Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall) working between services to better support victims (Lab): We now come to the group consisting of with the alcohol treatment they so often need urgently. Amendment 23. Anyone wishing to press this amendment This urgency has increased during the Covid-19 to a Division should make this clear in debate. pandemic, making it more important than ever for us to act now. During the first lockdown, visits to the Amendment 23 UK’snational domestic abuse website surged by 950% by Moved by Baroness Finlay of Llandaff the end of May.NSPCC Wales reported average referrals for parental substance use to police and agencies were 23: Clause 55, page 35, line 30, at end insert “including, where 72% higher in the 10 months to February 2021 than in necessary, alcohol and mental health support,” thefirstthreemonthsof 2020.Thesefiguresarefrightening, but they go only a small way to illustrate to your Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB) [V]: My Lords, I Lordships the scale of what people are experiencing declare my interest as chair of the Commission on right now. I am grateful to the Minister for her letter to Alcohol Harm. The commission received evidence the noble Lord, Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe, where from many who had first-hand experience of the she recognised the need for much better sobriety schemes, relationship between alcohol and domestic abuse. As which we greatly appreciate, but I remind the House of many noble Lords pointed out in Committee, there is the size of the problems. a strong, if complex, relationship between alcohol and I shall finish by sharing the words of a 15 year-old domestic abuse. The figure often quoted is that up to boy who contacted Childline. Speaking of his own half of perpetrators have been drinking when an assault experience, he said: takes place. Alcohol also tends to make violence more “I’m really scared of my dad, especially when he’s been drinking. serious, doubling the risk of severe violence and rape. Sometimes he gets really angry and throws things at my mum. It’s Tragically, substance use is a factor in over half of been getting worse since the coronavirus and I worry a lot. I have intimate-partner homicides. no idea what to do as I can’t escape because of the lockdown.” 1675 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1676

I hope, therefore, that I will get an even warmer noted in the debate on the first group of amendments. reception for this amendment than I received in the Witnessing domestic violence and alcohol abuse are letter from the Minister, and I reserve my ability to major events in childhood and may lead to an anti-social divide the House on this very important issue pending lifestyle of offending, truancy and violent behaviour the response I get. I beg to move. in the years ahead. As a surgeon, I treated many patients with injuries Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con) [V]: My Lords, sustained following domestic disputes, nearly all of I want to take a moment to support the noble Baroness, them fuelled by alcohol. Some were horrific injuries to Lady Finlay of Llandaff, in her Amendment 23. I pay the chest and abdomen; others were less serious but, tribute to all her work in this field and to the other none the less,led to long-term complications—particularly signatories to the amendment. I want to single out the injuries to the face from the assailant’s fists or a noble Lord, Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe, with whom blunt weapon. The consequences lead to long-term I had the privilege of serving on the ad hoc committee disfigurement, and the sight every day in the mirror of on the Licensing Act 2003. a broken nose or missing teeth is a constant reminder Without any shadow of a doubt, as the noble Baroness, of the abuse suffered. Children, too, may suffer injuries Lady Finlay, set out, domestic abuse is, unfortunately, as part of the collateral damage. Many choose not to aggravated and fuelled by alcohol and drug abuse. It admit to the assault outside the home. behoves all of us to try to limit the damage done in I am grateful to Professor Jonathan Shepherd, a these circumstances. I therefore hope that my noble surgeon and professor at Cardiff University’s Crime friend the Minister will look favourably on the modest and Security Research Institute, for providing me with change to the wording of the Bill that is proposed here. his publications in the journals of both the Royal I know that Scotland has taken a lead, particularly College of Surgeons and the Royal College of Psychiatrists on the unit pricing of alcohol. I initially had reservations and his position statements on the management of about that until I heard the evidence we took on the ad alcohol abuse and the mental health impacts of violence. hoc committee. It was always understood, and we My noble friend the Minister may wish to consider concluded that we would press them, that the Government these in the formal consultation after Royal Assent. would come forward with unit pricing in Scotland. I In conclusion, where alcohol is concerned, it is think my noble friend the Minister would agree that it important not to view physical injuries in isolation. has led to a significant reduction in alcohol abuse. All too often, the two are inextricably linked. I would With those few words, I lend Amendment 23 my welcome the opportunity to share these Royal College support, and ask my noble friend to look favourably policies with my noble friend the Minister, in the hope on the modest additional wording it proposes. that they may influence national policy in providing alcohol abuse and mental health support, as this Baroness Butler-Sloss (CB) [V]: I should have declared amendment proposes. earlieraninterestaschairmanof theNationalCommission on Forced Marriage. 4.45 pm I thank the Minister very much for listening and for Baroness Burt of Solihull (LD): My Lords, we had what she said in response to the debate on an earlier an extensive and informed debate on this issue in amendment on forced marriage. I agree entirely with Committee, so there is no need for me to detain the what the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay of Llandaff, House by repeating what I said before. said. I would just add that mental health issues should The noble Baroness, Lady Finlay,has confined herself include people who are forced into marriage, most of to just one amendment this time, to which I have whom are very young and some of whom are under 18. added my name in support. It encapsulates the importance of the issue and uses the modest vehicle of including Lord Ribeiro (Con) [V]: My Lords, it is a pleasure to alcohol and addiction support in the definition of follow the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, domestic abuse support when local authorities assess who supports this amendment. Like the noble Baroness, the need and prepare their strategies to meet it. Lady Finlay, I acknowledge the helpful letter on this I hope the Minister will agree that the close and amendment that we received today from my noble friend complex relationship between what I called in my remarks the Minister. in Committee Accommodation-based support, as proposed in “the unholy triumvirate of substance abuse, domestic abuse and government Amendment 22, is highly relevant because mental ill-health”—[Official Report, 27/1/21; col. 1621.] domestic abuse can take place in settings other than is intrinsic and deserves to be included somewhere in the home. Alcohol intoxication increases vulnerability the Bill. However, I fear that that will not be the case because it makes victims less physically able to get today. The Minister has written to the mover of the away from an aggressor and more likely to make poor amendment, the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, and I decisions. Likewise, alcohol increases the chances of am grateful for the copy she sent me. In the letter, the the aggressor assaulting someone in the home or other Minister says that the Government will reflect on the accommodation-based settings. We know that the more importance of this unholy triumvirate in statutory intoxicated someone is, the greater their chance of guidance to be issued under Clause 73 of the Bill. I am sustaining serious injuries. not convinced that this will be good enough to get the We should also be concerned about the effects of concerted result we need, so if the noble Baroness, domestic abuse on children—the hidden victims of Lady Finlay, decides to call a vote, my party and I will domestic abuse, as the noble Baroness, Lady Benjamin, support her. 1677 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1678

Baroness Wilcox of Newport (Lab) [V]: My Lords, it Some of us have witnessed the way in which someone is important to recognise that domestic abuse does not who abuses a substance such as alcohol seems to have happen in a neat silo. It is inherently bound up with a switch flicked within their brain and suddenly becomes the wider issues of mental health and substance abuse. potentially very aggressive. That is not an excuse for We cannot ignore the impact of devastating cuts to domestic abuse. It is important that both victims and our public services through a decade of austerity. The perpetrators have the opportunity to address these Royal College of Psychiatrists called for the Government issues, and that they get the support they need. To this to reverse the cuts and enable local authorities to end, the statutory guidance issued under Clause 73 invest at least £374 million in adult services to cope will reflect the importance of joining up domestic abuse, with the increased need. Indeed, report after report mental health and substance misuse services. highlights the poor preparedness of our public realm As I informed the Committee, local authority spending to cope with this dreadful pandemic. It is as a consequence through the public health grant will be maintained in of the austerity decade that council funding has been the next financial year. This means that local authorities cut to the bone. can continue to invest in prevention and essential Mental health services have been particularly impacted front-line health services, including drug and alcohol by austerity, leading to a lack of services and long treatment and recovery services. We want to ensure waiting times. Victims and survivors with mental health that people who need support for alcohol and substance problems also face barriers in accessing many other misuse issues can access the right services commissioned vital services due to strict eligibility criteria and not by local authorities. The Government are working on being able to engage in the way that the services increasing access, and we have appointed Professor require. Such barriers often lead to people being bounced Dame Carol Black to undertake an independent review between different services and having to constantly of drugs to inform the Government’s work on what retell their story. There is awareness of the complex more can be done. and interrelated needs of those with mental ill-health, The overarching aim will be to ensure that vulnerable but many services are unequipped to support them people with substance misuse problems get the support and few services exist that can care for people with they need. The review will consider how treatment both mental health and substance misuse issues. services can enable people with a drug dependency to The noble Baroness, Lady Finlay of Llandaff, spoke achieve and sustain their recovery. These will span a expertly and knowledgably about the close link between wide range of services with which they might interact domestic abuse and alcohol, with a perpetrator drinking across mental health, housing, employment and the heavily.Of course, there are instances where the victim’s criminal justice system. The review is currently focusing drinking leads to uninhibited behaviours that can on treatment, recovery and prevention. The Government trigger abuse. Similarly, the victim may use alcohol look forward to receiving Dame Carol’srecommendations and drugs to self-medicate. We know that the level of shortly. alcohol consumption has increased during the pandemic, thus exacerbating an already known problem. I reassure noble Lords that we intend to reflect the importance of joining up domestic abuse, mental health This should be part of the Government’s work on and substance misuse services. The joint strategic needs community services. They have made a commitment assessment produced by local authorities, clinical to consult on the provision of community services for commissioning groups and other partners should include victims and perpetrators. Will the Minister give a consideration of the needs of victims and survivors. commitment that the consultation will explicitly include This assessment informs the commissioning process the provision of alcohol and substance misuse services? for the local area. In addition, joint working through All this work will be effective only if we look at local health and well-being boards helps support people tackling domestic violence in the round. who may have co-occurring substance misuse, mental In conclusion, the importance of multiagency and health and domestic abuse issues with more effectively holistic working in this area cannot be overemphasised. commissioned services in order to improve outcomes It is important to recognise that mental health and and the use of local resources. We want to ensure that, addiction problems can create additional vulnerabilities no matter where someone turns, there is no wrong which people perpetrating abuse may seek to exploit. door for individuals with co-occurring conditions, and If the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, decides to test the that compassionate and non-judgmental care centred opinion of the House, the Opposition Benches will on the person’s needs is offered and accessible from strongly support her. every access point; for example, people can access via a referral from their GP, or by self-referral. I hope this Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con): My Lords, I reassures noble Lords that assessing and meeting the thank the noble Baronesses, Lady Finlay and Lady needs of the local population are already integral to Burt, and the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, for tabling the commissioning and provision of healthcare services. this amendment. I am grateful to have had the opportunity In addition, the Government have announced a to discuss the issue with them at length. As the noble total of £25 million in funding for domestic abuse Baroness, Lady Wilcox of Newport, observed, domestic perpetrator programmes. This more than doubles the abuse does not happen in a neat silo. That is a very £10 million funding for such programmes last year. good way of putting it in the context of this amendment. Through them, we funded a number of interventions In Committee we debated the complex relationship that sought to address issues such as substance misuse and obvious correlation between domestic abuse, mental and mental health problems as part of a wider programme health problems and the misuse of drugs and alcohol. of intervention. 1679 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1680

I know that the noble Lord, Lord Brooke of 5 pm Alverthorpe, is pleased that the Bill introduces domestic Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB) [V]: My Lords, I abuse prevention orders—DAPOs—which enable positive am grateful to the Minister for the detail she has requirements such as attendance at a drug or alcohol provided in her full reply. I understand from a previous programme or a behavioural change programme. The conversation that the guidance to the Bill will be courts will also be able to require the subject of such statutory, as will, therefore, the implementation of the an order to wear a sobriety tag. many factors to be included in it that she listed in her The Government recognise the harm that alcohol response. I am also glad to hear that the review of my can cause and have already committed to rolling out long-standing friend and colleague, Professor Dame sobriety tags as part of a wider programme to tackle Carol Black, will report soon. I have always held her in alcohol-fuelled crime.Following twopilots and a successful the highest regard and I am sure that her report will be judicial engagement programme, the alcohol abstinence very sound. monitoring requirement was launched in Wales on I recommend that all noble Lords recall that we 21 October last year. This has proved a popular option need early intervention; otherwise the next generation for sentencers in Wales and we will be rolling out the to experience alcohol abuse will become alcohol abusers new requirement in England later in the spring. themselves. The link is horribly real and certainly well We are also committed to our ambitions in the documented, and I appreciate the Minister saying that NHS long-term plan for expanding and transforming there will be no wrong door. The £25 million for mental health services in England, and to investing an programmes for perpetrators is welcome, but there is a additional £2.3 billion a year in mental health services lot of evidence to show that every £1 invested in local by 2023-24. This includes a comprehensive expansion treatment services saves £3 in wider social costs. This is of mental health services, ensuring that an additional indeed a sound investment by the Government. 380,000 adults can access psychological therapies by In the light of the full response I have received, I 2023-24. will withdraw my amendment. I am grateful to all I would add that the domestic abuse commissioner’s noble Lords who have spoken for their strong support, role requires her to adopt a specific focus on the needs both now and behind the scenes, for the amendment of victims from groups with particular needs. She also and the work being done. I hope that the Minister will has the power to make recommendations where she take back to the Treasury the need to recognise the sees gaps in provision. I believe her role will offer financial cost to the nation of alcohol-fuelled domestic independent oversight and the assurance that all issues violence. Measures such as minimum unit pricing, a relating to domestic abuse will be monitored closely. differential duty on off-sales to decrease drinking at home—which would support pubs and restaurants—and Finally, it is worth briefly touching on the drafting stopping the promotion of alcohol close to checkouts of the amendment. The noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox in supermarkets are all needed to make her strategy to of Newport, referred to this. It seeks to add to the decrease alcohol-fuelled domestic violence as effective definition of domestic abuse support in Clause 55. as she and I would hope. These issues do not come This relates to a new duty on tier 1 local authorities to directly into the Bill, but they are of wider concern. In provide support to victims of domestic abuse and the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. their children within safe accommodation. As such, the amendment does not touch on the issue of support for perpetrators to help them address problems with Amendment 23 withdrawn. alcohol misuse; nor does it deal with the provision of alcohol and mental health community-based support. Amendments 24 to 26 This is the point that the noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox, Moved by Baroness Williams of Trafford was making. 24: Clause 55, page 36, line 2, at end insert— That said, I can assure the noble Baroness that, as “(aa) must keep under review any effect of the strategy part of the new duty in Part 4, tier 1 local authorities on the provision of other local authority support in will be expected to assess the accommodation- its area,” based support needs of all domestic abuse victims and Member’s explanatory statement their children. Within the statutory guidance that will This amendment would require a relevant local authority that accompany Part 4, we describe the support within publishes a strategy under Clause 55 to keep under review the effect of that strategy on the provision by the local authority of “relevant” safe accommodation as including support domestic abuse support to people in the community as opposed designed specifically for victims with unique and/or to those residing in relevant accommodation. complex needs, such as mental health advice and 25: Clause 55, page 36, line 4, at end insert— support, and drug and alcohol advice and support. “( ) In this section “other local authority support”, in Again, I thank the noble Baronesses, Lady Finlay relation to a local authority, means support, in relation and Lady Burt, the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, and to domestic abuse, that— other noble Lords for drawing attention to this important (a) is provided to victims of domestic abuse or their issue, and I thank all noble Lords who have raised it children, and during this debate. I hope I have been able to persuade (b) is provided or funded by the local authority, the noble Baroness in relation to the existing provisions other than accommodation-based support (within the meaning and our ongoing ambitions to address the links between of subsection (2)).” substance misuse, mental health and domestic abuse. Member’s explanatory statement On that basis, I ask the noble Baroness to withdraw This amendment would define “other local authority support” her amendment. for the purposes of Clause 55. 1681 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1682

26: Clause 55, page 36, line 23, at end insert “or any effect of special measures and the ban on cross-examination the strategy on the provision of other local authority support in in person as they operate in civil proceedings. The its area” Government have taken careful note of the debate in Member’s explanatory statement Committee on Clauses 62 and 64, particularly the This amendment would provide that regulations under Clause argument that there should be equivalent protections 55(8) can make provision about the frequency with which a for the victims of domestic abuse in the civil courts as relevant local authority must review the effect of its strategy on the provision of other local authority support in its area. in family courts. I am personally grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames, for our Amendments 24 to 26 agreed. discussions about these issues. As I explained in Committee, while we want to ensure that there is Clause 56: Domestic abuse local partnership boards parity between each of the jurisdictions, we also need to build in allowances for the differences. That is why the provisions in respect of cross-examination and Amendments 27 to 29 special measures in civil proceedings differ from those Moved by Baroness Williams of Trafford in family proceedings. 27: Clause 56, page 36, line 31, after “about” insert “— I shall speak first to Amendment 32 in respect of (a) ” Clause 62. It is worth noting that the original provision Member’s explanatory statement in the Bill was based on recommendations made by the Civil Justice Council in its report published last See the explanatory statement accompanying the Minister’s amendment at page 36, line 32. year entitled Vulnerable Witnesses and Parties within Civil Proceedings. However, having reflected on the 28: Clause 56, page 36, line 32, at end insert “, and representations we have received and the cogent arguments (b) the provision of other local authority support in put forward in Committee by the noble Lord, Lord the authority’s area.” Marks, Amendment 32 would extend eligibility for Member’s explanatory statement special measures to those at risk of domestic abuse in This amendment would provide for a domestic abuse local addition to the existing provisions which provide eligibility partnership board to also advise a relevant local authority about the provision of other local authority support in the authority’s for special measures for the victims of specified offences. area. We see the force of the argument to include this measure 29: Clause 56, page 37, line 5, at end insert— so that there will be an equivalent level of protection for domestic abuse victims across the jurisdictions. ““other local authority support” has the same meaning as in section 55.” The Civil Procedure Rules will lay out how this is to Member’s explanatory statement work in practice, but the instruction in the Bill is a clear indication that those victims who have not reported This amendment would define “other local authority support” for the purposes of Clause 56 (by reference to the definition that their perpetrator to the police will have an opportunity would be inserted into Clause 55 by the Minister’s amendment at to let the court know where they are at risk of domestic page 36, line 4). abuse. As the existing clause provides, judges will still need Amendments 27 to 29 agreed. to consider whether the quality of a person’s evidence Amendments 30 and 31 not moved. or the person’s participation in proceedings is likely to be diminished by reason of vulnerability and, if so, The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Watkins of Tavistock) whether it is necessary to make one or more special (CB): We now come to the group beginning with measures directions. However, we believe that including Amendment 32. Anyone wishing to press this or anything provision for those at risk of domestic abuse will mean else in the group to a Division must make that clear in that these victims will be covered and given the ability the debate. to avail themselves of special measures. I shall say a further word on that, which I mentioned Clause 62: Special measures in civil proceedings: in Committee as well. By their nature, civil cases have victims of specified offences the potential to cover a much broader range of circumstances where there is no prior connection between the parties; for example, where a victim is suing an alleged Amendment 32 perpetrator of sexual abuse, an action against an Moved by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar employer where abuse is alleged, or in a boundary dispute. This amendment is therefore an appropriate step. The 32: Clause 62, page 39, line 23, after “person” insert “— breadth of cases in the civil courts means that it may (a) is, or is at risk of being, a victim of domestic abuse; not be appropriate in all cases to grant special measures, (b) ” although our amendment makes it likely that they will Member’s explanatory statement be granted where there is a genuine need. This amendment ensures that rules of court made by virtue of subsection (1) of Clause 62 must make provision which enables I turn now to Amendments 33 to 40 to Clause 64. the court to make a special measures direction in respect of a These introduce an automatic ban on cross-examination party or witness in civil proceedings who is a victim, or is at risk in person by a litigant in person if the party to of becoming a victim, of domestic abuse. proceedings has been convicted or cautioned in relation to a specified offence against a party to the proceedings Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, I apologise or where there is a protective injunction between the for the short intermission while we changed places. parties. The witness may also introduce additional The government amendments in this group relate to evidence to prove that they are a victim of domestic 1683 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1684 abuse, and this too can give rise to an automatic ban. The Government have listened to those concerns. The evidence would be based on legal aid evidentiary I am particularly grateful to the Minister for the time standards and may include a letter from a GP or an that he and officials in his department made available employer. This is provided for in family courts through to consider these issues and for the very useful discussions Clause 63. These amendments would therefore move we had, which have led us to the position that special the position in civil courts substantially closer to the measures are now to be extended to persons who are provision in family courts on a ban on cross-examination. or who are at risk of being a victim of domestic abuse, However,as with the point I made in regard to Clause 62, where the original unamended clause required that the we have to be mindful of the differences between the person had to be the victim of a specified offence for two jurisdictions. which the perpetrator would have had to have been The clause, in so far as it relates to banning the convicted, cautioned or charged. cross-examination of vulnerable parties or witnesses, I am delighted that the Government have agreed, again stems from the report by the Civil Justice Council. no doubt because so many cases of domestic abuse The council recommended that the prohibition of never reach that stage—largely because so much abuse cross-examination by a self-represented party should goes unreported or is never the subject of criminal be extended to cover civil proceedings, thereby ensuring investigation—that victims and those at risk of being some parity with the criminal and family jurisdictions. victims should be protected in civil proceedings, as The council did caution, however, that the ban or they are to be in family proceedings. prohibition should not be automatic and absolute, Although the amendments on direct cross-examination bearing in mind the broad range of cases that come are complex, as the Minister has explained, they effectively before the civil courts. offer broadly equivalent protection to victims of abuse As I have said previously in our debates on the Bill, in civil proceedings to that offered in family proceedings, we have concerns in relation to the civil jurisdiction which was the aim of my amendments. In addition to that there should be an automatic ban on cross- the discretionary protection which the court is to be examination where the position is only that someone able to give as a result of new Section 85F of the is charged with an offence against an individual; that Courts Act 2003, to be introduced by Clause 64, there is, where the facts of the case have yet to be proven. In is now to be a clear bar on direct cross-examination in the circumstances where someone is charged with an cases where the victim is a victim of an offence or offence, we believe that it should be left to the discretion protected by an injunction or where there is evidence of the court to determine whether a ban is appropriate of domestic abuse against the victim by a party or on the facts of a particular case. That is because, as I witness. The nature of the evidence to be required to have said, civil and family jurisdictions are different in trigger the mandatory bar will be specified in regulations. type of case they deal with, the civil jurisdiction having It is to be hoped that no undue formality will be a much wider range. required, but I am confident that will be the case. I believe that these amendments will give better These amendments achieve what I set out to achieve: protection to victims of domestic abuse and bring to protect witnesses and parties in civil proceedings closer parity between the civil and family jurisdictions. who have been subject to domestic abuse. I am therefore I beg to move. very pleased to have been able to add my name to the amendments and say—it is not the first time it has Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD): My Lords, been said today—that this process has shown the I explained in Committee the reasons for my amendments, House at its best. It has been a model of co-operation which were directed at ensuring that special measures between some of us on the Opposition Benches and and the prohibition of direct cross-examination should the Government of the day. be applied in civil cases on the same or a very similar basis as they are to be in family cases. Our debates highlighted the difficulties, fear and trauma for parties Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I and witnesses in giving evidence and taking part in thank the noble Lord, Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames, proceedings where they were victims or at risk of for pursuing this issue. It is not something I had being victims of domestic abuse at the hands of other focused on. The concessions he has got from the parties or witnesses. We spoke of the effect of reliving Government are welcome. There will be a ban on the trauma of abuse in subsequent court proceedings cross-examination in family courts and a broadly and the fear of the consequences of giving or challenging equivalent set of rules in the civil courts, although, as evidence given by or in the presence of perpetrators. far as I understand it, there will still be some judicial discretion on these matters because of the wider nature I argued that in many civil proceedings the risks of the types of cases heard in the civil courts. As the and effects were the same. I mentioned disputes over noble Lord just said, while the nature of the cases may property and goods, landlord and tenant disputes, be wider, the risks may be the same, particularly if the employment disputes, inheritance disputes and business parties are personally connected in any way. I welcome disputes—particularly when partners break up and these government amendments and congratulate the the separation of their joint business interests gives noble Lord on pursuing this matter. rise to litigation. It is a truism for litigation lawyers that the disputes giving rise to the most bitterness and unpleasantness are precisely those where the litigants 5.15 pm have a close personal connection. However, of course I conclude by drawing on something completely I take the Minister’s point that the range of disputes in different: the advent of remote working, which I am civil cases is very much broader than it is in family cases. actively involved with in both criminal and, more 1685 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1686

[LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDE] (iii) any other caution given to a person in England importantly, family proceedings. We are developing and Wales in respect of an offence which, at the different ways of remote working in real time. For time the caution is given, the person has admitted; example, in videoconferences, should a party be able (b) in the case of Scotland, anything corresponding to to ask that their face not be available to be seen by all a caution falling within paragraph (a) (however described) which is given to a person in respect of parties taking part in the case? These are difficult an offence under the law of Scotland; matters which we are dealing with day to day; at the moment there is no guidance as such, other than (c) in the case of Northern Ireland— consulting with colleagues and senior judges. These are (i) a conditional caution given under section 71 of the very live matters which may be on the horizon to be Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2011, or further regulated in future. However, for now, I am glad (ii) any other caution given to a person in Northern Ireland in respect of an offence which, at the time to accept these government amendments. the caution is given, the person has admitted; Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, I hope “conviction” means— the House will forgive me if I am brief, because I am (a) a conviction by or before a court in England and conscious there is a lot of business still to get through. Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland; I thank the noble Lord, Lord Marks of Henley-on- (b) a conviction in service disciplinary proceedings (in England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, or Thames—my co-sponsor of these amendments—for elsewhere), including— his kind words and engagement. As he said, we have (i) in the case of proceedings in respect of a service reached the position where there are broadly equivalent offence, anything that under section 376(1) and (2) provisions in place across the jurisdictions. of the Armed Forces Act 2006 (which relates to I am also grateful for the support of the noble Lord, summary hearings and the Summary Appeal Court) Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede. The point he raised is to be treated as a conviction for the purposes of about remote working and the courts having to work that Act, and in real time in dealing with the pandemic and its (ii) in the case of any other service disciplinary proceedings, effects is very important. To say any more at this stage a finding of guilt in those proceedings; would take me both outside the confines of this Bill (c) a finding in any criminal proceedings (including a and well off my brief. However, I have no doubt we finding linked with a finding of insanity) that the will discuss it in this and other contexts in future. person concerned has committed an offence or done the act or made the omission charged; Amendment 32 agreed. and “convicted” is to be read accordingly; “service disciplinary proceedings” means— Clause 64: Prohibition of cross-examination in person (a) any proceedings (whether or not before a court) in respect of a service offence (except proceedings in civil proceedings before a civilian court within the meaning of the Armed Forces Act 2006); Amendments 33 to 40 (b) any proceedings under the Army Act 1955, the Air Moved by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar Force Act 1955, or the Naval Discipline Act 1957 (whether before a court-martial or before any other 33: Clause 64, page 47, line 21, at end insert— court or person authorised under any of those Acts “85EA Prohibition of cross-examination in person: victims to award a punishment in respect of an offence); of offences (c) any proceedings before a Standing Civilian Court (1) In civil proceedings, no party to the proceedings established under the Armed Forces Act 1976; who has been convicted of, or given a caution for, a “service offence” means— specified offence may cross-examine in person a witness who is the victim of that offence. (a) a service offence within the meaning of the Armed Forces Act 2006, or (2) In civil proceedings, no party to the proceedings who is the victim of a specified offence may cross- (b) an SDA offence within the meaning of the Armed examine in person a witness who has been convicted Forces Act 2006 (Transitional Provisions etc) Order of, or given a caution for, that offence. 2009 (S.I. 2009/1059); (3) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to a conviction “specified offence” means an offence which is specified, or caution that is spent for the purposes of the or of a description specified, in regulations made by Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, unless evidence the Lord Chancellor. in relation to the conviction or caution is admissible (6) The following provisions (which deem a conviction in, or may be required in, the proceedings by virtue of a person discharged not to be a conviction) do of section 7(2), (3) or (4) of that Act. not apply for the purposes of this section to a (4) Cross-examination in breach of subsection (1) or (2) conviction of a person for an offence in respect of does not affect the validity of a decision of the court which an order has been made discharging the person in the proceedings if the court was not aware of the absolutely or conditionally— conviction or caution when the cross-examination (a) section 14 of the Powers of Criminal Courts took place. (Sentencing) Act 2000; (5) In this section— (b) section 82 of the Sentencing Code; “caution” means— (c) section 187 of the Armed Forces Act 2006 or any (a) in the case of England and Wales— corresponding earlier enactment. (i) a conditional caution given under section 22 of the (7) For the purposes of this section “offence” includes Criminal Justice Act 2003, an offence under a law that is no longer in force. (ii) a youth conditional caution given under section 66A 85EB Prohibition of cross-examination in person: persons of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, or protected by injunctions etc 1687 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1688

(1) In civil proceedings, no party to the proceedings (cb) any charge of which the court is aware in respect of against whom an on-notice protective injunction is a specified offence alleged to have been committed in force may cross-examine in person a witness who by the witness in relation to the party;” is protected by the injunction. Member’s explanatory statement (2) In civil proceedings, no party to the proceedings This amendment, and the Minister’s amendment at page 48, who is protected by an on-notice protective line 25, provide that, in deciding whether to make a direction injunction may cross-examine in person a witness under new section 85F of the Courts Act 2003 prohibiting a party against whom the injunction is in force. from cross-examining a witness in person, the court must have (3) Cross-examination in breach of subsection (1) or regard to the fact that the party has been charged with a specified (2) does not affect the validity of a decision of the offence alleged to have been committed in relation to the witness court in the proceedings if the court was not aware (or vice versa). of the protective injunction when the cross- 36: Clause 64, page 48, leave out lines 10 to 13 examination took place. Member’s explanatory statement (4) In this section “protective injunction” means an This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment order,injunctionorinterdictspecified,orof adescription at page 47, line 21. specified, in regulations made by the Lord Chancellor. 37: Clause 64, page 48, line 25, at end insert— (5) For the purposes of this section, a protective injunction “( ) In subsection (5)(ca) and (cb) “specified offence” is an “on-notice” protective injunction if— means an offence that is a specified offence for the (a) the court is satisfied that there has been a hearing at purposes of section 85EA.” which the person against whom the protective Member’s explanatory statement injunction is in force asked, or could have asked, for See the explanatory statement for the Minister’s amendment the injunction to be set aside or varied, or at page 48, line 9. (b) the protective injunction was made at a hearing of 38: Clause 64, page 49, line 7, leave out “a direction under which the court is satisfied that both the person section” and insert “any of sections 85EA to” who applied for it and the person against whom it is Member’s explanatory statement in force had notice. This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment 85EC Prohibition of cross-examination in person: evidence at page 47, line 21. of domestic abuse 39: Clause 64, page 50, leave out lines 16 and 17 (1) In civil proceedings, where specified evidence is Member’s explanatory statement adduced that a person who is a witness has been the This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment victim of domestic abuse carried out by a party to at page 50, line 30. the proceedings, that party to the proceedings may 40: Clause 64, page 50, line 30, at end insert— not cross-examine the witness in person. “85K Regulations under Part 7A (2) In civil proceedings, where specified evidence is adduced that a person who is a party to the proceedings Regulations under this Part may make different provision has been the victim of domestic abuse carried out by for different purposes.”” a witness, that party may not cross-examine the Member’s explanatory statement witness in person. This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment (3) In this section— at page 47, line 21. “domestic abuse” has the meaning given by section 1 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021; Amendments 33 to 40 agreed. “specified evidence” means evidence specified, or of a description specified, in regulations made by the The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Watkins of Tavistock) Lord Chancellor. (CB): We now come to the group beginning with (4) Regulations under subsection (3) may provide that Amendment 41. Anyone wishing to press this or anything any evidence which satisfies the court that domestic else in this group to a Division must make that clear in abuse, or domestic abuse of a specified description, debate. has occurred is specified evidence for the purposes of this section.” Member’s explanatory statement Amendment 41 This amendment provides for an automatic prohibition in civil Moved by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar proceedings on the cross-examination of witnesses in person in 41: After Clause 64, insert the following new Clause— certain cases, similar to the provisions in Clause 63. For example, “Orders under section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 it prohibits a party who has been convicted of a specified offence Orders under section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 from cross-examining in person a witness who is the victim of that offence. “Specified” here means specified in regulations made (1) The Children Act 1989 is amended as follows. by the Lord Chancellor. (2) In section 91 (effect and duration of orders etc.), at the 34: Clause 64, page 47, line 25, after “if” insert “— end of subsection (14) insert— (a) none of sections 85EA to 85EC operates to prevent “For further provision about orders under this subsection, the party from cross-examining the witness, and see section 91A (section 91(14) orders: further provision).” (b) ” (3) After section 91 insert— Member’s explanatory statement “91A Section 91(14) orders: further provision This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment (1) This section makes further provision about orders at page 47, line 21. under section 91(14) (referred to in this section as 35: Clause 64, page 48, line 9, at end insert— “section 91(14) orders”). “(ca) any charge of which the court is aware in respect (2) The circumstances in which the court may make a of a specified offence alleged to have been committed section 91(14) order include, among others, where by the party in relation to the witness; the court is satisfied that the making of an application 1689 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1690

for an order under this Act of a specified kind by panel in its report Assessing Risk of Harm to Children any person who is to be named in the section 91(14) and Parents in Private Law Children Cases that, while order would put— they can be an effective measure, Section 91(14) barring (a) the child concerned, or orders are not being used sufficiently to prevent (b) another individual (“the relevant individual”), perpetrators continuing their abuse through the use of at risk of harm. court applications under the Children Act 1989. (3) In the case of a child or other individual who has Before I go further, I want to pay respectful tribute reached the age of eighteen, the reference in subsection to the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, (2) to “harm”is to be read as a reference to ill-treatment who delivered the seminal re P judgment in this area of or the impairment of physical or mental health. law back in 1999. For over two decades the guidelines (4) Where a person who is named in a section 91(14) included in that leading judgment have been regarded order applies for leave to make an application of a as the main reference point for judges when they are specified kind, the court must, in determining whether to grant leave, consider whether there has making the often difficult decision on the use of been a material change of circumstances since the Section 91(14). It is fair to acknowledge that it is clear order was made. from those guidelines that specific cases and types of (5) A section 91(14) order may be made by the court— harm, including harm from domestic abuse, are not (a) on an application made— excluded from consideration for a barring order. None the less, now is the right time for us to act on the (i) by the relevant individual; evidence presented by the harm panel about how (ii) by or on behalf of the child concerned; Section 91(14) is being understood and applied, (iii) by any other person who is a party to the application particularly in domestic abuse circumstances. being disposed of by the court; As is evident from the many debates we have had on (b) of its own motion. the Bill, we now know far more about the prevalence (6) In this section, “the child concerned” means the of domestic abuse and the different forms that it can child referred to in section 91(14).”” take than we did in 1999. It is therefore right that as Member’s explanatory statement the Bill approaches the end of its parliamentary journey, This amendment inserts a new section 91A into the Children Act 1989 which makes further provision about the circumstances we use the opportunity to clarify the ambit and application in which the court may make an order under section 91(14) of of Section 91(14) to ensure that we are providing that Act (also known as a barring order), including where the greater protection to victims, survivors and their children. court is satisfied that the making of a further application for an The Government are clear that barring orders are order under that Act, by any person to be named in the order, would available to protect parents and children where further put the child concerned, or another individual, at risk of harm. proceedings would risk causing them harm, and particularly where proceedings could be a form of Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, continuing domestic abuse. To that end, Amendment Amendments 41 and 104 relate to Section 91(14) of 41 introduces a new provision into the Children Act the Children Act 1989. Last year we committed to 1989: new Section 91A. The new section clarifies that exploring whether an amendment to the Bill was needed the circumstances in which a court may make a barring to clarify that Section. As noble Lords will be aware, it order include where the court is satisfied that a further deals with barring orders, as they are often called, application made by the named person would put the which allow courts to bar individuals from making child or another individual—for example, the parent further applications without permission of the court. victim—at risk of harm. It is a non-exhaustive example; Importantly, therefore, the order does not prevent the discretion is preserved, but an additional statutory access to the court; it prevents making an application indication is provided. As I have mentioned, this without first obtaining the permission of the court to amendment responds to recommendations made by do so. the harm panel. In Committee, the noble Lord, Lord Rosser, and The aim of Amendment 41 is therefore to make it my noble friend Lady Newlove asked for an update on clearer to courts and practitioners that Section 91(14) the progress of the work. On responding to an amendment barring orders are indeed available where a further on barring orders put forward by the noble Lord, application would pose a risk of harm to a child or a Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, I said that I would parent victim, and in particular where that application consider the issue of Section 91(14) carefully ahead of could constitute further domestic abuse. In that context, this next stage. I can assure noble Lords that I have I should highlight to noble Lords that while this done precisely that. amendment does not expressly mention domestic abuse, The sad fact is that perpetrators sometimes use the it refers to the concept of “harm” that is already found family court as a way to continue their abuse, often in the Children Act 1989. This is because the definition bringing their victims back to court repeatedly, which in Section 31(9) of the Children Act is already very can in itself be a traumatising process. It is an abuse of broad. It already includes coercive control and other the victims and also, therefore, an inappropriate use of forms of domestic abuse, along with many other forms the court process. of harm. As it is currently formulated, Section 91(14) of the Wetouched on that point in the government response Children Act 1989 does not include any detail as to the to the Joint Committee’s recommendation to amend circumstances in which such barring orders should be the definition of harm. As we said there, we believe used. Courts have therefore elaborated the principles that singling out a specific form of harm in any part of for when such barring orders may, and should, be made. the 1989 Act could have unintended negative consequences Last year we heard compelling evidence from the expert and risk appearing to give greater weight to one form 1691 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1692 of harm than another. We do not want to create a The jurisdiction is similar to the court’s jurisdiction hierarchy of harm. We have therefore opted for the to make civil restraint orders and civil proceedings wider concept of harm, consistent with the approach orders against vexatious and unmeritorious repeat in the Children Act. litigants in civil cases.Under this government amendment, We have also responded to the harm panel’s report a person subject to a barring order may of course seek in a further way. The new Section 91A makes it clear permission to apply further to the court. That application that in determining whether to grant permission to for permission will be considered, but the court considering make an application to a person who is subject to a whether permission should be given to make a fresh barring order under Section 91(14), the court must application must consider whether there has been a consider whether there has been a material change of change of circumstances since the making of the circumstances since the barring order was made. Our original order. That, I suggest, seems entirely sensible. intention is to require that courts consider carefully The amendment therefore strikes a careful and judicious whether the circumstances that gave rise to the barring balance between protecting potential applicants and order have materially changed, such that permission providing a safeguard against people being harassed to apply should be granted. The amendment does not by unmeritorious repeat litigation. draw a red line such that permission can be granted Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I only if there has been a material change of circumstances, thank the Minister for introducing these amendments, but we believe that the inclusion of this provision, which we support. As he explained, they put in additional which requires the court to consider this question, will strengthening factors for barring orders; of course, offer further protection to domestic abuse victims. there are barring orders in place in the family courts in The amendment also makes it clear that courts can any event. The purpose, as he explained, is to make it make these orders on their own initiative—of their crystal clear, and to set out clearly, what the court own motion, as it used to be said—for example, without must consider where there is any risk for the children an application being made by the victim for an order or the other parties through repeated litigation. However, to be made. This, too, is a response to the harm panel’s there is discretion for the court, if there is a material recommendations. We want to put beyond doubt that change in circumstances, to decide to accept and hear there need not be an application for a barring order in the case. So I accept the amendment as presented. order for the court to consider making one. Of course, the court will still need to give due consideration to the 5.30 pm making of such an order, but the amendment clarifies One case that I dealt with comes to mind. It had that the court can make an order on its own initiative. come to court 24 times in six years. The child was six The Government are therefore confident that the years old, which means that every three months that amendment will mean that barring orders are used child’s issues had come to court, as a child arrangements more often by courts to protect victims of domestic order. There were no allegations of domestic abuse. It abuse where further applications put them at risk of was a youngish couple who were using the court system harm. It will also make sure that permission to apply to resolve matters that seemed trivial. At what we will be granted only where the court has considered hoped would be the final time we were dealing with whether there has been a material change of circumstances this case, we came up with six pages of guidance for the since the order was made, and also clarify that courts childarrangements,withalotof detail.Attherecommendation can make these orders on their own initiative. For those of the legal adviser, we put in place a barring order to reasons, I beg to move. get those parents to sort out those problems themselves. As I say, there was no allegation of domestic abuse in that case, so it is slightly different from that which the Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD): My Lords, noble Lord has put forward today. Nevertheless, it was we support this government amendment and the certainly appropriate for a barring order. I support the amendment of the Title of the Bill that goes with it. amendment as moved by the Government. As the Minister has explained, Section 91 of the Children Act permits the court to make a barring order—that is, Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, again, an order forbidding someone, usually an applicant I hope that the House and the noble Lords, Lord who has failed to persuade a court to make an order in Marks of Henley-on-Thames and Lord Ponsonby of his or her favour, from making an application for an Shulbrede, will forgive me for being brief. I am conscious order of a particular kind; this is usually but not of the amount of the work that we have to get through. always a repeat application—with respect to a child, I am grateful for their comments and support for the importantly, without the leave of the court. purpose and effect of these amendments. As the noble An order under this section still permits a further Lord, Lord Marks, put it, we are striking a careful and application for an order to be made if the court judicious balance here between access to courts and decides to permit it, which the court may in its discretion preventing the court process being used as a vehicle decide to do. This amendment, as the Minister has for abuse. As we were reminded by the noble Lord, explained, extends the discretion to make a barring Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, it is not only in cases of order if a further application would put the child domestic abuse that Section 91(14) is available, although concerned, or another individual, at risk of harm. that is the purpose of the amendments before the House. That is the real purpose and merit of this amendment: Again, with apologies for being brief, because it is for the protection from repeated litigation of those there appears to be broad agreement, I beg to move who might be victims of domestic abuse, when that Amendment 41. repeated litigation often amounts to a particularly unpleasant form of harassment by legal proceedings. Amendment 41 agreed. 1693 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1694

The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Watkins of Tavistock) label the victim as a fellow perpetrator. As the Minister (CB): We now come to Amendment 42. Anyone wishing said on a previous group, an abuser will pursue their to press this amendment to a Division must make that victim through the family courts to try to force contact clear in debate. with their child, not because they care, but because it is an extension of their coercive and controlling behaviour and their fury that their victim has managed to escape Amendment 42 them. So, the abuse continues through the courts and Moved by Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb then into unsupervised contact. More than a dozen 42: After Clause 64, insert the following new Clause— children have been murdered by their fathers during “Proceedings under the Children Act 1989 unsupervised contact. Can the Minister please tell me (1) Part I of the Children Act 1989 is amended as follows. what the Government are going to do to stop it? (2) In section 1 (welfare of the child) after subsection (2B) insert— Baroness Fox of Buckley (Non-Afl): In my short “(2C) Subsection (2A) shall not apply in relation to a parent where there has been domestic abuse which time in this House, I have been hugely impressed by has affected the child or other parent. the fairness, clarity and reasonableness of the noble (2D) Evidence of domestic abuse may be provided in Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb—that might one or more of the forms accepted as evidence for be bad for her reputation—even when we have not legal aid, as per guidance issued by the Ministry of agreed. However, in this instance, I am sad to say that Justice.” I cannot find anything reasonable in this amendment, (3) Part II of the Children Act 1989 is amended as follows. but it raises some broader issues about the Bill that (4) In section 9 (restrictions on making section 8 orders) worry me, so I will make those points. after subsection (7) insert— This amendment effectively argues for denying the “(8) No court shall make a section 8 order for a child to right to be a parent to anyone accused of the offence spend unsupervised time with or have unsupervised of abuse. In listing those who will be denied unsupervised contact with a parent who is— access to their own children, we have those “awaiting (a) awaiting trial, or on bail for, a domestic abuse offence; trial”, “on bail” or (b) involved in ongoing criminal proceedings for a “involved in ongoing criminal proceedings”, domestic abuse offence; all of which—as anyone who knows anything about (c) is pending a fact finding hearing or has been found the criminal justice system knows—can involve months to have committed domestic abuse in a previous fact-finding hearing; or or years of one’s life. That would mean that innocent people, accused, are already treated as guilty. (d) has a criminal conviction for a domestic abuse offence. (8A) In subsection (8)— Of course, we all want to protect children from any risk and, as the noble Baroness has illustrated, those “unsupervised” means where a court approved third party is not present at all times during contact with horrifying stories of children being hurt or even killed, the parent to ensure the physical safety and sometimes as revenge, are at the forefront of our emotional wellbeing of a child; minds, but I have two points. The amendment refers to “domestic abuse offence” means an offence which the ensuring the Crown Prosecution Service alleges to have involved “physical safety and emotional wellbeing of a child”. domestic abuse.”” Those are two distinct threats. The latter, at least, is Member’s explanatory statement difficult to pin down. I argue that being deprived of This amendment seeks to prevent domestic abusers from time with one’s parent, free from a court-approved being granted unsupervised contact with children in family law third party, could also be the cause of considerable proceedings. emotional distress for any child. It could be a recipe for the parental alienation that she mentioned. Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP): My Lords, I had to bring this amendment back on Report, because Secondly, even the prospect or fear of a threat to I did not think that the Minister accepted the issues in physical safety cannot distort our sense of justice or Committee. They are important: domestic abusers are lead to disproportionate or punitive measures in a being granted unsupervised contact with children as a risk-averse “what if?” scenario. It could too easily lead result of an ingrained pro-contact culture. The Ministry to the state unjustly alienating children from a parent of Justice’s own harm review concluded that “the who is accused but not found guilty. Surely, evidence dominance of contact” is seen and facts are key to establishing the level of threat. I “as excluding other welfare considerations, including the child’s note that the amendment would deny unsupervised need for protection from abuse, or the child’s wishes and feelings.” contact Rather than seeing contact as a means to an end and “pending a fact finding hearing”, weighing it up against all the harm and damage that which makes a mockery of establishing facts and tears an abusive parent has caused, it is seen as the end in up any commitment to factual evidence as an important itself, almost no matter what the cost. That is deeply part of judging whether an accused parent can be harmful. trusted to care for or parent their children without The debate on parental alienation on Monday showed third-party supervision. just how embedded some of these ideas have become. I am even worried that this amendment argues that Wanting to exclude an abusive parent can itself be unsupervised contact would not be allowed for anyone labelled as abusive. Abusive men, in particular, falsely with a “criminal conviction” for abuse. Granted, in claim that abuse is mutual and reciprocal, and try to this instance the evidence has been weighed and facts 1695 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1696 established, but consider the implications of this. This of statutory services that all parents are entitled to access amendment would mean that someone found guilty of to children, regardless of any fears that the primary abuse perhaps when as young as 18 could find themselves, carer or parent may have about violence or abuse. Of at the age of 38—by now, we hope, a reformed character course, there are exceptional social workers and other in a different set of circumstances, maybe no longer professionals who will pay heed to the whole range of drinking, on drugs or mentally ill, as we have heard issues of safeguarding, particularly where there is a today, or just shame-faced about their younger self’s previous history of violence and abuse. abusive behaviour—still denied unsupervised access to I commend here the long-standing and excellent their children. To be honest, that seems ungenerous, work of Barnardo’s and the Thomas Coram Foundation even barbaric and vengeful. It suggests that we are contact centre. In my experience, they have always branding people found guilty as perpetrators with the taken these grave matters into consideration, but their letter “A”for abuser, for ever. services are for the lucky few. This is why I support the We also heard earlier that one can gain a criminal amendment in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady conviction for abuse by breaching a domestic abuse Jones. As has been detailed, the harm review found a order. That breach might be for a relatively minor pattern of sexism, racism and class bias against mothers offence.I worry that aspects of this amendment encourage and children in the family court and confirmed the a lack of perspective and a disavowal from making presumption of contact, which has resulted in the judgments of different threats. The Government continue minimisation and disbelief of allegations of domestic to stress that they do not want a hierarchy of abuse or abuse and child sexual abuse. harm—we have just heard the Minister discuss that—but The presumption is often based on one parent lying this can lead to a muddle when it comes to parental to deprive the other of access to children and somehow contact. I want to discourage a lazy, one-size-fits-all persuading their children to turn against the other approach. When considering risks to children, there is parent. Such legal presumption often disadvantages a distinction between, for example, the perpetrator of women, including those from minority heritage regular, systematic violence or coercive control and backgrounds and those for whom our legal system is the particular emotional or psychological abuse that frequently alienating due to a lack of adequate English one partner might inflict on another in a toxic relationship. or knowledge about their rights. The latter may be worse than horrible if you are at the receiving end of it, but it may never be aimed at or Even in these most serious cases against mothers even witnessed by children. and children, the presumption of contact has triumphed, dismissing evidence of domestic abuse and negating To conclude, I urge the Government to maintain mothers’ fears of extensive coercive and controlling the presumption of parental contact. It should be behaviour or sexual abuse. Some women who have curtailed or removed only with great care. That does written to me suggest that fathers have been able to not mean putting children at risk, but it means holding recognise the argument of being alienated to argue justice dear. their entitlement to access, even where there has been evidence of violence or sexual abuse. Baroness Butler-Sloss (CB) [V]: My Lords, I entirely As has been suggested by noble and learned Lords agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Fox. I recognise and other noble Lords, the court system does not the good intentions of the amendment, but I am always function as it should. It is not beyond the wit of concerned that it is too rigid. As I know from my our courts to make a proper assessment of the impact judicial experience, not all situations are black and on children when they have witnessed countless occasions white. As I said at some length on a previous occasion of violent incidents experienced by their mother or on Report, judges and magistrates will get specific why children would be afraid to see their violent father training on the Domestic Abuse Act, but the effect of in any unsupervised contact. this amendment would deny them important judicial discretion. Children who do not want to see their fathers are sometimes forced into foster care, separated from siblings, I am particularly concerned about that because or given to other family members, to force them into proposed subsection (2D) in the amendment says: contact. The London Victims’ Commissioner has called “Evidence of domestic abuse may be provided in one or more this “state-sanctioned abuse”. I am not saying that; of the forms accepted as evidence for legal aid, as per guidance issued by the Ministry of Justice.” someone who has a wide range of experience is saying it. We have to respect that view and take it on board. As the noble Baroness, Lady Fox, pointed out, that means that a decision is taken that generally a father, but sometimes a mother,would be forbidden unsupervised 5.45 pm contact based on the information provided by one The figures speak for themselves. Women’s Aid party and before the fact-finding decision had been research demonstrates that safeguarding concerns resulting made by the judge. Although I understand why the from domestic abuse are still not believed or understood amendment has been put forward, I am not prepared within the child contact system, leading to potentially to support it. unsafe contact decisions which, in the most extreme cases, have resulted in children being seriously harmed Baroness Uddin (Non-Afl) [V]: My Lords, the and murdered. This was highlighted in the Women’s presumption of contact cannot be the first indicated Aid report, which referred to the horrific murder of assurance by the family court process. As a front-line Claire Throssell’s two sons. This case illustrates the social worker supporting supervised contact, my danger of unsupervised contact. Werisk further tragedies experience was that there is an underlying assumption unless this is addressed now. 1697 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1698

[BARONESS UDDIN] However,as I attempted to demonstrate in Committee, As has already been referred to, last year the Ministry there may be cases where acts of abuse should not lead of Justice published the final report of its expert to the conclusion that contact should be cut. In some panel—Women’s Aid was part of it—on assessing the cases, the child will have not witnessed, known about risk of harm to children and parents in family law or been put at risk by an act of abuse, which may have children’s cases. It concluded that family courts do not been a completely isolated act, committed against its effectivelyprotectmanychildandadultvictimsof domestic parent. I am reluctant to disagree with the noble abuse from further harm. It called for fundamental Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb, because I so reform of the child arrangements programme, arguing rarely do, but I do on this occasion. I understand her that the system should be redesigned with a focus on concern and that of the noble Baroness, Lady Uddin, trauma and an assurance to work collectively across all to ensure that children are protected from the harm of other justice agencies. The presumption should be unsuitable and often dangerous contacts, but to provide ended in cases where children are at risk of harm from that protection is the job of judges. It is not the task of domestic abuse, with contact arrangements for domestic Parliament to make absolutist rules that treat all cases abuse cases based on an informed judgment of the where allegations of abuse are made in the same way. child’s best interests and safety. The Ministry of Justice Judicial discretion in these cases should be left as it is, panel concluded in June 2020 that the presumption exactly for the reasons advanced by the noble and should be urgently reviewed. learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss. I have been overwhelmed with emails and messages I also do not accept that the proposed new subsection from women who have experienced hopelessness with (4) should pass into law. It would provide that no our legal system. No doubt we can deluge this Chamber court should make an order for unsupervised contact with countless cases—I am sure that many noble Lords with a parent who is, broadly, facing proceedings for a have been contacted and reached out to. All involve domestic abuse offence, is involved in a fact-finding years of long-lasting and damaging court cases where hearing for a domestic abuse offence or who has a children are forced into contact deemed unsafe. Mothers criminal conviction for such an offence. There are two have experienced pressure to prove that their fear was points that are conclusive against such a clause. First, real but that has been denied, so inflicting further in the circumstances of paragraphs (a) to (c) in the injury to the mother and children. One survivor,speaking proposed new subsection (8) of Section 9 of the Children on behalf of many named survivors, said to me, “I am Act, there would have been no finding of guilt of crying out for help and hope”. This amendment is one domestic abuse. The presumption of innocence has to small aspect of our response to safeguard them and their apply, a point well made by the noble Baroness, Lady children. I speak to give their voices in the Chamber today. Fox of Buckley. A judge hearing a contact application should not be barred by a statutory prohibition from making a finding of fact and an order after hearing Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD): My Lords, evidence if they take the view that the welfare of the I expressed my concern in Committee at the proposal child would be best served by making such an order to abandon the presumption in subsection (2A) of the for contact, just because there is a statutory prohibition Children Act 1989 where there has been domestic that operates without a finding of fact. abuse that has affected the child or the other parent. My concern was then, as it is now, that under the Secondly, this suggested prohibition would not be Children Act the welfare of the child must be the court’s limited to cases where the alleged offending party is paramount consideration. said to have been involved in domestic abuse against either the child or its other parent, so it would forbid a The presumption requires courts, when making contact order between the prohibited parent and a orders about arrangements for children, including their child from an entirely different relationship. A court living arrangements and arrangements for contacts, to would be forbidden from making an order for contact ensure that with a child from a father’s relationship with a former “unless the contrary is shown, that involvement of that parent in the life of the child concerned will further the child’s welfare”. partner, with whom a good relationship had been maintained by him and by the child, because of an That presumption is supported by a great deal of allegation of domestic abuse lodged by a subsequent evidence that for children to maintain a relationship partner. Such an absolute prohibition would be wrong, with both their parents following a breakdown of the and I cannot support it. parents’ relationship is generally in their best interests. The presumption has stood the test of time. It serves to remind custodial and non-custodial parents in entirely Lord Rosser (Lab) [V]: My Lords, the proposed new non-abusive relationships that have nevertheless broken clause in this amendment moved by the noble Baroness, down that their responsibility is to try to help their Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb, would disapply the children to maintain relationships with the other, non- presumption that parental involvement furthers a child’s residential parent. welfare in cases where there has been domestic abuse. But the presumption is rebuttable, hence the words It would also prohibit unsupervised contact for a “unless the contrary is shown”. parent awaiting trial or on bail for domestic abuse In many cases involving domestic abuse, judges will offences where there are ongoing criminal proceedings not order contact, because the best interests of the for domestic abuse or where the parent has a criminal child will not be met by their making an order for offence for domestic abuse. I moved a similar amendment contact. That covers the cases that I suspect the noble in Committee which did not receive the backing of a Baronesses,LadyUddinandLadyJonesof Moulsecoomb, number of speakers in the debate or of the Minister. are worried about. In his response in Committee, the Minister said: 1699 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1700

“I have a great deal of sympathy for the aims of these safety. That is why this Government, in November amendments, and I agree that more needs to be done to ensure 2020, following the recommendations from the Expert that the courts take proper account of the impact that domestic Panel on Harm in the Family Courts, launched a abuse can have on children’s well-being and safety.” review of the presumption of parental involvement. He went on to say that The noble Lord, Lord Rosser, and the noble Baroness, “following the recommendations from the Expert Panel on Harm Lady Uddin, referred to the harm panel’s report, but it in the Family Courts, the Government launched a review on the is important to acknowledge that the panel did not presumption of parental involvement” call for immediate legislative change, despite hearing which evidence from more than 1,200 parties. Instead, the “will focus on the presumption … and the impact on children’s panel recommended that a full review be undertaken welfare of the courts’ application of these provisions.” by the Government, and that is precisely what we are He argued that it would doing. “be premature to amend the legislation relating to the presumption … In my respectful view, the panel was right to do so before gaining the in-depth evidence from the review.”—[Official because, as the debate in Committee demonstrated, Report, 3/2/21; col. 2222.] this is a complex and nuanced issue, with a significant However, we should not forget that Women’s Aid’s real-world impact for the thousands of families who Nineteen Child Homicides documents the cases of go through the family courts every year. That review 19 children in 12 families who were killed in circumstances will focus on the application of the provision and its relating to child contact by a father who was the exceptions, and the impact on children’s welfare of the perpetrator of domestic abuse. The Expert Panel on courts’ application of those provisions. Through the Harm in the Family Courts said that it had review, we will develop a strong evidence base and “received sufficient evidence to conclude that in the cohort of ensure that any changes brought about as a result of it cases described in submissions the presumption further reinforces the procontact culture and detracts from the court’s focus on the are rooted in a solid understanding of the effect of the child’s individual welfare and safety.” presumption and the associated evidence on child The report also states: welfare. I remain of the view that it would be premature to amend the Children Act in the way proposed by the “The panel is clear, however, that the presumption should not remain in its present form.” amendment before gaining the in-depth evidence and response from the review. There is thus some clear and, indeed, tragic evidence that the present arrangements relating to the presumption 6 pm of parental involvement as opposed to solely what is in the best interests of the child, including its welfare I will return briefly to the valuable debate we had in and safety, are just not delivering the protections they Committee about the paramountcy principle and the should. However, in the light of the concerns expressed potential impact of this amendment in that respect. by some noble Lords in Committee, which have been The current legislation regarding the presumption makes repeated today,and the current review of the presumption it clear that the presumption should be disapplied of parental involvement, we did not put down the where there is a risk of harm to the child. That means amendment for Report. Instead, we will continue to that risk of harm from a parent perpetrator of domestic pursue this issue outside the discussions and debates abuse should already be taken into account by courts. on the Bill. The Children Act 1989, in placing the child’s welfare as paramount, should also ensure that courts consider Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, as the the risk of a child suffering harm, or further harm, noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb, has when deciding any aspect of the child’s upbringing. explained, Amendment 42 seeks to disapply the As stated by the noble Lord, Lord Marks, during presumption found in the Children Act—that parental the debate in Committee, Section 1 of the Children involvement furthers the child’s welfare—when there Act 1989 provides that, has been domestic abuse that has affected the child or “the child’s welfare shall be the court’s paramount consideration.” the other parent. This is rightly viewed as a cornerstone of that Act. It is The amendment also seeks to prohibit unsupervised a central cannon of our law relating to children. It is contact by a parent in a number of different circumstances: important that any changes to the law in this area do when they are on bail awaiting trial; when there are not undermine this fundamental principle. That is my ongoing criminal proceedings for a domestic abuse short answer to the question put to me by the noble offence; when a fact-finding hearing concerning domestic Baroness, Lady Jones. Protecting children is at the very abuse allegations is pending; and when domestic abuse heart of the process. is proven in such a fact-finding hearing or as a result If, however, we legislate to create automatic bans on of a criminal conviction for a domestic abuse offence. a particular form of contact, we may not be allowing In Committee, many noble Lords spoke passionately courts to take account of whether there are risks to the about the presumption of parental involvement and child in the particular circumstances of the case. I can gave a number of examples of unsupervised contact assure the noble Baroness, Lady Fox of Buckley, that leading to tragic results in cases which involved domestic the law in this area is the opposite of one size fits all. abuse. The noble Lord, Lord Rosser, reminded us of This area of law is certainly not off the shelf; it is an some of them this evening. As I said in Committee, I area where the law is bespoke. That means that rights have significant sympathy for the aims of this amendment and risks must be weighed carefully, on a case-by-case and agree that more needs to be done to ensure that basis, allowing the judiciary to assess each case on its the courts are taking proper account of the impact own merits but always putting the welfare of the child domestic abuse can have on children’s well-being and at the very heart of the decision. It is also not clear 1701 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1702

[LORD WOLFSON OF TREDEGAR] them when they say that they are not happy. That is whether such bans, if they prevent unsupervised contact not necessarily happening at the moment. I accept following a conviction or finding of fact, should be that the noble Lord, Lord Rosser, tried to do this and capable of being lifted or modified at some later date if is pursuing it in other ways. I am grateful for that and the risks in an individual case materially change. That glad. I am very happy to work with him on it. is not something that the amendment appears to envisage. The Minister said that more needs to be done. He Furthermore, in referring expressly to domestic talked about the review and said that the amendment abuse, which is only one of many circumstances which is premature and that we need in-depth evidence, but may impact on a child’s well-being and safety, the this situation has been happening for decades and amendment could be seen to give domestic abuse children are still dying. I mentioned a figure because it prominence over other valid considerations and risks is easy to count deaths—every death is tragic and we of harm to a child that judges have to take into can count them easily. However, we cannot count the account, such as sexual or violent offending, or a damage or the mental and sometimes physical anguish history or allegations of child abuse. It is not surprising that happens to children. That is absolutely uncountable. that I can do no better than respectfully endorse the I have listened and I accept some of the limitations words of the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler- of my amendment, but I have heard nothing about a Sloss, whose experience in this area needs no comment solution to stop children dying. I beg leave to withdraw from me. She said that the amendment would deny the my amendment. important issue of judicial discretion. Amendment 42 withdrawn. I also respectfully endorse the characteristically perceptive point made by the noble Lord, Lord Marks. The Deputy Speaker (Lord McNicol of West Kilbride) He pointed out the effect—or the non-effect—of the (Lab): We now come to the group consisting of amendment on a child from a different relationship. Amendment 43. Anyone wishing to press this amendment The amendment would catch cases that ought not to to a Division must make that clear in the debate. be caught. I am grateful to all noble Lords who have spoken in Amendment 43 this short debate but, for the reasons that I have Moved by Baroness Bertin explained, the Government’sposition remains unchanged on this issue. We believe that we should wait for the 43: After Clause 64, insert the following new Clause— outcome of the review on the presumption of parental “Confidentiality of refuge addresses involvement before any decisions are taken on whether (1) In family proceedings, where a person (“P”) is— changes are required either to the presumption of (a) witness or party to the proceedings; and parental involvement as a principle or to its application. (b) has been subject to domestic abuse as defined under To that extent, as I understood it, the position that the section 1 of this Act; and noble Lord, Lord Rosser, has arrived at—although he (c) is residing at a refuge; started at a different point to me—is much closer to the provisions in this section apply. the Government’s position. I am grateful to hear that (2) The court must not share the residential address of the from the noble Lord, and I therefore invite the noble refuge with any individual or third party. Baroness, Lady Jones, to follow that lead and withdraw (3) A court order must not be served on P at the residential her amendment. address of the refuge. (4) A court order may be served on P at the refuge’s office Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP): I thank all address or by an alternative method or at an alternative noble Lords who have spoken in this short debate. I place, in accordance with Part 6 of the Family Procedure listened very carefully but did not hear anyone offer Rules 2010. any other solution. Children are dying. Noble Lords (5) The residential address of the refuge must be redacted said again and again that the current situation was not from any court documentation.” working, but still no one has come up with a solution. Member’s explanatory statement I take the Minister’s comments about waiting for the This would prevent the residential address of a refuge being review, but during my political career, which has only shared as part of court proceedings. been 20 years long, I have found that repetition works Baroness Bertin (Con) [V]: My Lords, I laid this extremely well, so I repeat to him that we have to find amendment in Committee because I was genuinely a solution because people—children—are dying. shocked that a refuge address could ever be revealed to The noble Baroness, Lady Fox of Buckley, gave us a a perpetrator. Victims are not moving to refuges because “what if” situation; obviously I could also do that, but they fancy a change of scene; they are fleeing for their I will not. Again, I am trying to save children’s lives; I lives. Since laying that amendment I have heard many did not hear any other solutions. The noble and learned more anecdotes from those on the front line, suggesting Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, said that the amendment that disclosure of a refuge address to a perpetrator is is too rigid, which I accept, but judges and magistrates not a particularly rare occurrence. I am hugely troubled are getting it wrong and children are dying. I thank the by this, and it is the reason why I have laid the noble Baroness, Lady Uddin, very much for her support amendment again. from her experience. She described unsafe decisions I am also hugely troubled that we have absolutely and she put my case better than I could. no solid data on how frequently this happens. Weshould The noble Lord, Lord Marks, was very kind in his not have to rely on anecdotal evidence, important comments.Of course the welfare of children is paramount, thoughitis.Surelythereshouldbemoreformalityincentral but they are not always listened to. We have to listen to record-keeping to document such serious disclosures. 1703 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1704

To reach a refuge, a victim must leave behind their proceedings and could have the unintended consequence home, job and possessions, and in many cases they of endangering the child. I reiterate once again that I must uproot their children. Tohave reached the conclusion respectfully disagree. I suggest that the current situation, that that is the only way forward is to experience a where refuges are pressured into revealing their most level of trauma and abuse, and have reached a crisis fiercely guarded information, causes more delay and point, that most of us simply cannot comprehend. We can of course result in significant harm. I add that owe it to them to have a cast-iron guarantee that this refuges are not unregulated hideaways, and safeguarding course of action is not for nothing and that the law standards around children will always be paramount. will protect them. I believe the amendment would do I stress that the amendment is absolutely not about that. denying contact. Indeed, if the refuge’s office address As I said in Committee, the amendment seeks to were formalised as the alternative route to service, provide a legal safety net for the secrecy of refuge providers would understand that they have a duty to addresses. The refuge model, as we know, is predicated locate the mother as soon as possible and would not on the secrecy and protection of safe addresses. The be faced with a serious conflict in doing so. responsibility for protecting those addresses falls not In Committee, some noble Lords questioned whether only on the staff but on each and every resident at a it was reasonable to expect refuges to have an office refuge. Many of us in this House will have visited a address. Women’s Aid has reassured me on this point: refuge. I was not even allowed to talk about which part if they do not have a separate office address, they have of London I had been in when discussing my visit at a a PO box address that the refuge uses to ensure that later date. GPs, police and other agencies are able to contact the By way of background, refuges can find themselves women who live there. the subject of orders from the family court, particularly I sincerely hope the Minister can find a way to location orders, generally from fathers trying to locate accept the amendment, but, at the very least, I believe mothers and children. Refuge providers are forced to the guidance must be strengthened beyond doubt. I disclose their addresses to facilitate the service of a also feel strongly that the Ministry of Justice needs to court order on mothers, and although some protections find a way to keep track of the number of cases are in place, it is clear that there are serious loopholes. involving the service of court orders on refuge addresses As it stands, the court has discretion as to what and the disclosure of those addresses. If it is indeed information is provided and always has the option not rare then the amendment should not be too onerous, to order refuges to disclose their addresses and locations. and it could ensure another check and balance on It is therefore deeply concerning that some judges these proceedings. Furthermore, the lack of transparency either turn a blind eye or do not take enough care or in the family courts is surely something that needs proactive steps to ensure that maximum levels of looking at. I accept that that is not something for this confidentiality are maintained. Bill, but it has come up time and again, and it appears In the interests of time I will not repeat the two to present a barrier to reform. examples that I gave in Committee, but I know noble I thank the Minister for his time on this issue. We Lords will have enormous empathy for the fear and are lucky to have his experience on these Benches, and chaos that ensues when a perpetrator discovers the I am sure he will bring an urgency to issues such as the location of a refuge. This is not just about the safety of one being addressed in this amendment. I beg to move. the residents; it also concerns the welfare of staff. They too are taking a risk in the job that they do, and 6.15 pm should not have to put up with violent and threatening behaviour. Baroness Hamwee (LD) [V]: I thank the noble Baroness, My amendment remains the same as in Committee Lady Bertin, for bringing this amendment back. She and it is a simple one: the court order should never be has explained the position very clearly. I have added served at the refuge itself, and the refuge address my name, because the disclosure of a refuge address is should remain confidential. It provides that the order something that should be avoided, can be avoided and should be served at the refuge’s office address or by an usually is avoided—because it can be—but, if not alternative method or at an alternative place. As such, avoided, can have very serious consequences. We spent the amendment would not make any significant change some time on that at the previous stage of the Bill. to the protections that already exist; it would strengthen In Committee, the Minister said that he did “not and clarify the cases in which they should be used, so dissent” from confidentiality being described as “of that all judges were crystal clear. In my opinion, any critical importance” and “essential”. If I may say so, disclosure of the refuge address demonstrates that the that is very much counsel’s phraseology, and I am not existing safeguards are not adequate, and we cannot sure where on the scale of strength of agreement as confidently say that refuge addresses will always be expressed by a member of the Bar all this comes, but it appropriately protected. I believe that the practice on certainly means agreement. He also took on board my the ground is not necessarily consistent with what is point about the safety of other occupants of the intended by the Family Procedure Rules, and they refuge if a determined abuser tracks down the address—a therefore require strengthening and updating. problem I have come up against. In Committee, my noble friend the Minister raised Sometimes it is enough to say that such and such the issue of child safety—as I am sure he will again in hardly ever happens and there are ways to ensure that his response today—stating that there was some concern it does not and, anyway, there are rules to cover the that an alternative route to service, such as using the point. I do not put this issue in that category with any office address of a refuge, would present a delay in sense of ease or confidence. I join the noble Baroness 1705 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1706

[BARONESS HAMWEE] wants the Minister to put on record that guidance will in acknowledging that there are relevant rules but be updated and to make it absolutely clear that this asking that their importance is emphasised in guidance, should not happen again. I do not know whether she is if the Bill is not amended. going to move her amendment or what will happen, but I would have thought that, at the very least, the Baroness Uddin (Non-Afl) [V]: My Lords, I support Minister should be able to do that and say that guidance this amendment, eloquently and powerfully detailed will be updated. by the noble Baronesses, Lady Bertin and Lady Hamwee. The noble Baronesses, Lady Hamwee and Lady I agree that confidentiality must be inherent in safe- Uddin, both have experience of working in refuges guarding women survivors, many of whom may have and they know the importance of keeping these addresses endured prolonged periods of violence prior to reaching secret. I hope we will hear from the Minister something the safety of a refuge. that sufficiently reassures his noble friend Lady Bertin I have worked with refuges and inside a refuge. I that this issue can be properly addressed once and know how hard it is to ensure the safety of not just for all. one individual but of a number of women and their families. There may be instances where refuge addresses Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, I am are revealed by residents being followed by a perpetrator, very grateful to my noble friend Lady Bertin for her or, in fact, survivors may reveal the address if they continued engagement on the issue of the confidentiality return to perpetrators for the countless, complex reason of refuge addresses. I take this opportunity to thank debated on many occasions in this Chamber. Regardless, refuge providers and others in the sector who took our statutory institutions, including the courts, must time out of their very busy diaries to meet me on this uphold the essential principle of safeguarding, not issue: we had a very useful discussion. just for the sake of one survivor but for all those who As with many issues with the Bill, it seems to me reside in refuges and for the staff responsible for that we all agree on the issues of principle. Refuges are protecting all survivors in such refuges. places of safety. They play a vital role in effectively It is critical that we acknowledge this, and I look responding to domestic abuse, and in supporting victims forward to the Minister being persuaded, much more and their children. Therefore, I am in complete agreement eloquently than I could ever do, by the noble Baroness, with the principle underlying my noble friend’s Lady Bertin. I thank the noble Baroness for moving amendment, that those in refuges must be protected. this amendment and I wholeheartedly support her. As such, it is right that the Government and those involved in family proceedings carefully consider both whether existing measures offer enough protection Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD): My Lords, and whether there are further steps that could be taken I supported this amendment in principle in Committee. better to protect domestic abuse victims living in refuge I expressed one or two drafting reservations, one of accommodation. which was about the point that not all refuges may In Committee, I outlined that those engaged in have office addresses, but that has been amply answered family proceedings are not required to disclose their by the noble Baroness, Lady Bertin. This amendment address, or that of their children, unless specifically is extremely difficult to resist with any sense of logic or directed to do so by the court. Where such a disclosure safeguarding at all. The noble Baroness, Lady Bertin, direction is made, addresses are disclosed to the court has argued the case for it and I shall be extremely brief. only, and it is for the court to determine whether The point is that everybody has stressed the importance information it holds should be disclosed further. Where and value of confidentiality for refuge addresses. That there are known allegations of domestic abuse, the flows from the very nature of a refuge: it is where women court should hold this information as confidential. I go—it is generally women—to avoid the consequences reassure the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, that the and a repetition of domestic abuse. Breach of that formulation I used in Committee was certainly intended confidence leads to perpetrators discovering where to indicate agreement. their victims have gone. Discovering the whereabouts Turning to the service of orders at refuge addresses, of their victims offers them a chance of harassing I again thank those from the refuge sector with whom those victims further—of committing further abuse—so I discussed this issue and their experience of it. They revealing a refuge address destroys the very concept gave some valuable evidence, and we heard some more that it is a refuge. It raises the risk of changing a refuge this evening from the noble Baroness, Lady Uddin. As into a target. That is what this amendment is designed I indicated in Committee, existing measures, particularly to avoid and I support it. Part 6 of the Family Procedure Rules, enable the court to direct bespoke service arrangements, and orders Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab) [V]: My Lords, can be served at alternative addresses, such as the the noble Baroness, Lady Bertin, powerfully moved refuge office address. This approach should be taken this amendment and went into the detail of the problems wherever possible. that arise when refuge addresses are revealed. I fail to I noted the way that the noble Baroness, Lady understand why judges, in her words, are turning a Hamwee, put it: service on a refuge should be avoided. blind eye to the requirement to keep the secrecy of a However, as I said on the last group, the real question refuge; I fail to imagine why that might be the case. is the welfare of the child, which is of paramount Nevertheless,either mistakes happen or some judges—very consideration in family proceedings. I remain of the few—have an alternative view. What I understand view that there can be limited circumstances where from the noble Baroness, Lady Bertin, is that she the court may need to serve an order on a party at the 1707 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1708 refuge they are staying in because not doing so would Baroness, Lady Uddin, for her kind words. It was pose risks to the safety of children involved in family powerful to hear that the noble Lord, Lord Marks, proceedings. with all his deep knowledge of the law on these issues, One can envisage such cases, and I would not wish and the noble Lord Ponsonby, agreed with the to limit the court’s ability to act quickly in those amendment. I felt it was important to hear them say circumstances to safeguard a child, which might occur that, and I thank them for it. were we to place a blanket or inflexible restriction on I am of course disappointed that my noble friend addresses at which an order can be served. However, I the Minister does not see that there is a need to put would expect family proceedings where an order needs this into the Bill. I will never accept that there is to be served at a residential refuge address to be very justification for revealing the location of a refuge, but few and far between. Although the question must I have really appreciated the time that he has given to ultimately be a matter for the judiciary and not for the this issue. I can tell that he cares; he obviously has a Government Front Bench, one would expect that a concern about this issue and is committed to trying to refuge address would be used only when there is no deal with it. I absolutely accept that his response has other viable alternative in the circumstances. gone further than that in Committee, so I will bank I have indicated that existing measures enable protection that progress and am grateful for it. We have indeed for victims in refuges. However, I am persuaded that spoken at length about other routes to explore, and there is a legitimate question of whether those measures I will certainly be keeping in touch with him on this. could be strengthened to ensure that victims are better I also want to pursue greater transparency. protected, that addresses are not disclosed to perpetrators, I was very reassured—as my noble friend said, the and that service of orders at refuge addresses is directed timing has been fortunate—that the issue has already only when absolutely necessary. While I am clear that been discussed with the President of the Family Division primary legislation, and therefore this amendment, is on the back of the amendment. I do not doubt the not the appropriate response here, there are other judiciary’s willingness to tackle this and to take these routes to explore, as I have discussed with my noble accounts seriously. We will certainly keep a close eye friend since Committee. on this and the progress that it makes. With that in This issue has been discussed between Ministers mind, I will withdraw the amendment. and the President of the Family Division in recent Amendment 43 withdrawn. bilateral meetings. I assure my noble friend that the judiciary is taking seriously the concerns raised. I The Deputy Speaker (Lord McNicol of West Kilbride) appreciate, in this context, that the noble Lord, Lord (Lab): Amendment 44 was previously debated on Monday. Ponsonby of Shulbrede, wanted some reassurance from Does the noble Baroness, Lady Helic, wish to move the Government; I hope I am giving it to him. The Amendment 44? Whips may not agree, but one of the benefits of making slightly slower progress on Monday than we intended is that I can now say that this matter was Amendment 44 discussed at the meeting of the Family Procedure Rule Moved by Baroness Helic Committee on Monday, which was a couple of days 44: After Clause 64, insert the following new Clause— ago. The committee agreed to work on this issue and “Training will be giving it detailed consideration in the coming (1) The Secretary of State shall within six months of the weeks and months. passing of this Act publish— The Government are committed to protecting (a) a strategy for providing specialist training for all vulnerable victims of domestic abuse from further magistrates and judges hearing cases in family harm by their abuser. I am confident that this issue is proceedings in the Family Courts concerning rape, being properly and carefully considered by members sexual and domestic abuse and coercive control; and of the senior judiciary and by the Family Procedure (b) a timetable for the delivery of the training mentioned in subsection (1)(a),to include the training of all Rule Committee. I have full sympathy with the motivation judges and magistrates, who are already hearing or behind this amendment. I understand why my noble who are to be appointed to hear Family cases and to friend has maintained this, and why the noble Lord, include continuing professional development training Lord Marks, had considerable sympathy with it on the for all such judges and magistrates. confidentiality point, although I note that he did not (2) The training mentioned in subsection (1)(a) must include engage with the lack of any exception to the proposition but is not limited to training concerning— set out in subsection (3) of the proposed new clause—that (a) the impact upon victims and witnesses, both adults is, service on a refuge address. and children, of the trauma of rape, sexual and I have used my response to set out what the domestic abuse and coercive control; Government are doing and the steps being taken. I (b) the risks and difficulties for victims and witnesses in hope that, having provided that assurance to my giving evidence and taking part in proceedings concerning rape, sexual, domestic abuse and coercive noble friend, she will now be content to withdraw her control; and amendment. (c) the risks and difficulties for victims and witnesses of being involved in proceedings where one or more Baroness Bertin (Con) [V]: I thank noble Lords for other parties may be the perpetrators of rape, their valuable contributions to this short but very sexual and domestic abuse and coercive control or important debate. I am grateful to the noble Baroness, persons connected to such perpetrators. Lady Hamwee, for her support and for putting her (3) Before publishing the strategy and timetable mentioned name to the amendment, and likewise to the noble in subsection (1) the Secretary of State must consult— 1709 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1710

(a) the Chairman of the Board of the Judicial College; Devon, E. Lee of Trafford, L. (b) the President of the Family Division; Dholakia, L. Levy, L. Donaghy, B. Liddell of Coatdyke, B. (c) the Chief Executive of the Magistrates Association; Donoughue, L. Liddle, L. and Doocey, B. Lincoln, Bp. (d) the Domestic Abuse Commissioner. Drake, B. Lipsey, L. (4) After commencement of this subsection, which shall not D’Souza, B. Lister of Burtersett, B. be more than two years after the passage of this Act, the Dubs, L. London, Bp. Secretary of State shall ensure that no Family cases are Elder, L. Loomba, L. heard by judges or magistrates who have not successfully Evans of Watford, L. Ludford, B. completed the training mentioned in subsection (1).” Falconer of Thoroton, L. MacKenzie of Culkein, L. Faulkner of Worcester, L. Mackenzie of Framwellgate, Member’s explanatory statement Featherstone, B. L. This amendment would require the Secretary of State, in Field of Birkenhead, L. Mair, L. consultation with training bodies, to publish a strategy for providing Finlay of Llandaff, B. Mallalieu, B. specialist training on matters relating to domestic abuse for Foulkes of Cumnock, L. Mandelson, L. magistrates and judges hearing cases in family proceedings. Fox, L. Marks of Henley-on-Thames, Freyberg, L. L. Gale, B. Masham of Ilton, B. Baroness Helic (Con) [V]: My Lords, I wish to move German, L. Mawson, L. Amendment 44. Glasgow, E. Maxton, L. Glasman, L. McAvoy, L. The Deputy Speaker (Lord McNicol of West Kilbride) Gloucester, Bp. McConnell of Glenscorrodale, (Lab): My Lords, I shall now put the question. We Goddard of Stockport, L. L. have heard from the noble Baroness, Lady Helic, Golding, B. McIntosh of Hudnall, B. Goudie, B. McKenzie of Luton, L. taking part remotely, that she wishes to divide the Grantchester, L. McNally, L. House in support of this amendment and I will take Greaves, L. McNicol of West Kilbride, L. that into account. The question is that Amendment 44 Grender, B. Meacher, B. be agreed to. Grey-Thompson, B. Mendelsohn, L. Griffiths of Burry Port, L. Miller of Chilthorne Domer, 6.32 pm Grocott, L. B. Hamwee, B. Mitchell, L. Hanworth, V. Monks, L. Division conducted remotely on Amendment 44 Harries of Pentregarth, L. Morgan of Drefelin, B. Harris of Haringey, L. Morgan of Huyton, B. Contents 286; Not-Contents 252. Harris of Richmond, B. Murphy of Torfaen, L. Haskel, L. Newby, L. Amendment 44 agreed. Haughey, L. Newlove, B. Hayman of Ullock, B. Northover, B. Division No. 2 Hayter of Kentish Town, B. Nye, B. Healy of Primrose Hill, B. Oates, L. CONTENTS Helic, B. O’Loan, B. Adams of Craigielea, B. Bruce of Bennachie, L. Hendy, L. Osamor, B. Addington, L. Bryan of Partick, B. Henig, B. Paddick, L. Adonis, L. Bull, B. Hilton of Eggardon, B. Palmer of Childs Hill, L. Alderdice, L. Burnett, L. Hogan-Howe, L. Pannick, L. Allan of Hallam, L. Burt of Solihull, B. Hollick, L. Parminter, B. Hope of Craighead, L. Patel of Bradford, L. Alli, L. Campbell of Pittenweem, L. Howarth of Newport, L. Pinnock, B. Anderson of Swansea, L. Campbell of Surbiton, B. Hoyle, L. Pitkeathley, B. Andrews, B. Campbell-Savours, L. Humphreys, B. Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L. Armstrong of Hill Top, B. Carlile of Berriew, L. Hunt of Kings Heath, L. Prashar, B. Bakewell of Hardington Carter of Coles, L. Hussain, L. Prescott, L. Mandeville, B. Cashman, L. Hussein-Ece, B. Primarolo, B. Barker, B. Chakrabarti, B. Hutton of Furness, L. Prosser, B. Bassam of Brighton, L. Chandos, V. Janke, B. Purvis of Tweed, L. Beith, L. Chapman of Darlington, B. Jolly, B. Puttnam, L. Benjamin, B. Clancarty, E. Jones of Cheltenham, L. Quin, B. Bennett of Manor Castle, B. Clark of Kilwinning, B. Jones of Moulsecoomb, B. Radice, L. Berkeley of Knighton, L. Clark of Windermere, L. Jones of Whitchurch, B. Ramsay of Cartvale, B. Berkeley, L. Clement-Jones, L. Jones, L. Ramsbotham, L. Bichard, L. Cohen of Pimlico, B. Jordan, L. Randerson, B. Billingham, B. Collins of Highbury, L. Judd, L. Ravensdale, L. Blackstone, B. Colville of Culross, V. Kennedy of Cradley, B. Razzall, L. Blower, B. Cox, B. Kennedy of Southwark, L. Rebuck, B. Blunkett, L. Craig of Radley, L. Kennedy of The Shaws, B. Redesdale, L. Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury, Craigavon, V. Kerr of Kinlochard, L. Rees of Ludlow, L. B. Crawley, B. Kerslake, L. Reid of Cardowan, L. Bowles of Berkhamsted, B. Cromwell, L. Khan of Burnley, L. Rennard, L. Boycott, B. Cunningham of Felling, L. Kilclooney, L. Ritchie of Downpatrick, B. Bradley, L. Curry of Kirkharle, L. Kingsmill, B. Roberts of Llandudno, L. Bradshaw, L. Dannatt, L. Knight of Weymouth, L. Robertson of Port Ellen, L. Brennan, L. Davidson of Glen Clova, L. Kramer, B. Rooker, L. Broers, L. Davies of Brixton, L. Lane-Fox of Soho, B. Rosser, L. Brooke of Alverthorpe, L. Davies of Oldham, L. Lawrence of Clarendon, B. Rowlands, L. Brown of Cambridge, B. Deech, B. Layard, L. Royall of Blaisdon, B. Browne of Ladyton, L. Derby, Bp. Lea of Crondall, L. Russell of Liverpool, L. 1711 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1712

Sandwich, E. Thomas of Winchester, B. Forsyth of Drumlean, L. Mendoza, L. Scott of Needham Market, B. Thornhill, B. Foster of Oxton, B. Meyer, B. Scriven, L. Thornton, B. Fox of Buckley, B. Montrose, D. Sharkey, L. Thurso, V. Framlingham, L. Moore of Etchingham , L. Sheehan, B. Tope, L. Fraser of Craigmaddie, B. Morgan of Cotes, B. Sherlock, B. Touhig, L. Freud, L. Morris of Bolton, B. Shields, B. Trevethin and Oaksey, L. Frost, L. Morrissey, B. Shipley, L. Triesman, L. Fullbrook, B. Morrow, L. Sikka, L. Truscott, L. Gadhia, L. Moylan, L. Simon, V. Tunnicliffe, L. Gardiner of Kimble, L. Moynihan, L. Smith of Basildon, B. Turnberg, L. Garnier, L. Murphy, B. Smith of Finsbury, L. Tyler of Enfield, B. Geddes, L. Naseby, L. Smith of Gilmorehill, B. Tyler, L. Glenarthur, L. Nash, L. Smith of Kelvin, L. Uddin, B. Glendonbrook, L. Neville-Jones, B. Snape, L. Verjee, L. Godson, L. Neville-Rolfe, B. Soley, L. Walker of Aldringham, L. Gold, L. Nicholson of Winterbourne, Somerset, D. Wallace of Saltaire, L. Goldie, B. B. Southwark, Bp. Wallace of Tankerness, L. Goldsmith of Richmond Noakes, B. St Albans, Bp. Walmsley, B. Park, L. Northbrook, L. Stair, E. Warwick of Undercliffe, B. Goodlad, L. Norton of Louth, L. Stephen, L. Watkins of Tavistock, B. Grabiner, L. O’Neill of Bengarve, B. Stern, B. Watson of Invergowrie, L. Grade of Yarmouth, L. O’Shaughnessy, L. Stevenson of Balmacara, L. Watts, L. Greenhalgh, L. Parkinson of Whitley Bay, L. Stone of Blackheath, L. West of Spithead, L. Greenway, L. Patten of Barnes, L. Stoneham of Droxford, L. Wheeler, B. Griffiths of Fforestfach, L. Patten, L. Storey, L. Whitaker, B. Grimstone of Boscobel, L. Pendry, L. Strasburger, L. Whitty, L. Hailsham, V. Penn, B. Stunell, L. Wilcox of Newport, B. Hallett, B. Pickles, L. Suttie, B. Willis of Knaresborough, L. Hamilton of Epsom, L. Pidding, B. Taverne, L. Wills, L. Hammond of Runnymede, L. Polak, L. Taylor of Bolton, B. Wood of Anfield, L. Hannan of Kingsclere, L. Popat, L. Taylor of Goss Moor, L. Woodley, L. Hannay of Chiswick, L. Price, L. Teverson, L. Worcester, Bp. Harris of Peckham, L. Rana, L. Thomas of Gresford, L. Young of Old Scone, B. Haselhurst, L. Randall of Uxbridge, L. Hay of Ballyore, L. Ranger, L. NOT CONTENTS Hayward, L. Rawlings, B. Henley, L. Reay, L. Aberdare, L. Callanan, L. Herbert of South Downs, L. Redfern, B. Agnew of Oulton, L. Cameron of Dillington, L. Hodgson of Abinger, B. Renfrew of Kaimsthorn, L. Ahmad of Wimbledon, L. Carrington of Fulham, L. Hoey, B. Ribeiro, L. Altmann, B. Carrington, L. Hogg, B. Ricketts, L. Anelay of St Johns, B. Cathcart, E. Holmes of Richmond, L. Ridley, V. Arran, E. Chadlington, L. Hooper, B. Risby, L. Ashton of Hyde, L. Chartres, L. Horam, L. Robathan, L. Balfe, L. Chisholm of Owlpen, B. Howard of Lympne, L. Rose of Monewden, L. Barran, B. Choudrey, L. Howard of Rising, L. Rotherwick, L. Barwell, L. Clarke of Nottingham, L. Howe, E. Saatchi, L. Bates, L. Coe, L. Howell of Guildford, L. Sanderson of Welton, B. Bellingham, L. Colgrain, L. Hunt of Bethnal Green, B. Sarfraz, L. Benyon, L. Colwyn, L. Hunt of Wirral, L. Sassoon, L. Berridge, B. Cormack, L. Jenkin of Kennington, B. Sater, B. Bethell, L. Courtown, E. Jopling, L. Scott of Bybrook, B. Bhatia, L. Couttie, B. Kamall, L. Seccombe, B. Black of Brentwood, L. Crathorne, L. Keen of Elie, L. Selkirk of Douglas, L. Blencathra, L. Crisp, L. King of Bridgwater, L. Shackleton of Belgravia, B. Bloomfield of Hinton Cruddas, L. Kirkham, L. Sharpe of Epsom, L. Waldrist, B. Cumberlege, B. Kirkhope of Harrogate, L. Sheikh, L. Borwick, L. Davies of Gower, L. Laming, L. Shephard of Northwold, B. Botham, L. Davies of Stamford, L. Lamont of Lerwick, L. Sherbourne of Didsbury, L. Bottomley of Nettlestone, B. De Mauley, L. Lancaster of Kimbolton, L. Shinkwin, L. Bourne of Aberystwyth, L. Dobbs, L. Lang of Monkton, L. Shrewsbury, E. Brabazon of Tara, L. Dodds of Duncairn, L. Lansley, L. Smith of Hindhead, L. Brady, B. Duncan of Springbank, L. Leigh of Hurley, L. Spencer of Alresford, L. Bridgeman, V. Dundee, E. Lexden, L. Stedman-Scott, B. Bridges of Headley, L. Dunlop, L. Lindsay, E. Strathclyde, L. Brookeborough, V. Eaton, B. Lingfield, L. Stroud, B. Brougham and Vaux, L. Eccles of Moulton, B. Liverpool, E. Stuart of Edgbaston, B. Brown of Eaton-under- Eccles, V. Lupton, L. Suri, L. Heywood, L. Empey, L. Mackay of Clashfern, L. Swinfen, L. Browne of Belmont, L. Erroll, E. Mancroft, L. Taylor of Holbeach, L. Browning, B. Evans of Bowes Park, B. Marland, L. Taylor of Warwick, L. Brownlow of Shurlock Row, Fairfax of Cameron, L. Marlesford, L. Tebbit, L. L. Fairhead, B. Maude of Horsham, L. Thurlow, L. Buscombe, B. Farmer, L. McColl of Dulwich, L. Trefgarne, L. Butler of Brockwell, L. Faulks, L. McCrea of Magherafelt and Trenchard, V. Butler-Sloss, B. Fink, L. Cookstown, L. True, L. Caine, L. Fleet, B. McDonald of Salford, L. Tugendhat, L. Caithness, E. Fookes, B. McLoughlin, L. Udny-Lister, L. 1713 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1714

Ullswater, V. Wharton of Yarm, L. not often I say that—Lady Bertin and Lady Sanderson Vaizey of Didcot, L. Whitby, L. of Welton. Aligning the definition of “personally Vere of Norbiton, B. Willetts, L. connected” in the Serious Crime Act 2015 with that in Verma, B. Williams of Trafford, B. Vinson, L. Wilson of Dinton, L. the Bill would mean that the offence of controlling or Wakeham, L. Wolfson of Tredegar, L. coercive behaviour would apply whether or not the Waldegrave of North Hill, L. Wyld, B. abuser and abused actually live together. It would Warsi, B. Young of Cookham, L. therefore cover situations of non-domiciliary family Wasserman, L. Young of Graffham, L. abuse, which my noble friend Lord Hunt of Kings Wei, L. Younger of Leckie, V. Heath raised in Committee, and post-separation abuse, which was the focus of my own original amendment. 6.44 pm Noble Lords will recall that, in Committee, there The Deputy Speaker (Lord McNicol of West Kilbride) was unanimous support for that amendment. The (Lab): My Lords, we now come to the group beginning situations we heard about were described using words with Amendment 45. Anyone wishing to press this or such as “heart-breaking”, “tragic”and “unacceptable”, anything else in the group to a Division must make and the particular implications for older and black that clear in the debate. and minority ethnic women were brought out. Victims of post-separation abuse, and in particular economic abuse, told us of its “crippling” effects and of the Amendment 45 “invisible chain” that it forges with an abuser they Moved by Baroness Lister of Burtersett thought they had escaped. A number of noble Lords called on the Government to bring forward their own 45: Before Clause 65, insert the following new Clause— amendment if they had problems with the one I tabled. “Controlling or coercive behaviour I am happy to say that that is exactly what they have Controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family done, to the credit of the Minister, who also generously relationship suggested that the government amendment should be (1) Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 (offence of tabled in my name. controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship) is amended as follows. During the Bill’s earlier stages, Ministers said that (2) In subsection (1)(b), after “personally connected” insert they had to await the findings of the delayed research “(see subsection (6))”. report that reviewed the controlling or coercive behaviour (3) Omit subsection (2). offence. In fact, this report rather sat on the fence (4) For subsection (6) substitute— when it came to recommending legislative change, which suggests that the Government genuinely listened “(6) A and B are “personally connected” if any of the following applies— to the strength of opinion expressed by your Lordships in coming to a decision. I am therefore really grateful (a) they are, or have been, married to each other; to all the noble Lords who supported my amendment (b) they are, or have been, civil partners of each other; in Committee. I am particularly grateful to the noble (c) they have agreed to marry one another (whether or Baroness, Lady Bertin, whom I have thought of as a not the agreement has been terminated); noble friend because of the support that she has given (d) they have entered into a civil partnership agreement me and whose commitment on these issues is second (whether or not the agreement has been terminated); to none. (e) they are, or have been, in an intimate personal relationship with each other; Together with a number of other noble Lords, we attended a round table the other week hosted by the (f) they each have, or there has been a time when they each have had, a parental relationship in relation to domestic abuse commissioner designate, whose support the same child (see subsection (6A)); has also been a significant factor, I am sure. At it, a (g) they are relatives. number of participants raised the important issue of training, which we discussed more generally in relation (6A) For the purposes of subsection (6)(f) a person has a parental relationship in relation to a child if— to earlier amendments and, of course, on which we have just voted. This was one of the key findings of (a) the person is a parent of the child, or the official review: (b) the person has parental responsibility for the child.” “When attending domestic abuse incidents, it is vital that the (5) In subsection (7), for “subsection (6)” substitute police (including domestic abuse specialists) have the training and “subsections (6) and (6A)”.” specialist resources needed to establish whether there are patterns Member’s explanatory statement of controlling or coercive behaviours underlying the incident that This new Clause would align the definition of “personally led to a police callout.” connected” in section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 with that This reflected the view across stakeholder groups that, in Clause 2 of the Bill. The result is that the offence under that despite improvements in the understanding and awareness section of engaging in controlling or coercive behaviour would of CCB, there is a need for better training of prosecutors apply in relation to members of the same family, or people who have been in an intimate relationship, whether or not they live and judges, as well as of front-line police officers in together. particular. Surviving Economic Abuse—of which more in a moment—states: Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab) [V]: My Lords, “Currently, just under half of police forces in England and it is with great pleasure that I introduce Amendment 45 Wales have not received training in coercive and controlling or and consequential amendments, with the support of coercive behaviour. Government must provide funding to correct the noble Baronesses, Lady Williams of Trafford—it is this deficit”. 1715 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1716

I would be grateful if the Minister could tell us what I had intended to divide the House on Amendment 46 plans there are to improve training and raise awareness if the Minister could not accept it. I will not do so for generally of CCB and of how economic abuse fits into one reason, and one reason alone. Just this morning, I this pattern of behaviour, particularly in light of the learned that it could jeopardise Amendment 45, which amendment we just voted for. SEA also states that, at is supported by the Government. I have no wish to present, risk another important amendment and potentially “the majority of coercive controlling behaviour is not reported to lose both it and my amendment. I have great admiration the police, and many victims do not immediately recognise what is for the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, and support her happening to them.” amendmentoverwhelmingly.NobleLordswillundoubtedly Can the Minister tell us the Government’s response to understand my reasons. I had not expected that kind of the review’s recommendation that the operation of unwelcome surprise today. this legislative change Controlling or coercive behaviour, which is part of “should be monitored and reviewed to assess the impact”? the definition of domestic abuse under Clause 1 of the Before concluding, I want to voice my support for Bill, is an offence under Section 76 of the Serious Amendments 46 and 47 in the name of the noble Crime Act. Such behaviour is unfortunately a common Baroness, Lady Campbell of Surbiton. She made a form of abuse by carers. Amendment 45 amends the powerful case on Monday and, following the vote on definition of “personally connected” in Section 76 to Amendment 4, it would be good if the Government align it with Clause 2. The importance of including were willing to concede on these related amendments disabled people applies equally to the offence under and treat them as consequential. Section 76. I set this out extensively on Monday and The Government’s decision to accept an amendment will not rehearse those arguments. It is worth noting on post-separation abuse has been widely welcomed that the draft guidance on Clause 2 relies on the by organisations on the ground, and by survivors guidance on Section 76 to explain controlling or coercive themselves. I pay special tribute to Surviving Economic behaviour. They are complementary. Abuse, which has campaigned on the issue of post- The two sets of provisions are totally interrelated. separation economic abuse with such determination These amendments would ensure they remain consistent and skill, in response to concerns raised by victims and ensure the coherence of the statutory abuse regime. and survivors. It has shared with me, anonymised, It is very disappointing to not be able to follow that some of the responses that it has received from these through for the protection and safety of disabled women. They are truly heartwarming. I will quote just people if these amendments do not go through today. two: “Thank you for sharing this amazing piece of news. I await the response of the Minister in the sincere hope I am crying with happiness.” “I woke up this morning that she will accept these amendments. I beg to move. and saw the news and I was practically jumping up and down with joy. Yes, joy. These milestones that SEA achieves or helps achieve ... are like magic healing Baroness Grey-Thompson (CB) [V]: My Lords, I for my soul, this one in particular.” speak to Amendments 46 and 47, which are in the name of my noble friend Lady Campbell of Surbiton Many of these women have shown such courage in and to which my name is also added. Because speaking out and have undergone such an ordeal just Amendments 46 and 47 are an amendment to 45—and at the point at which they believed that they had I do not wish to quote sections of the Companion to broken free of their abusers. I dedicate this new clause the Standing Orders to your Lordships’ House—I would to them. I beg to move. like to make clear that those listed as signatories have been put in the unenviable position of making the Amendment 46 (to Amendment 45) heartbreaking decision of whether to divide the House Moved by Baroness Campbell of Surbiton and risk preventing the valuable amendment put by 46: Before Clause 65, in subsection (4), after inserted subsection the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, from being passed. (6)(g), insert— In speaking after my noble friend, I do not wish to “(h) A is a carer for B who is a disabled person.” reiterate what has already been well articulated. I Member’s explanatory statement would like to thank the staff of your Lordships’ This amendment and the other in the name of Baroness Campbell House, the disabled peoples’ organisations and many of Surbiton to Amendment 45 would amend the new Clause in the disabled women for the considerable amount of work name of Baroness Lister of Burtersett to ensure that the definition they have put into this Bill. If there is one thing I ask of “personally connected” in section 76 of the Serious Crime of the Minister and the Bill team, it is that, when Act 2015 includes the relationship between a disabled person and their carer in line with the amendments to the definition in legislation that has such an impact on disabled people Clause 2 of this Bill in the name of Baroness Campbell of Surbiton. is being considered, disabled peoples’ organisations are expressly and extensively consulted. The added Baroness Campbell of Surbiton (CB) [V]: My Lords, issues disabled people face should always be included. in moving Amendment 46, I will speak also to my On Monday it felt that, while we might not have Amendment 47 and to Amendment 45 in the name of convinced Her Majesty’s Government of the need to the noble Baroness,Lady Lister,to which my amendments include disabled people in this Bill, the Chamber strongly are attached and which I strongly support. supported my noble friend’s amendments. I would like My amendments bring controlling or coercive to thank the 318 Peers who voted to support and behaviour within the scope of Section 76 of the Serious include disabled people this week. I am expecting that Crime Act 2015. Amendment 46 mirrors Amendment 4, there will be much support as we debate this group, which was considered and overwhelmingly agreed to but there will be push-back from Her Majesty’s by the House on Monday. Government. 1717 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1718

[BARONESS GREY-THOMPSON] The Government and their statutory agencies must Having re-read Hansard several times this week, I also ensure that they do not make good law only to fall fear that we still have to convince Her Majesty’s short in executing it. As we have heard a lot during the Government of the need to protect disabled people. It course of the Bill, training is paramount, whether it is is important and welcome that controlling or coercive for the police, judiciary, GPs or anyone else who could behaviour is more widely understood across society, be the first point of contact. They must know how to but that same protection does not appear to be afforded spot the signs and have the right pathways to the next to disabled people. For that, I am extremely disappointed. steps. I wholly, but with a sad heart, support my noble The media also has a big role to play. My noble friend’sdecision tonight. As I mentioned at the beginning friend Lady Sanderson made a brilliant speech in of my speech, my noble friend has been put in the Committee, where she made the point that story lines unenviable position of having to explain to disabled in popular soaps are crucial to getting the message out people who experience abuse in a domestic setting—whom there. She is quite right: let us face it, more people are she has spent a considerable part of her working life watching “Coronation Street” than listening to us. I supporting and protecting—that the politics and know that my noble friend is very sorry not to be procedures we are operating under have excluded their speaking in today’s debate. She also deserves a lot of place in the Bill. credit for the work that she has done in this area. I know from extensive discussions with those involved Businesses must also step up and make sure that in these amendments that, in accepting and supporting their employees are supported and that they do what the amendment of the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, they can to raise awareness among their managers, which I absolutely do, if the House were divided we and they must put in place strategies for people to seek might put Amendment 45 at risk. There is always a support. Consumer-facing companies can also add price to pay by some in bringing legislation. Tonight, their shoulder to the wheel: schemes like “Ask for and in this instance, the price is being heavily paid by ANI”, in over 3,000 pharmacies—as the Minister has disabled people. mentioned many times—are hugely important, as is the work that companies like Lloyds Bank have done Baroness Bertin (Con) [V]: My Lords, I will speak to to offer support and advice to victims going through Amendment 45, but I do want to reference the noble financial abuse. All of this can play a crucial role. Baronesses, Lady Campbell of Surbiton and Lady Grey- I also plead with the headline writers of some of Thompson. Their words have been very powerful, and our nation’s favourite news outlets not to belittle or we should never forget about the rights of disabled include the defence of a killer over and above the people. We should always try and give them a voice reality of a brutal murder. All too often, we read that a and make sure they are heard, because they are not nagging wife has been killed or that the victim was heard enough in my view. drunk when she died—so what? Coercive control, both in and outside relationships, can be complex and 7 pm hard to understand, even for those experiencing it. I will also begin my speech on Amendment 45 with Many victims may not even be aware that what is some thanks. Wedefinitely would not be here welcoming happening to them is abuse. this amendment without Nicola Sharp-Jeffs and her Part of the battle will now be to ensure that they team at Surviving Economic Abuse. Cassandra Wiener understand the legal protections that they have and also deserves enormous praise and was the first person ensure that we give them all the help that they need to to make me aware of this problem. The noble Baroness, use them. I thank the Government again: this amendment Lady Lister, is the living embodiment of a hard-working really matters. Peer, and her persistence definitely got this over the line. These people and others made the case so clearly Baroness Jolly (LD) [V]: My Lords, Amendments 46 for a change in the law. and 47, in the name of the noble Baroness,Lady Campbell Over the past few weeks, we have heard many stories of Surbiton, would amend the new clause in from victims of domestic abuse. They have changed Amendment 45, proposed by the noble Baroness, my understanding of the scale of the problem: they Lady Lister of Burtersett, to ensure that the definition are stories of abuse that last for years, even decades, of “personally connected” in Section 76 of the Serious and, very often, well beyond the end of a relationship. Crime Act 2015 includes the relationship between a Coercive control only applying to those still in their disabled person and their carer, in line with the abusive relationships was a dark gap in our current amendments of the noble Baroness, Lady Campbell of legislation, and I am so delighted that the Government Surbiton, to the definition in Clause 2 of the Bill. have agreed to right that wrong. They send a powerful Amendments 45, 46 and 47 sit together, and I hope message to victims that the law is on their side. that the Minister can be persuaded to add her name to In the weeks, months and years ahead, it will be Amendments 46 and 47. The new clause proposed in crucial to raise awareness of this crime and to make Amendment 45 would align the definition of “personally victims and society more widely mindful that controlling connected”in Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 behaviour, either in a relationship or after it has ended, with that in Clause 2 of the Bill. The result is that the is not okay. We all need to play our part in this; if we offence under that section of engaging in “controlling have friends with whom we suspect something is not or coercive behaviour” would apply in relation to quite right, we should not turn a blind eye. This is not members of the same family or people who have been about snooping or gossiping but about being there for in an intimate relationship, whether or not they live each other. together. 1719 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1720

Amendment 46 seeks to ensure that the relationship undeniable and outstanding leadership. I am delighted between a disabled person and their carer is included. to call her a friend. Another incredible champion of people This amendment and Amendment 47 in the name of with disabilities is the noble Baroness, Lady Grey- the noble Baroness, Lady Campbell of Surbiton, would Thompson, who is also a friend. Her words are etched amend the new clause proposed by the noble Baroness, and lie heavily on my heart as someone who has cared Lady Lister of Burtersett, in Amendment 45 to ensure for a disabled adult for 42 years. I hope that we can get that the definition of “personally connected”in Section to a place where we can find some solutions. 76 of the Serious Crimes Act 2015 includes the relationship I thank and salute my noble friend Lady Lister and between a disabled person and their carer, in line with her long list of supporters and welcome Amendment 45, the amendments from the noble Baroness,Lady Campbell which seeks to strengthen the legislation on post-separation of Surbiton, to the definition in Clause 2. controlling or coercive behaviour, making it no longer I also highlight that the term “disability” includes a requirement that abusers and victims must live together learning disabilities, which is important in this context. for it to apply. This is an important amendment that Many parents choose to look after their children with will lead to post-separation abuse becoming a criminal a learning disability rather than entrust their care to offence. I am grateful to the Minister for her personal an organisation. When the child becomes an adult and persistence and advocacy. Many survivors will today the parents are older and frail, what had been a loving express small relief and quiet prayers for the protections relationship often becomes tense and fraught, and can to come. lead to violence and abuse. This can apply equally when a person with a learning disability has a carer There are many ways in which perpetrators can rather than parents.What started as a positive relationship control the lives of survivors, to devastating effect, can turn sour, and the abuse of one party by the other whether they live together or not. These include using and violence are often the outcome. In this case, with financial dependency, and the survivor’s desire to protect no parents, it is the local authority that has the their children from poverty; societal and cultural pressures; responsibility to sort the problem out. and a lack of belief on a survivor’s part that it is not her fault, that she has not contributed to her partner’s, This is a good suite of amendments and I am happy husband’s, lover’sor family member’sviolence or coercive to support them. behaviour. Ex-partners may also use cultural references, faith or social norms to continue to torment survivors, Baroness Hayman (CB) [V]: My Lords, I will speak whose self-belief and confidence may have been briefly to Amendment 45, but before I do so, perhaps I substantially depleted with questions: why did she not may record my concern at the situation described by leave? Was the decision to divorce or separate right? the noble Baronesses, Lady Campbell, Lady Grey- Was it in the best interests of the children? Thompson and Lady Jolly, in relation to people with disabilities. I hope that the Minister will be able to give I speak from considerable experience, having for some comfort from the Front Bench on what is obviously years supported women who suffer from controlling a very unsatisfactory situation. behaviour, even after separation and divorce. I wish to single out one incident I witnessed earlier today outside On Amendment 45, I want simply to add my thanks my door of an ex-partner turning up at the survivor’s to the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, and the supporters parents’ home, demanding to see her and her child. of her amendment, both inside the House and those They have been divorced for nearly four years. The who have campaigned outside it, for this change to the woman in question was so traumatised and frightened provisions regarding post-separation coercive control. that I had to grab her, get her inside the house and I also express my gratitude to the Minister for listening calm her down. Her ex-partner was so obsessed with and, more than that, acting by adding her name to the having the children and seeing the woman that he left amendment. Like the noble Baroness, Lady Lister, I only when I threatened him with reporting the matter have had a tremendously positive response to the news to the police. Anyway, I do not want to go into any that the change was to be made. I can do no better further details. than to quote from a note I have received from the director of the Daisy Programme in Norfolk, of which All survivors will understand the intense fear of the I am a patron. She has said, “We continue to witness at extents to which an angry perpetrator may go, in first hand the insidious nature of continued domestic addition to external means of control: intimidation, abuse post separation and the controlling nature of threats of violence, and denigration of the mind through perpetrators. Retraumatising of survivors is common the instrument of internalised fear. The perpetrators as they continue to tell, retell and tell once again their do not even have to be present; survivors can easily be stories, leaving little time to begin the process of reached by modern methods. Constant voice, text and rebuilding their lives.” video messages can create psychological and emotional These amendments will support survivors and children havoc by inducing imminent and ever-present danger who have been deeply impacted. As others have said, while the survivor is silenced. This is often destructive these are important amendments that will change to their long-term well-being. people’s lives, and I welcome them. As Surviving Economic Abuse outlines, economic abuse does not require physical proximity.It can escalate, Baroness Uddin (Non-Afl) [V]: My Lords, it is a or even start, after separation, creating significant privilege to take part in this debate. Before I speak to barriers for victims seeking to rebuild their lives. This Amendment 45, I want to echo other noble Lords’ amendment is needed because abusers often continue sentiments and say how heroic my friend the noble to use coercive control after separation, and victims Baroness, Lady Campbell of Surbiton, has been in her are at a heightened risk of homicide in this period. 1721 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1722

[BARONESS UDDIN] how economic abuse fits into them. That can be done We all know that lack of access to economic resources only through training of professionals right across the can result in a victim staying with an abusive partner police and criminal justice system. This has come up for longer and experiencing more harm as a result. on other parts of the Bill, including very recently, and Noble Lords will be familiar with the experiences of I hope the Minister will address it in her response. survivors who face additional forms of discrimination, Secondly, when legal aid is sought, survivors could including black and other minority women, women be unfairly assessed as failing the means test due to with disabilities, migrant women and women from money or assets they appear to own but which they are LGBT communities, who continue to face serious unable to access or control due to economic abuse. barriers to protection, safety and support. Will the Minister acknowledge this and undertake to refer it to her MoJ colleagues to ensure it is taken into 7.15 pm account in the legal aid inquiry? In that context, I very While the Bill crucially ratifies the Istanbul convention, much support Amendment 71 in the name of my the legislation does not meet the key commitments in noble friend Lord Kennedy. this landmark treaty on violence against women and Thirdly, the SEA charity, whose briefings on this—as girls, including, most urgently, equal protection and every contributor to this debate has said—have been support for migrant women. No survivors should be invaluable, highlights the inadequacy of data collection left without access to a safety net. It is essential that on controlling or coercive behaviours in both the the Bill delivers reforms to “no recourse to public Crime Survey of England and Wales and ONS reports. funds” and to safe reporting for migrant women. Can the Minister, in taking forward this legislation, While improvements to the criminal justice response undertake to ensure that this is brought to the attention to domestic abuse are needed, the Government are of the relevant government department so as not to moving on non-fatal strangulation, threats to share undermine the effectiveness of this excellent piece of intimate images and post-separation coercive control. legislation, which she has so ably steered through this However, survivors are calling for change to housing House? and welfare provision, well-informed family courts, protection and support for children and critical access Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB) [V]: My Lords, to community-based services which may provide them Amendment 45 is crucial and unreservedly welcome. with legal advice as well as therapeutic services, for It is awful to see someone subject to coercive control; them to be safe as they begin their journey to recovery. to see how the woman—I have seen only women subject No matter how far back I look—I have lived for to it—is made mentally and physically ill by such passive- 61 years—I can recall the suffering only of women in aggressive behaviour. Sometimes it is more active than these contexts and circumstances. I agree that men passive. By adding her name to this amendment, the suffer too and may have once been the sons of women Minister has shown her understanding of this. who endured violence. I hope the Bill will ensure and Amendments 46 and 47 are similarly essential. Coercive enshrine that women receive a seamless service which control can be very difficult to pick up under safeguarding. is well co-ordinated, financially backed and underpinned As the noble Baroness, Lady Jolly,stated, disability applies by guaranteed services and law so that the next survivors to those with profound learning difficulties as well as can receive justice. serious physical difficulties, but their communication difficulties can make it very hard to detect what is going Baroness Warwick of Undercliffe (Lab) [V]: My on. As the noble Baroness, Lady Uddin, described, the Lords, I declare an interest as chair of the National terrible fear induced in the victim is something that Housing Federation, the trade body for housing feeds the controlling coercive behaviour from the abuser. associations. None of us wants to delay the Bill. I hope the I do not need to repeat the statistics so vividly Minister will take to heart and address the difficulties described by my noble friend Lady Lister and others that my noble friends Lady Campbell of Surbiton and on the use of coercive control after separation. Suffice Lady Grey-Thompson have been put in, and will seek it to say that they are clear and troubling enough for to ensure that the statutory guidance relating to the the Government to acknowledge both that economic Bill recognises that there is true domestic violence abuse is linked to physical safety and that something occurring from personally connected intimate care must be done swiftly to protect these women. I support providers. all the points raised by my noble friend so powerfully in introducing this amendment; I also pay tribute to Baroness Burt of Solihull (LD): I am grateful to have the noble Baronesses, Lady Campbell of Surbiton and the opportunity to speak. I was delighted to see the Lady Grey-Thompson, whom I would have supported. Minister’sname on Amendment 45 and the consequential I hope the Minister can respond positively to the dilemma Amendments 88, 89 and 96. That is three times that I in which they have so troublingly found themselves. have been delighted today so I do not quite know what In my brief contribution I will highlight just three is going on. I welcome the extension of “personally things, focusing on what further action is needed once connected” in the context of coercive control to family the amendment is incorporated into the Bill and members or people who have been in an intimate implemented. First, there has been in the past a missed relationship, whether living together or not. opportunity to see patterns of behaviour which should The noble Baroness, Lady Lister, talked about how have led to greater awareness of coercive control important training for police and professionals is in behaviours, so it is vital to create greater awareness the implementation phase. As several noble Lords and understanding of these patterns of behaviour and have said, a lot of individuals who are being coercively 1723 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1724 controlled do not know or appreciate that fact. It is a I also pay tribute to the work of the noble Baroness, bit like the story of the frog in the beaker where the Lady Campbell of Surbiton. We strongly support water gets heated more and more, very gently, and the Amendments 46 and 47 in her name, but understand frog does not realise that it is trapped until it is too why she now feels that she cannot divide the House, in late. It really makes a difference if other people can the light of the Government’s apparent stance on recognise what is going on, perhaps even before the those amendments and the impact that could have on victim themselves. Amendment 45 if they were carried. Post-separation abuse is a terrible thing. Having The House has already shown its support for the thought that you had escaped the abuse but then inclusion of carers in the definition of “personally realising that you are being dragged back and dragged connected”, through the vote on Monday in support down financially and emotionally takes a toll. We have of earlier amendments from the noble Baroness, heard a number of examples of just how awful that is, Lady Campbell of Surbiton. Weregard Amendments 46 so I cannot say just how happy I am. and 47 as consequential parts of the package. As I We have been pushing the boundaries somewhat have already stated, part of what Amendment 45, in regarding the definition of “personally connected” in the name of my noble friend Lady Lister of Burtersett, several contexts. I will talk about disabled people in a achieves is to align the definition of “personally second but, with regard to family members or people connected” in the Bill with the Serious Crime Act 2015. who have been in an intimate relationship, whether or On Monday, this House added carers to the definition not they are living together, I am glad that the Minister of “personally connected” in the Bill. That is why we has listened. I am sure that is right, and the Bill will be believe that the Government should recognise the stronger for it. outcome of the vote on Monday and accept Amendments 46 and 47 as effectively consequential, as the noble Amendments 46 and 47 extend the definition to the Baroness, Lady Campbell of Surbiton, asked. They relationship between a disabled person and their carer. should give a clear assurance that they accept them, as We had this discussion on Monday, so I will not repeat government support for Amendment 45 means that the arguments that were used then, but I was disappointed they will make sure that that amendment, in the name by the Minister’s response. The House showed its of my noble friend Lady Lister of Burtersett, is still concerns and feelings, and I hope that the Minister enshrined in the Bill when it becomes an Act. takes them into account in her remarks, but also takes I hope that the Government think hard about their the opportunity to have another think before Third response to these amendments, particularly to Reading and the Bill goes back to the House of Amendments 46 and 47. If they do not feel that they Commons. can give a positive response tonight, along the lines We strongly need disabled people to be heard. We asked for by the noble Baroness, Lady Campbell of heard strong arguments for this on Monday and tonight, Surbiton, perhaps they could reflect further and come not least from the noble Baroness, Lady Grey-Thompson. back on Third Reading. I hope that the Minister listens to them. I very much welcome Amendment 45. 7.30 pm Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con): My Lords, as Lord Rosser (Lab) [V]: Amendment 45 ensures that noble Lords have pointed out, Amendment 45 removes the existing offence of coercive or controlling behaviour the cohabitation requirement contained within the applies to abuse that happens post-separation by extending controlling or coercive behaviour offence in Section 76 the offence to cover those who no longer live together. of the Serious Crime Act 2015. This would extend the It aligns the definition of “personally connected” in reach of the offence, meaning that it may apply to Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 with Clause 2 post-separation abuse, or to any family member regardless of the Bill, and the result is that the offence of controlling of whether they lived with the victim. or coercive behaviour will apply to members of the As noble Lords will be aware, the current offence same family or people who have been in an intimate applies only to those who are “personally connected” relationship, whether or not they live together. as defined in Section 76 of the 2015 Act. This definition Amendments 46 and 47 amend Amendment 45 to applies to those in an intimate personal relationship— include the relationship between a disabled person and whether or not they live together—or to those who live their carer in the definition of “personally connected” together and have either been in an intimate relationship in the Serious Crime Act 2015 to reflect the changes or are members of the same family. The definition in made to the Bill when the earlier amendments of the the 2015 Act is therefore out of sync with the definition noble Baroness, Lady Campbell of Surbiton, were in Clause 2 of this Bill. agreed on Monday. I congratulate my noble friend The Government have listened carefully to the debate Lady Lister of Burtersett for the determination that in Committee, where the noble Baroness, Lady Lister she has shown in pursuing Amendment 45 and the of Burtersett, the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, strength of the case that she has marshalled in support. and many others argued for the controlling or coercive This is a key amendment for us and, most importantly, behaviour offence to be extended to cover post-separation a key change for survivors living with abuse after abuse between intimate partners and interfamilial abuse separation. I hope that, after today, they feel that their regardless of whether the family members were living voices have been heard. We also appreciate the together. In Committee, I asked noble Lords to await Government’s willingness to support the amendment the outcome of the review into the controlling or coercive and the role that the Minister has played. We trust that behaviour offence—I really meant it—and I am pleased the House now does likewise. to say that this review has now been published. 1725 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1726

[BARONESS WILLIAMS OF TRAFFORD] broadening the definition of “personally connected” The review found that police-recorded controlling to include a much wider range of connections within or coercive behaviour offences, as well as prosecutions, health and social care settings, which are of course have increased year on year since the introduction of covered by other legislation, and would confuse the the offence. However, the review also found there is meaning of “domestic abuse”. still room for improvement in responding to this abhorrent The noble Baronesses, Lady Lister and Lady Burt, crime. The review considered views from a number of talked about the important issue of ongoing training. stakeholders, who expressed concern that the cohabitation I acknowledge that there is more to do to ensure that requirement in the offence is preventing some victims the offence is understood, and we will update the of this abuse from seeking justice, and that it poses statutory guidance, in consultation with police and challenges for police and prosecutors in evidencing others. and charging abusive behaviours under other applicable In answer to the question from the noble Baroness, legislation. Lady Lister, about what next, we will be strengthening Calls from domestic abuse services echo concerns the legislation around controlling or coercive behaviour around the cohabitation requirement of the offence, to ensure that all victims of domestic abuse are able to given that we know that victims who leave their receive protection, regardless of their living arrangements perpetrators are often subjected to sustained or increased with their abusers. This summer we will be publishing coercive or controlling behaviour after separation, a domestic abuse strategy, which will build on the and are statistically at the highest risk of homicide work to date to help to transform the response to within the period immediately after they have left. domestic abuse and to tackle perpetrators. We will Controlling or coercive behaviour is an insidious consider the wider policy and data recommendations form of domestic abuse and this Government are made in the review throughout the development and committed to ensuring that all victims are protected. implementation of the strategy, and we will of course We have heard the experts and considered the evidence continue to engage with domestic abuse organisations on this issue and I am very pleased to support the throughout the process. amendments brought forward by the noble Baroness, The noble Baroness mentioned monitoring. At the Lady Lister. She has campaigned on it. She owns it. I moment, all legislation is subject to ongoing review am very happy that she is the sponsor. I commend the and monitoring, and we have the very important benefit resolute campaigning on this issue by Surviving Economic of the domestic abuse commissioner, who I know will Abuse and other organisations. I acknowledge the be keeping a very careful eye on how the legislation is points made by the noble Baroness, Lady Warwick, working in practice. and I will draw her comments to the attention of my I will not repeat the other points that I made colleagues in the MoJ. on Monday, but I hope that, in the light of the debate then and my response today, the noble Baroness, Amendment 45 will bring the definition of “personally Lady Campbell, will be content not to move her connected”as used in the controlling or coercive behaviour amendment. To be clear, the Government’s position offence into line with that in Clause 2 of the Bill and on Amendment 45, should Amendments 46 and 47 be send a clear message to both victims and perpetrators moved, is that we will not support Amendments 46 that controlling or coercive behaviours, irrespective of and 47. There is cross-party support for Amendment 45 the living arrangements, are forms of domestic abuse. as currently drafted, and I urge the House not to detract This Government are committed to doing all we from that should it come to a vote on Amendment 46. can support victims and to tackle offenders. I am The House must of course first reach a decision on delighted that, in removing the cohabitation requirement that amendment. in the controlling or coercive behaviour offence, we can take another step towards ensuring that every Baroness Campbell of Surbiton (CB) [V]: My Lords, victim has access to the protection they need. I thank all noble Lords who have supported my Amendments 46 and 47 seek to expand the definition amendments. I am grateful for the very kind words of “personally connected” within the revised offence about my own personal commitment to these issues of controlling or coercive behaviour to include both and that of my noble friend Lady Grey-Thompson, paid and unpaid carers. I made it very clear during the who has wheeled with me through this amendment debate on Monday on earlier amendments tabled by rollercoaster today. Disabled people, who face so many the noble Baroness, Lady Campbell, that the Government barriers in their fight for equal dignity and safety from absolutely recognise that abuse can be perpetrated by those who may abuse their vulnerability, need this carers. The other point that I made on Monday was support; it gives them all strength to carry on. that many carers will be captured by the “personally I am of course deeply saddened by the Minister’s connected”definition, being family members or partners. response. As I said earlier, I am not able now to divide However, I reiterate that extending that definition in the House; my hands are tied. I have no alternative the context of what is a domestic abuse offence would than, very sadly, to withdraw my amendment. have detrimental effects on the overall understanding Amendment 46 (to Amendment 45) withdrawn. of domestic abuse and the complexities of the familial and intimate partner relationships that domestic abuse Amendment 47 (to Amendment 45) not moved. is understood to encompass, where the affectionate emotional bond between the victim and the perpetrator Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab) [V]: My Lords, plays an important role in the power dynamics. By before the Question is put on Amendment 45, I first extending the definition to include carers we would be pay tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Campbell of 1727 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1728

Surbiton, who is my noble friend, and the noble Baroness, (2) In the heading, after “Disclosing” insert “, or threatening Lady Grey-Thompson. They have made a tremendous to disclose,”. sacrifice, and we should acknowledge that. It saddens (3) For subsection (1) substitute— me, because this is a time when I feel so happy that “(1) A person commits an offence if— Amendment 45 is going to go through. I am just really (a) the person discloses, or threatens to disclose, a sorry that it has been at the expense of what they have private sexual photograph or film in which another been campaigning for. I ask the Minister to reflect on individual (“the relevant individual”) appears, the number of noble Lords who have asked her to (b) by so doing, the person intends to cause distress to think again about this before Third Reading. that individual, and On a happier note,I thank the Minister for her response (c) the disclosure is, or would be, made without the on Amendment 45, of which she is of course a co-sponsor; consent of that individual.” I am particularly grateful that she has taken on board (4) In subsection (2)— and answered in detail the question of “Where now?” This is really just the first step. There is a lot that needs (a) after “disclose” insert “, or threaten to disclose,”; to be done with the development of the domestic (b) for “the individual mentioned in subsection (1)(a) abuse strategy to make sure that we raise awareness and (b)” substitute “the relevant individual”. and implement training, monitoring and so forth. (5) After subsection (2) insert— I want to take this opportunity to thank again all “(2A) Where a person is charged with an offence under those who have made Amendment 45 possible. Those this section of threatening to disclose a private who have survived economic abuse must take such sexual photograph or film, it is not necessary for the pride in what has been achieved this evening. I thank prosecution to prove— colleagues across the House, both those who have (a) that the photograph or film referred to in the threat spoken this evening and those who spoke in Committee. exists, or I thank the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Williams (b) if it does exist, that it is in fact a private sexual of Trafford, who has, I am sure, been pivotal to the photograph or film.” Governmentlisteningandthenagreeingthatthisparticular (6) In subsection (4)(a), after “disclosure” insert “, or threat formulation of the amendment be put forward. I also to disclose,”. thank the many women who have spoken out in recent (7) In subsection (5)— years. (a) in paragraph (a), for “the individual mentioned in It seems fitting to give the last word to one of these subsection (1)(a) and (b)” substitute “the relevant women who has been in touch with me. This is what individual”; she said—I have reduced it down, because it was a (b) in paragraph (b), for “the individual mentioned in longer email: subsection (1)(a) and (b)” substitute “the relevant “The Government’s announcement … is such positive news. I individual”. just wanted to stay a huge thank you and let you know how grateful I am … and also to your colleagues for all their tremendous (8) For subsection (8) substitute— care and commitment. Thank goodness the Government has “(8) A person charged with an offence under this section listened.” is not to be taken to have intended to cause distress by disclosing, or threatening to disclose, a photograph Amendment 45 agreed. or film merely because that was a natural and probable consequence of the disclosure or threat.” Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con): My Lords, (9) In section 35 of that Act (meaning of “private” and we have completed scrutiny of 10 groups of amendments “sexual”), in subsection (5)(c), for “the person mentioned and have a further seven to cover today, so I suggest in section 33(1)(a) and (b)”substitute “the relevant individual that this might be a sensible moment for a short break. (within the meaning of section 33)”. (10) In Schedule 8 to that Act (disclosing private sexual 7.44 pm photographs or films: providers of information society services)— Sitting suspended. (a) in the heading, after “Disclosing” insert “, or 7.57 pm threatening to disclose,”; The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Barker) (LD): My (b) in paragraph 5 (exception for hosting)— Lords, we now come to the group beginning with (i) in sub-paragraph (1), after “sub-paragraph (2)” Amendment 48. Anyone wishing to press this or anything insert “, (2A)”; else in this group to a Division must make that clear in (ii) in sub-paragraph (2), in the words before paragraph debate. (a), after “if” insert “, in the case of information which consists of or includes a private sexual photograph or film,”; Amendment 48 (iii) after sub-paragraph (2) insert— Moved by Baroness Morgan of Cotes “(2A) This sub-paragraph is satisfied if, in the case of 48: Before Clause 65, insert the following new Clause— information which consists of or includes a threat “Disclosure of private sexual photographs and films to disclose a private sexual photograph or film, the Threats to disclose private sexual photographs and films with service provider had no actual knowledge when the intent to cause distress information was provided— (1) Section 33 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 (a) that it consisted of or included a threat to disclose a (disclosing private sexual photographs and films with private sexual photograph or film in which another intent to cause distress) is amended as follows. individual appears, 1729 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1730

(b) that the threat was made with the intention of now been published, and it highlights a number of causing distress to that individual, or further issues to be explored. I very much look forward (c) that the disclosure would be made without the to working to improve the law more broadly on image- consent of that individual.”” based abuse and increasing protections for survivors. Member’s explanatory statement The report looks at the motivation element of both This new Clause would amend the offence under section 33 of disclosure of and, now, threats to disclose intimate the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, of disclosing a private images. Currently, in order to be a crime, the intent to sexual photograph or film with intent to cause distress to an cause distress must be proved, and the commission has individual who appears in the photograph or film, so as to include threats to disclose private sexual photographs and films. rightly pointed out that that is often difficult. It provisionally recommends amending the intent element Baroness Morgan of Cotes (Con) [V]: My Lords, it of the offence because abusers often have motivations is a pleasure to take part in the later stage of debates additional to the intent to cause distress, such as on this important Bill, and to move Amendment 48. I causing humiliation, taking revenge or smearing the thank my noble friend Lady Hodgson and the noble reputation of survivors, which ought to be captured in and learned Lord, Lord Judge, for their support, and the criminal law. particularly my noble friend the Minister for adding The Law Commission report also examines culturally his name to this amendment. I thank the noble Baronesses, specific elements of what might constitute an intimate Lady Crawley and Lady Grey-Thompson, who supported image, which are not captured in various abuse laws. the amendment that I tabled in Committee, and I This requires careful investigation to ensure that no thank all the Ministers involved in the Bill, in this woman can be abused by the exposure or threatened House and in the House of Commons, for their exposure of what she and her community might judge engagement on the issue of criminalising the threat of to be intimate and to ensure that all women are sharing intimate images. protected. I pay tribute to Refuge, particularly its tech abuse Then, of course, we need to address the creation of team, who first identified this as an issue, and to those deepfakes or photoshopped images, where images are brave survivors who have spoken out about the toll altered to make it look like the survivors are the that the sharing of images and the threat of sharing subject of the photo or video. They are commonly in images has taken on them. They have been very clear pornographic materials, and not yet adequately covered about the devastating long-term impact on their lives. in law. However, let us make no mistake: Amendment If any noble Lord or anyone watching this debate has 48 and the creation of a new offence of threatening to any doubt about that, I recommend that they watch disclose a private sexual image with the intent to cause the very powerful film that the survivor Zara McDermott distress is a significant step forward for the millions of has made about this, which was released within the women who have experienced this deeply distressing last month. form of domestic abuse. 8 pm As I said in Committee, at the moment the police I suspect that I am not alone in this House in often and others, such as the Crown Prosecution Service, are being asked what the House of Lords actually does. often not clear about which offence the threat to share This amendment and the debate around it provide a could be prosecuted under. That is why I and many very good example of how this House makes a real other noble Lords were keen that this amendment be difference to the lives of our fellow citizens. An issue accepted. Amendment 48 could give the police, the of harm was identified; a suitable legislative opportunity CPS and the wider criminal justice system the legal was spotted; an amendment was tabled and debated, tools they need to investigate and prosecute a significant and the Government have listened and accepted the proportion of these threats, and offer women the arguments that were made. I very much welcome protection and peace of mind they need to move on. the Government’s support for Amendment 48 and the That is especially true if the proposed remedy includes consequential amendments, which will extend the offence the deletion of the images from the perpetrator’s devices, of disclosing intimate images with the intent to cause so I strongly encourage the Government to look into distress to cover threats to share those intimate images. that and adopt that proposal. I also encourage the It will make a significant difference to the 4.4 million Government to ensure that the police and the CPS people in England and Wales, including the one in have the training they need to thoroughly investigate seven young women, who have experienced this form and prosecute these crimes, and to ensure that these of abuse. agencies and the specialist services that support survivors These women have lived with the impact of the have the resources they need to ensure that survivors threat to share, often for many years, with little, if any, can achieve justice. police support. The impacts include panic attacks for Although there is clearly more to follow, given the a fifth of women, suicidal ideation for 10% of women, Law Commission’s recently published consultation on and an increased risk of physical harm for one in taking action against intimate image-based abuse, I seven women. Women are also changing their behaviours, am very pleased that the Government have not waited as I said in my speech in Committee, often including but have taken heed of the arguments that I and other going back to their abusers, granting them access to noble Lords have made. The tech is not waiting, and children or changing their evidence. the abusers are not waiting to cause these devastating It was discussed in Committee that the Law impacts. I am very pleased to commend these Commission would be publishing proposals for further amendments, which I hope will secure the support of reform of image-based abuse offences. That report has the House. 1731 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1732

Baroness Crawley (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I will be Baroness Fox of Buckley (Non-Afl): My Lords, I brief, but as my name was on the original amendment was rather surprised to discover that the Government I wanted to thank the noble Baroness, Lady Morgan, have accepted this amendment. The disclosure of sexual for her passion and persistence in ensuring that the photographs and films is egregious and abusive, but I Bill will now be the vehicle for finally making threats am not convinced that primary legislation is the place to share intimate images a criminal offence. Thanks to criminalise threats to disclose in this way. I seek also must go to the Government and to the Minister clarification and reassurance from the Minister. for really listening—not only to the campaigners and I am concerned about the elision between speech those of us who spoke in Committee but, far more and action. Angry words exchanged in the height of importantly, to those many millions of women who relationship break-ups, for example, might now be have been subjected, and continue to be subjected, to taken as literal and on a par with action. Domestic this invidious behaviour. abuse is not the same as domestic arguments. These We have heard today of how an entire town has arguments can be verbally vicious and intemperate on been sent intimate images of young women from that both sides. When intimate interpersonal relationships town. This is a growing crime, as online sites grow and turn sour, there can be a huge amount of bitterness. more young people are betrayed and humiliated. As Things are said and threats made in the heat of the the chair of Refuge put it, changing the law to criminalise moment. I do not understand why primary legislation threats to share could not come soon enough for those should be used to criminalise these things. one in seven young women who experience this form Of course I understand that a threat, or a continued of abuse in the UK. This will finally provide them with threat, to expose intimate images of the most personal the recourse to justice that they deserve. nature can be abusive—it may not be, but it can be. However, if it is abusive, I do not understand why it is Lord Judge (CB) [V]: My Lords, I too acknowledge not covered by the ever-broadening definition of abuse with enthusiasm and, if I may say so, admiration the in this Bill. If the threat was used as part of coercive dedicated energy of the noble Baroness, Lady Morgan, control—for example, “I will publish these photos to resolving this issue and achieving this reform. This unless you do whatever”—would that not be captured is a simple amendment, or will be a series of simple by the coercive control provisions of the Bill? amendments. The clause in question addresses what everybody who has spoken in the past, whether in The amendment notes that, for a person to be, Committee or at Second Reading, knows is pernicious “charged with an offence...of threatening to disclose a private and malevolent behaviour. It should be criminalised sexual photograph or film, it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove … that the photograph or film referred to in the threat and now it will be; good. exists, or … if it does exist, that it is in fact a private sexual Importantly, if I may just digress, the achievement photograph or film.” of this objective by recasting Section 33 of the Criminal This feels like a dystopian, post-modern removal of Justice and Courts Act 2015 means that every potential actual abuse into the absurd world of virtual threats, victim will fall within the new protected ambit of the relating to non-existent artefacts and images. I do not offence, whether or not she—it is, of course, nearly understand why this specific form of threat needs to always she but sometimes may be he—forms part of be in the legislation. any domestic arrangement or personal relationship, or none. They may be a total stranger. Behaviour like this I will give a couple of examples of similar threats, causes distress, anxiety and offence by whomsoever even though they are not of images, which were definitely and in whatever circumstances it occurs. intended to cause distress. One person I know years ago threatened her partner that she would reveal details In the context of the debate we have just had on of some of his more dodgy tax goings-on about which Amendments 46 and 47, it would apply to someone in she,as his wife,knew.If she had done as she had promised, the position of a carer. I wonder why that is strange in and posted them on Facebook, it would have been very the context of the debate that has just happened; embarrassing. It would undoubtedly have been an for the purposes of this amendment, it is not strange incredibly distressing breach of privacy. It was being at all. I thank the Minister for reflecting, for accepting used as leverage in an alimony and custody battle, but that there is no time to waste and for an approach it was just a threat. which will be welcomed on all sides of the House. I will add a footnote: like the noble Baroness, In another instance, a husband threatened that he Lady Morgan, I shall hope to continue to examine the would show his estranged wife’s mother and her friends ingredients of this offence, and in particular the state private letters to her then lover, and expose her secret of mind currently required on the basis of the new affair. Those threats were horrible, but should they be clause inserted by Amendment 48—old Section 33 of illegal? I am just worried that such grim threats can the 2015 Act—just to make sure that it satisfactorily sadly be used but then never acted on and, as such, addresses how strong an intent is required. I feel that should surely have no place in the law courts. In both having a positive, specific intent to cause distress is not examples, the threats were never acted on. One couple appropriate. It certainly would not be appropriate for separated amicably in the end. The other couple reconciled someone who had acquired the intimate photographs, and are happy to this day. perhaps without paying for them if they were sent I understand the modern world, online tech issues and through modern technology, and just decided to publish the images we have been discussing. But I am worried them. I think “intent to cause distress” is too strong, about the threats point. Should threats be elided with but that is a detail for today. We will come back to it action in this way, or will we potentially criminalise and trouble the Minister about it, no doubt, in discussions. speech? This is a dangerous, slippery slope. 1733 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1734

[BARONESS FOX OF BUCKLEY] The noble Baroness, Lady Crawley, mentioned the Finally, I am concerned that this could give a green extraordinary small market town somewhere in the light to more and more offences being considered in United Kingdom where no fewer than 70 women have need of official intervention, investigation and prosecution. had intimate images shared on an online forum where The police could potentially become overly preoccupied somebody commented that they are “traded like Pokémon and drowned out with complaints of threats, rather cards”. What must it feel like, as a woman or a man— than focusing on pursuing the properly egregious examples as a human being—to have intimate images of yourself of abusive actions, such as publishing the said images. traded like Pokémon cards? On this online forum if you have an interest in a particular town you can message Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Con) [V]: My Lords, people on the forum who circulate these images and Amendment 48 is in my name and those of my noble ask: “Do you have anybody from this particular town friends Lady Morgan and Lord Wolfson, and the noble or who went to this particular school?” That is really and learned Lord, Lord Judge. I will also speak to the shameful; the fact it is going on shames us all. other amendments in this group. I congratulate my noble I am pleased that we are, belatedly, in catch-up friend Lady Morgan on moving Amendment 48 so ably. mode. But I find it excruciatingly embarrassing and unacceptable that victims are suffering in many different 8.15 pm ways, while Her Majesty’s Government and Parliament The strength of feeling on revenge porn and threats occasionally appear to be dithering over regulation to share images was clear from our debates during the and legislating. In doing that we are letting ourselves earlier stages of the Bill, with support coming from all down, but far more importantly, we are letting the sides of the House. Individual case studies referenced victims down. have demonstrated the sheer scale and devastating impact of how threats to share sexual images or videos Baroness Uddin (Non-Afl) [V]: My Lords, it is a without consent are being used as a tool of coercive pleasure to follow the noble Lords who have spoken, control. Once again, I commend Refuge’s The Naked and I am very grateful to the noble Baroness, Threat report and the support organisations working Lady Morgan, and, of course, the Government, for in this space. Previously, the law did not appear clear accepting these necessary amendments. about this, so these provisions make it possible to hold At the outset, I also record my thanks to Dr Ann perpetrators to account. Olivarius of McAllister Olivarius, a very eminent lawyer I will be brief because others have already made the who, about a decade ago, began her campaign against arguments, but I thank all the Ministers and their so-called revenge porn. Her outstanding work, both teams for being willing to listen and move on this here and in the US, has definitely made a very significant important point. I hugely welcome the Government’s contribution to the fact that we have had legislation support of these new provisions and their willingness for the last five years and it is a criminal offence to to use the Domestic Abuse Bill to make these changes. share sexual images without consent. I welcome this amendment to extend the offence of Lord Russell of Liverpool (CB): My Lords, like disclosing everybody else who has spoken, I say that this is “private sexual photographs and films with intent to cause distress” extremely welcome. We thank the Minister for listening to so many voices. It is great that the Government have to an individual who appears in the photograph or film— listened, although, if I were being uncharitable, I known as a “revenge porn” offence—so as to include would say they have listened somewhat belatedly. I am “threats to disclose”. One in 14 adults has experienced very pleased that the Law Commission review is now threats to share intimate images or films of themselves. under way. I reflect that it took the influence of a very Young women aged 18-34 are disproportionately impacted influential and effective recent Cabinet Minister to by this form of abuse, with one in seven reporting that persuade her own party to listen, when so many voices she has experienced such threats. have been trying to get the Government to listen over Like other noble Lords, I commend Refuge’s The quite a long period. However, thanks are due, and Naked Threat research, which found that the vast thanks are given. majority—72%—of threats experienced by women were I am concerned that we often seem to be behind the made by partners or ex-partners, making it a clear curve when it comes to so many aspects of online domestic abuse or domestic violence issue. Therefore, harm and harassment-type behaviour in general. In the Domestic Abuse Bill is not only the right legislative today’s newspaper there was mention of a YouGov vehicle for what is clearly a crime related to domestic survey which has just been done. Of 1,000 women, violence or abuse but a piece of legislation that would 96% of them do not and would not report incidents of allow the Government to make these required changes harassment to the authorities. One of them pointed imminently. As such, I am very grateful for that. out that the police can act if somebody drops litter on Some 83% of women threatened by their current or the street but are unable to act if somebody is harassed former partners experience other forms of abuse alongside on the street, and that does seem wrong. I think 46% these threats. One in 10 women threatened by a current of the 1,000 ladies said, when asked why they did not or former partner felt suicidal as a result of the threats, report harassment, that it was because they had no and 83% said that the threats damaged their mental belief whatever that it would change anything. That is health or emotional well-being. More than one in a reflection on the various authorities and organisations seven of these women felt a continuous risk of physical that are meant to help victims of harassment. If they violence because of these threats. Only one in three feel like that, there is clearly something wrong. women felt empowered to report this behaviour to the 1735 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1736 police, and, of those women, less than 14% said that I was interested to hear the argument of the noble they had received a good response. I am also deeply Baroness, Lady Fox, about whether threats of any sort concerned about the lack of reports coming from should be criminalised. That may be an argument for black and other minority women. another time, looking at other threats, but I have no As I have said previously in this Chamber,perpetrators doubt that threats in the context of Section 33 are of domestic abuse are increasingly using technology entirely appropriate and should be criminalised. and the internet to control and abuse their partners However, I share the view of the noble and learned and ex-partners. Threats to share images are used to Lord, Lord Judge, about the phrase “with intent to control, coerce and abuse when they are in a relationship, cause distress”. Before this particular clause becomes and, after they have separated, this form of abuse is law, it would be helpful to look at whether that should, disproportionately perpetrated against younger women. in fact, be adjusted. Survivors of this form of abuse lack the vital legal protection that they need, with the police often telling Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP): My Lords, I survivors—or making them believe—that they cannot will be brief. I would like to congratulate everybody take any action until the abuser has shared the images, who brought us to this successful outcome, including leaving survivors in fear and enabling perpetrators to the Government. It is staggering to count how many use these threats to control them. times we have all congratulated the Government this Like the noble Baroness, Lady Morgan, I thank evening. It is a rare event and one to be enjoyed while Refuge, the Equality and Human Rights Commission it lasts. and Barnardo’s,among others,which recommend making I would just like to say that the law alone is never threats to share intimate images a crime, and extending enough to protect victims and achieve justice. As the offence of controlling and coercive behaviour in the noble Baroness, Lady Uddin, pointed out, we need an intimate family relationship to remove the cohabitation training for everybody, but in particular for police requirement. This is most welcome; it would therefore officers, and to some extent lawyers, to make sure they cover post-separation abuse, which would protect are able to sensitively and effectively bring perpetrators 4.4 million adults who have experienced this form of to justice. I have argued strongly for anti-domestic abuse. violence training for police officers, and this is part of Young people are the group most likely to be in an it. Threatening to leak nude photos can be a crime, and abusive relationship. A survey of 13 to 17 year-olds I am happy that this amendment will be put into the Bill. found that 25% of girls and 18% of boys reported having experienced some form of physical violence 8.30 pm from an intimate partner. However, the Children’s Lord Paddick (LD) [V]: My Lords, I start by addressing Society found that 77%—a majority—of local authorities directly the comments of the noble Baroness, Lady Fox that responded to its FoI request do not have a policy of Buckley. I have spoken before about the abusive or protocol in place for responding to under-16s who relationship that I was in 20 years ago. What I have not experience teenage relationship abuse, with just 39% of talked about is the intimate video that my then partner local authorities providing specialist support services recorded and subsequently kept in his father’s safe in for under-16s and 26% of local authorities providing France. People may question why anyone would allow no specialist support for this age group. Tragically, such a video to be recorded, but in a coercive and 500 children—mostly teenagers, but some as young as controlling relationship, compliance is rewarded and eight years old—were victims of image-based abuse. defiance is punished. When what you most want is the The UK Safer Internet Centre is a partnership of love of your partner, and you know that not doing three leading charities, including the Internet Watch what he wants could result in alienation, abuse or Foundation. It reported an increase in the number of physical violence, you acquiesce to things that you young people trying to view sexual abuse materials would not normally participate in. online, and that in just one month of lockdown its I lost count of the number of times he threatened analysts blocked 8.8 million attempts by UK users to that, if he I left him, he would make the video public. access such images and videos. We continue to see a It was not until I went on a residential training course rise in the number of children being groomed online beyond his immediate control and started talking to a into producing self-generated indecent images. I shudder female colleague that I realised how unhealthy the to think of the underreporting, particularly among relationship was and how unacceptable his behaviour young people from black and minority-ethnic was. I resolved to end it. When I told him the relationship communities. was over, after the initial fear from his threats to kill Can the noble Lord say what action the Government me, followed by the relief I felt when he finally removed are considering to influence, inform and educate children his belongings from my home, the dread that he would and, more widely,the general population? What research, deliver on his promise to release the intimate video if any, have the Government undertaken into the became even more intense. That is why this amendment impact of online abuse of women and intersectional is needed. online abuse of women from black and minority As the noble Baroness, Lady Morgan of Cotes, and communities? the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, have said, revenge may also be a motivation and further reform Baroness Butler-Sloss (CB) [V]: My Lords, this is may be necessary. I am grateful to the noble Baroness, such a sensible addition to Section 33 of the Criminal Lady Morgan, for raising the issue of threatening to Justice and Courts Act 2015. It is excellent news that disclose private sexual photographs and films with an the Government have now accepted it. intent to cause distress, and to the noble Lord, 1737 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1738

[LORD PADDICK] I reiterate that the Government consider that the Lord Wolfson of Tredegar,for accepting her amendments. revenge porn offence has worked well to date. There Threatening to disclose such material can be used as a have been over 900 convictions for the offence since its means of coercive control both during a relationship commencement in April 2015. I am pleased to see that and after it has ended, so we on these Benches support the creation of this offence has offered victims protection these important changes. under the criminal law from the deeply distressing behaviour of sharing private intimate images. Baroness Wilcox of Newport (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I must begin by applauding the frankness and honesty I am very grateful for the discussions that I have of the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, in his speech. It is had with the sponsors of the amendment in addition to truly humbling to hear him speak so bravely about his my friend Lady Morgan: my noble friend Lady Hodgson own former coercive partner. of Abinger and the noble and learned Lord, Lord In bringing this much-needed amendment to the Judge. I have been happy to add my name on behalf of House, the noble Baroness, Lady Morgan, has recognised the Government to the amendment. the changes that have occurred in society since the However, we cannot rest on our laurels. We must be widespread introduction of mobile phone technologies alert, as the noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liverpool, and social media coverage. It has changed irreversibly said, to changes in technology, including the misuse of the way in which we communicate, and the inherent social media and the opportunities to abuse and distress dangers of the misuse of that communication have others that such developments can bring. While we become increasingly prevalent. I warmly support her have a range of criminal offences that in many instances tenacity in getting the amendment through the process. can deal with those who threaten to share intimate Clearly, her colleagues and former colleagues in material with others, it is vital that we ensure that the Government have listened and acted on her arguments. criminal law remains fully equipped to deal with any It will make a difference. new problems in this constantly developing area. As a former teacher of media studies, I had no idea, just five years ago, when I was last in the classroom, It was with this in mind that the Government asked how exploitative or dangerous the medium would the Law Commission to review the law in this area. become. The threat to share intimate or sexual images That review has considered the existing offences relating and films is an increasingly common tool of coercive to the non-consensual taking and sharing of intimate control, which can have enormous negative impacts images to identify whether there are any gaps in the on survivors of abuse. While the sharing of intimate scope of protection already offered to victims. Noble and sexual images without consent is a crime, threats Lords will be pleased to note that on 27 February the to share are not, leaving survivors of this form of Law Commission published the consultation paper on abuse without the protection of the criminal law. the review. The consultation ends on 27 May and I During my reading for this topic, I was powerfully encourage noble Lords to consider contributing to moved by a key report, Shattering Lives and Myths, that public engagement, as my noble friend Lady Morgan written by Professor Clare McGlynn and others at of Cotes said. Durham Law School, which was launched in 2019 at The consultation paper puts forward a number of the Supreme Court. It sets out the appalling consequences proposals for public discussion, including the need to for victims of intimate images being posted on the address those who threaten to disclose intimate images. internet without consent. I look forward to the Law Commission’s full proposals Threats to share these images play on fear and in this area once its final recommendations are published shame and can be particularly dangerous where there later this year. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Russell may be multiple perpetrators or where so-called honour- of Liverpool, that the law must keep pace with based abuse is a factor. The advent of new technologies technological developments. I would not say that we enables perpetrators to make these threats even where are behind the curve but I think that it is fair to say such images do not exist. But there is no clear criminal that the curve itself is constantly moving. While it sanction for this behaviour. Lack of support leaves would be wrong of me to pre-empt the consultation victims and survivors isolated, often attempting to and the Law Commission’s eventual findings, I think navigate alone an unfamiliar, complex and shifting the fact that the commission has acknowledged that terrain of legal provisions and online regulation. The threats to disclose intimate images should be further Domestic Abuse Bill is the most appropriate vehicle to considered adds strength to the calls to extend the make this change. Victims and survivors would benefit revenge porn offence, as provided for in Amendment 48. almost immediately and it would help them prevent further abuse and get away from their perpetrator. We have listened to the passionate calls for change This amendment will close that gap in the law. from victims. They have bravely shared their distressing, and sometimes life-changing, experiences of suffering Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, my at the hands of those who would manipulate and noble friend Lady Morgan is to be congratulated on torment them with threats to share their most personal bringing forward these amendments.As she has explained, and intimate images. That point was made during this the amendments seek to extend the scope of the offence short debate by the noble Baronesses, Lady Crawley at Section 33 of the Criminal Justice and Courts and Lady Uddin, and in particularly moving terms by Act 2015, commonly known as the revenge porn offence, the noble Lord, Lord Paddick. Since I have just mentioned additionally to criminalise threats to disclose such the noble Baroness, Lady Uddin, I remind her that sex images. Importantly, in any prosecution there is no and relationship education is part of the national need to prove the images exist at the time of the threat. curriculum. 1739 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1740

We have also taken note of the views of campaigners Rachel’s family and friends unless she went back to and fellow parliamentarians. I remember the strength the police to change her evidence about the level of of feeling in this House in Committee, when my noble physical abuse that she had suffered. She did so and he friend and others proposed a similar amendment to thought that he had gotten away with it until, sadly, the one now before us. We have reflected on those calls the abuse continued to escalate; at that point, Rachel and that debate and we are happy to support these decided that she had to get out of the family home amendments, which will extend the parameters of the with her children. I am pleased to say that she is now Section 33 offence to capture the threat of disclosure. in a much more positive and better place, but the fact As was noted by the noble and learned Lord, that victims are changing their behaviour and evidence, Lord Judge, and the noble and learned Baroness, allowing perpetrators access to their families and returning Lady Butler-Sloss, Amendment 48 stays as close as to them, shows, in addition to the mental suffering, possible to the provisions and drafting of the existing the very real toll that the threat of showing these Section 33 offence, rather than making any broader images has on their lives. It just shows the very real changes to the law in this area. I suggest that that is the effect that these victims suffer. right approach given the Law Commission’s ongoing I thank the Minister for adding his name to my work. I assure the noble and learned Lord and the amendment and I thank his officials in the Bill team, noble and learned Baroness that the Law Commission who worked so hard on drafting this amendment and is specifically considering the intent issue as part of its the consequential ones. I am grateful to them and to work. I am grateful that the amendment also has the him for allowing me to move this amendment, and I support of the noble Baronesses, Lady Jones of take great pleasure in moving Amendment 48. Moulsecoomb and Lady Wilcox of Newport. Amendment 48 agreed. I should say something in response to the speech made by the noble Baroness, Lady Fox of Buckley. This is nothing to do with criminalising speech and we 8.45 pm are not dealing with just domestic abuse here. This is a broad offence that applies throughout criminal law; it Amendment 49 does not apply just in the context of domestic abuse. Moved by Baroness Newlove While I agree that other criminal law offences, such as 49: Before Clause 65, insert the following new Clause— blackmail and harassment, can be applicable in this “Strangulation or suffocation area—a point I made in Committee—the Government (1) In Part 5 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 (protection of have been persuaded that it is right and appropriate to children and others), after section 75 insert— have this specific offence in this area of the law. “Strangulation or suffocation For those reasons, I believe that this reform will 75A Strangulation or suffocation create a clear and consistent enforcement regime for (1) A person (“A”) commits an offence if— both threats and actual disclosures, thereby providing greater protection to those who may have had to (a) A intentionally strangles another person (“B”), or endure such intrusive and distressing behaviour. It has (b) A does any other act to B that— been a pleasure to be able to add my name to these (i) affects B’s ability to breathe, and amendments, and I join my noble friend in commending (ii) constitutes battery of B. them to the House. (2) It is a defence to an offence under this section for A to show that B consented to the strangulation or Baroness Morgan of Cotes (Con) [V]: My Lords, I other act. thank all noble Lords who spoke in the debate on (3) But subsection (2) does not apply if— these amendments. As we heard the noble Lord, (a) B suffers serious harm as a result of the Lord Russell, put so eloquently, victims are suffering. strangulation or other act, and I am pleased that the Government have decided that (b) A either— they do not have to wait until the conclusion of the (i) intended to cause B serious harm, or Law Commission process. (ii) was reckless as to whether B would suffer serious Like other noble Lords, I pay particular tribute to harm. the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, for being so brave and (4) A is to be taken to have shown the fact mentioned clear about his own personal experiences of these in subsection (2) if— issues, which will be outlawed by my amendment. I (a) sufficient evidence of the fact is adduced to raise an thank him for sharing his experiences with the House. issue with respect to it, and Like the Minister, I took careful note of what was (b) the contrary is not proved beyond reasonable doubt. said by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, and (5) A person guilty of an offence under this section is the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss. liable— They pointed out that this is not the end of the matter, (a) on summary conviction— of course, and that the use of “intent” will be looked (i) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months at during the course of the LawCommission consultation. (or 6 months, if the offence was committed before For those who remain in any doubt, I want to share the coming into force of paragraph 24(2) of Schedule just one of the stories that I heard about. It relates to 22 to the Sentencing Act 2020), or Rachel, a lady who was physically abused by her (ii) to a fine, partner. After her partner had been arrested and released or both; by the police because of the physical abuse, he threatened (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a to disclose the many images he held on his phone to term not exceeding 5 years or to a fine, or both. 1741 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1742

(6) In this section “serious harm” means— (8H) Subsection (8G)(b) will only be established if the (a) grievous bodily harm, within the meaning of section 18 behaviour concerned is, or is part of, a history of of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, conduct which constitutes domestic abuse as defined in sections 1 and 2 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, (b) wounding, within the meaning of that section, or including but not limited to conduct which constitutes (c) actual bodily harm, within the meaning of section 47 the offence of controlling or coercive behaviour in of that Act. an intimate or family relationship as defined in 75B Offences under section 75A committed outside the section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 (controlling United Kingdom or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship).” (1) If— (5) In subsection (9) after “householder cases” insert “and (a) a person does an act in a country outside the domestic abuse cases”.” United Kingdom, Member’s explanatory statement (b) the act, if done in England and Wales, would This Clause seeks to clarify the degree of force which is constitute an offence under section 75A, and reasonable under the common law of self-defence where the (c) the person is a United Kingdom national or is defendant is a survivor of domestic abuse alleged to have used habitually resident in England and Wales, force against their abuser. the person is guilty in England and Wales of that offence. Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws (Lab) [V]: It is a (2) In this section— great privilege to take part in this debate and to hear “country” includes territory; the voices of so many people with expertise in this field “United Kingdom national” means an individual who —sometimes direct experience—speaking with wisdom is— and compassion about why the law had to change. (a) a British citizen, a British overseas territories I remind noble Lords that not so very long ago citizen, a British National (Overseas) or a British there used to be a way of referring to domestic abuse Overseas citizen, as “a domestic”, as though it were lesser than ordinary (b) a person who under the British Nationality Act 1981 crime. It has been a long and hard struggle to have the is a British subject, or law shift and change, for the agenda and context to (c) a British protected person within the meaning of change and for our political and legal classes to understand that Act.” the full import of domestic violence and the toll it (2) Schedule (Strangulation or suffocation: consequential takes on our lives and the whole of society. That is why amendments) contains consequential amendments.” it has been so uplifting to listen to this debate over the Member’s explanatory statement last few weeks. I will move for two new statutory This amendment provides that it is an offence for a person to defences to be included in the Bill and give notice that strangle another person, or to commit any other kind of battery I intend to divide the House. against a person that affects the person’s ability to breathe (such In 2017, the Home Office Minister for Crime, as covering the person’s mouth or nose or sitting on the person’s chest). The maximum penalty for the offence is 5 years’imprisonment. Safeguarding and Vulnerability said there needed to be a root and branch review of how women are treated Amendment 49 agreed. in the criminal justice system when they themselves are victims of abuse. Unfortunately, criminal law still fails to protect those whose experience of abuse drives The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Barker) (LD): We them to offend. I strongly urge this House that there now come to the group beginning with Amendment 50. cannot be two classes of victim: those who somehow Anyone wishing to press this or anything else in this win our compassion and for whom we are desirous of group to a Division must make that clear in debate. a much fairer system and those who somehow fall outside that kind of protection. Amendment 50 We know that the law has failed women in many different areas for many years, and that one of the Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws Moved by reasons why has been the absence of women in 50: After Clause 68, insert the following new Clause— lawmaking—in the senior judiciary and in Parliaments. “Reasonable force in domestic abuse cases Happily, we have seen that changing in our society (1) Section 76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration over recent decades, but there is still work to be done. I Act 2008 (reasonable force for purposes of self-defence am attempting in these amendments, supported by etc.) is amended as follows. colleagues around the House, to fill a really important (2) In subsection (5A) after “In a householder case” insert gap—for those who perhaps have least voice because “or a domestic abuse case”. they end up in prison. (3) In subsection (6) after “In a case other than a These amendments are supported by virtually every householder case” insert “or a domestic abuse case”. organisation involved—I do not know any organisation (4) After subsection (8F) insert— involved in domestic abuse that is not supporting this “(8G) For the purposes of this section “a domestic change. Once you really know about abuse and its abuse case” is a case where— ultimate potential consequences, which can often be (a) the defence concerned is the common law defence the death of a woman or a victim of abuse, you know of self-defence, that sometimes the person on the receiving end can (b) D is, or has been, a victim of domestic abuse, and take no more and, out of despair and desperation, (c) the force concerned is force used by D against the inflicts violence. We have to understand the context, person who has perpetrated the abusive behaviour and what has often been missing in the courts was a referred to in paragraph (b). full understanding of domestic violence and the context. 1743 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1744

I know that, even in this House, we learn from each I suggest that the point was ill made, because no other and from each other’s experience, directly and one is suggesting a parallel. A departure has been indirectly,about what is involved and what the long-term made from the normal rules, which were made with a impact of domestic abuse can be. It has been in only different perception in mind, by men of law who had recent times, for example, that forms of abuse other not imagined the circumstances of domestic violence, than violence have been shown to have long-term the long-term abuse, the toll that it takes and the consequences that can be so damaging to someone’s psychological impact it has on someone—the rising mental health. That learning has, in turn, to be fed fear, the reading of a situation, the complexity referred into the law. to by the Minister and the dynamic that is created in The organisations supporting these amendments these relationships. The point that I was making was include Women’s Aid, Rights of Women, Refuge, the that a departure has been made for the circumstances Criminal Bar Association and the Centre for Women’s of the householder. If we are prepared to make it Justice, which has been a very important part of the there, why are we so reluctant to make it here, particularly research-gathering for these amendments. One of when it is going to be made use of by women—rare as the pieces of work has come out of a report recently these cases are—defending themselves against someone? published by the Centre for Women’s Justice, Women We heard today of the Government’s change of Who Kill: How the State Criminalises Women We heart in their concession that non-fatal strangulation Might Otherwise Be Burying. The Victims’Commissioner should become a crime, properly recognised by the supports these changes.The domestic abuse commissioner- courts at the right level. I have not worked on a single designate supports these amendments. Unfortunately, homicide where such a strangulation has not put at the moment, the Government do not. Is this about people in fear that, one day, it will extinguish their life. not wanting to be seen in any way to support persons That has been part of the histories that they have who might be accused of crime, rather than seeing that given to the court about the way in which they have you are really supporting victims? been treated over the years. The concern here is that self-defence is not working The first of the amendments, Amendment 50, has a in these cases. The amendment seeks to introduce the new statutory defence relating to self-defence and the test that was introduced for the householder, which is reasonableness test that applies to it. This amendment that, instead of being reasonable and proportionate, it would afford justice to women who, after long-term would have to be grossly disproportionate to lose the abuse, are unable to avail themselves of self-defence right to draw down self-defence as a rationale or defence when they are accused of harming their abuser, using for conduct and for seeking an acquittal. For most of force against their abuser or, indeed, killing their abuser. these women, because they face a conviction of murder Why does self-defence not work in these circumstances? if they fail, those acting for them persuade them to The reason is that the force used in self-defence must plead guilty of manslaughter. They are driven down be reasonable, but because of their experience of relentless another road that will lead to a conviction, but that is abuse and their physical disadvantage, women often not the justice of the situation. They plead guilty to reach for a weapon. As a result, their action is often manslaughter, are convicted and end up in prison. deemed disproportionate because, in examining whether That conviction will have consequences for their lives— something is reasonable, which is an objective test, the employment and so much else—when they have been question is asked, “Is it proportionate to what was at the receiving end of abuse. That is quite wrong. It is happening to her at the time?” in the hands of the Government to make a difference Of course, it might not seem proportionate if a and I call upon them to reconsider their position. woman runs to the kitchen drawer, or reaches to the I turn now to an interesting piece of academic work kitchen counter,and picks up a knife, or,as Sally Challen that was written under the names of Sheehy, Stubbs did, reaches for a hammer and causes a fatal blow to and Tolmie in 2012. It is about defences against homicide her controlling, abusive husband. I even represented a from battered women, as a comparative analysis of woman who took a rolling pin and hit her husband, laws in Australia, Canada and New Zealand. This causing an injury to his skull that ended in his loss of House can be persuaded by research from elsewhere, if life. But he had abused her over years and years, and changes have been made in other common law she could not take any more. So, we have to look at the jurisdictions. It would be good for us to take a lead. ways in which we can contextualise this form of abuse, When Theresa May introduced this legislation, she and look at why self-defence does not work for women. spoke of the United Kingdom leading the world in The research conducted in the report by the Centre for making changes to law that would bring proper justice Women’s Justice really lays it out very clearly. to anybody facing domestic abuse, particularly women. Seeing whether others have made those changes first is I just raise the comparison that I put before the not necessary, but it is helpful to look at research. House originally, when I spoke at Second Reading and then in Committee. I pointed out that there had already been a departure from the normal rules when dealing 9 pm with a householder. The Government’s response then The research by Sheehy,Stubbs and Tolmie shows that was to distinguish a householder’s fear if someone the same problems exist in other jurisdictions. In Canada, trespassed on to their property—an Englishman’s home they have tried to find ways of dealing with this by is his castle—as, not knowing who they may be, they contextualising. Self-defence would be measured as having may take a weapon from a drawer and use it fatally, to be grossly disproportionate only if the nexus was with from the position of a victim of domestic violence a context of domestic abuse. They then talk about how taking a weapon in her hand. tweaking away at other parts of it have not been successful. 1745 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1746

[BARONESS KENNEDY OF THE SHAWS] although we now call it the reasonable person test, as Self-defence is still a problem in these three jurisdictions. though that cancels out the problems. However, it They point out that the guilty pleas women end up does not do that because you have to weave in aspects tendering to lesser charges of manslaughter because of the woman’s experience. The threat must be of they cannot invoke self-defence mean that they risk death or of serious harm. The question is asked, “Did compromising their innocence. They deny themselves he actually say that he was going to kill you if you did the acquittal they would be deserving of if the law not hide his gun?” But he does not have to say the were fairer. That is the reason for Amendment 50. words because she will know that that threat was Amendment 51 draws on a similar experience of persistent while they were living together. women not being able to use the law because it was manmade. It did not ever contemplate the circumstances Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con): My Lords, I in the lives of women coerced and compelled into acts am sorry to interrupt the noble Baroness. I appreciate they are not consenting to in the ordinary way because that she has three amendments to introduce— of the ways they have to live with partners. I was taken Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws (Lab) [V]: The with what the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, just said third one does not count. about compliance being rewarded and defiance being punished—that toxic way of having to live with an Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con): She has abusive partner, where you are having to please and do taken 20 minutes to do so already and the House is things to prevent abusive conduct. keen to debate the amendments she is putting forward. Amendment 51 is the second statutory defence we If she could do so briefly, it will give noble Lords the are seeking to introduce. This provides a defence where opportunity to do just that. a person is compelled to commit a crime because they live in a situation of domestic abuse. They live in fear, Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws (Lab) [V]: I feel under the control of their abusive partner and there is that that was unnecessary, but I was coming to my a history of domestic abuse. There has to be the nexus conclusion anyway.There must be a causal link between with domestic abuse. It is not about everybody being the threat and the decision of the defendant to break able to make the claim; there would have to be that the law, and that is a high bar. I strongly urge the history. There would have to be evidence of abuse and House to support this new statutory defence for women of being compelled to commit the crime. who are compelled to commit crimes so that they can It happens and the circumstances will be familiar to put it before the court where it can be tested and people who have dealings with the courts: where women measured evidentially. If it passes the test, she can be who are abused and under the control of their partner acquitted. are forced to store stolen goods, hide guns or drugs and Amendment 66 is a list of the offences to which this end up before the courts. They end up losing their liberty would not apply because of their gravity. I hope that and are separated from their children. It is a horrible the Crown does not think that there are two kinds of cycle: their children are taken into care; if they live in victims: those who are somehow deserving and those council accommodation, they lose their accommodation who are undeserving. The end of the road is when and the destruction becomes intergenerational. We women are forced to do things that take them into the really have to examine this to see whether we can find criminal ambit because of a history of abuse. I beg to a fairer and more just way of doing things. move. The general principle of criminal law is that those Lord Randall of Uxbridge (Con) [V]: My Lords, we who chose to break the law are held responsible for have heard a passionate and erudite speech by the their crime, and so it should be. But this amendment noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws. I have would create an exception. The exception is on the attached my name to her Amendment 51 principally grounds that the choice is not being made voluntarily. because I was struck by the similarity,which is mentioned It is not going to apply in every case, but it will in in the explanatory statement, to what is set out in the cases where there is clear evidence of coercion, a fear Modern Slavery Act 2015, where someone cannot be of violence or being killed by a partner and a sense of found guilty of committing a criminal act if they have powerlessness, which we know is the experience of been subjected to the coercion of modern slavery. I those subject to serious domestic abuse. can see the same parallel between that and the domestic It is not one size fits all, which was a concern abuse situation which has been put so well by the expressed by the noble Baroness, Lady Fox of Buckley. noble Baroness. I therefore say, in the interests of This is very much about looking at the evidence in a brevity, that the noble Baroness has said it all and I particular case and creating a nexus between the history shall support her, certainly on Amendment 51, if she of abuse and the compelling of someone to commit a puts it to a vote. crime. The question will arise: what is wrong with duress? Is duress not a defence in law? I should say Baroness Hamwee (LD) [V]: My Lords, I am glad that duress rarely avails itself to any defendant because that the noble Baroness is intent on pursuing these two it sets such a high bar. It is particularly hard for amendments, to which I have added my name. She women who have been abused. Again, the tests are mentioned a report published recently by the Centre unsuitable for this situation because, of course, they for Women’s Justice. The report mentioned that a turn on questions such as, “Was the threat such that it defendant must be prepared, which I think means in would overbear the will of an ordinary person?”There is both senses of the term, to disclose in court in the also what used to be called the reasonable man test, presence of the deceased’s family, how he—it is usually 1747 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1748 he—had treated her; it is usually her. I would add to are not mutually exclusive—the Minister takes the that the further difficulty of disclosing the behaviour view that there are occasions when Parliament should in the relationship in front of one’s own family. Shame lead the way. is another component of what we have been discussing, however misplaced it is. 9.15 pm I mention this because I want to use this opportunity I find it difficult to accept, and indeed I cannot to ask the Minister about the MoJ’s review of the accept, that there can be a householder defence—“the issues raised in this debate. I heard the Secretary of Englishman’s home is his castle”, which some called State for Justice being interviewed yesterday about the for—but not an equivalent defence in the extreme sentencing Bill which has just been introduced in the cases dealt with by Amendment 50. Commons. He talked about the views of a victim’s I have also added my name to Amendment 51. In family.He referred to the victims’ commissioner, having Committee, I referred to the Modern Slavery Act, talked to her about the disproportionately high sentences which the noble Lord, Lord Randall, mentioned, and imposed because the weaker partner, as has been I do not want to repeat that. But I came across a referred to, had to arm herself because she could not briefing from the Prison Reform Trust that included a defend herself with her bare hands against a stronger paper from the Criminal Bar Association, written in person. Can the Minister tell us more? There is clearly 2017. It addressed the potential application of duress a relationship between this and what we are discussing to domestic abuse and coercion. It quoted the noble in the context of these amendments. Amendment 50 is and learned Baroness, Lady Hale, in the 2005 case of not about sentencing but about culpability, and if Hasan—as usual, she was in the vanguard—and I there should be a review, we should not delay. cannot do better than to quote her. Although it was During the Bill’s passage, I have been struck by how obiter, what she said was very clear and relevant: fast our understanding of domestic abuse has been “I have no difficulties envisaging circumstances in which a developing. The noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy,referred person may be coerced to act unlawfully. The battered wife”— to this. In Committee, the right reverend Prelate said we have moved on from that sort of terminology, but that she is a passionate defender of trauma-informed this was in 2005— interventions. I am with her there. Would we have “knows very well that she may be compelled to cook the dinner, heard that 10 years ago? Perhaps 10 years ago, because wash the dishes, iron the shirts and submit to sexual intercourse. that was post Corston, but it would have been quite That should not deprive her of the defence of duress if she is rare in the sort of debate that we are having now, not obliged by the same threats to herself or her children to commit … in specialised circles and among professionals, but in perjury or shoplift food It is one thing to deny the defence (of duress) to people who choose to become members of illegal this sort of debate. organizations, join criminal gangs, or engage with others in drug Reading the report that I have just referred to, I was related criminality. It is another thing to deny it to someone who struck by the observation that often abuse is disclosed has quite a different reason for becoming associated with the very late, sometimes after conviction, especially when duressor and then finds it difficult to escape. I do not believe that this limitation on the defence is aimed at battered wives at all, or abuse has taken the form of coercive control. The at others in close personal or family relationships with their noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy, explained in Committee duressors and their associates, such as their mothers, brothers and that this was the form of abuse in all the cases that she sisters.” had been involved in. So much of our debate has These are important amendments, and we support touched on, if not centred on, training. I refer to this them enthusiastically. here because it is a shorthand way of referring to a thorough understanding of the subject, or as thorough as it can be, while understanding of the whole issue The Lord Bishop of Gloucester [V]: My Lords, I continues to develop. spoke in support of Amendments 50 and 66 in Committee and have added my name to them again. I remind In Committee, the Minister, when arguing for the noble Lords of my interests as listed in the register. As status quo, said that it is important to ensure that ever,I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy, wherever possible, people do not resort to criminal for setting out the amendments so clearly and with behaviour—well, indeed. The amendment proposed is such expertise. It is also a privilege to follow the noble quite limited. To quote from the 2008 Act as amended Baroness, Lady Hamwee, and I echo all that she has for the householder cases, said. “the degree of force used by D is not to be regarded as having I speak not as a lawyer but as the Anglican Bishop been reasonable in the circumstances as D believed them to be if it for prisons and a long-time advocate for women in the was grossly disproportionate in those circumstances.” criminal justice system. There is still a great need for He also argued, as, he said, an “enthusiastic” fan of reform. In recent years, it has been recognised that we the common law, that need to rethink how women in the criminal justice “the courts are quicker, more nuanced and more flexible in system are treated and their paths straightened. With developing the common law”.—[Official Report, 3/2/21; col. 2285.] the Female Offender Strategy, the Government seem They are not quick, nuanced, and flexible enough, or to have conceded to a more nuanced approach but we we would not be having this debate. I do not know the are still waiting for it to be fully implemented. genesis of the 2008 Act but clearly it was thought then Here is an opportunity for the Government to that it was necessary to produce legislation on reasonable recognise that far too many women in prison or under force for the purposes of self-defence, and then of supervision in the community are survivors of domestic course we had the householder defence. I hope that as abuse and that that unimaginable experience has driven an equally enthusiastic parliamentarian—the enthusiasms them to offend. If we are convinced of the need to 1749 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1750

[THE LORD BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER] of the criminal justice system to women who kill protect all survivors of domestic abuse then we have a abusive partners and the way the law itself, and the moral obligation to dig deeper and extend that protection way it is applied, prevent women from accessing justice. to all those, mainly women, who have offended while Women who have been abused by the man they kill being coerced or controlled by an abusive partner, as are unlikely to be acquitted on the basis of self-defence. we have heard. The experiences of those who retaliate Of the 92 cases included in the research for the report, against abusive partners in self-defence or after years 40—that is 43%—were convicted of murder. Some of horrific abuse must be taken into account. Protection 42—that is 46%—were convicted of manslaughter, must be afforded to those who are compelled to offend and just six, which is only 7%, were acquitted. The use as part of, or as a direct result of, their experience of of weapons is an aggravating factor in determining the abuse. sentence, and the report found that, in 73 cases—that There are many outstanding organisations that support is 79%—the women used a weapon to kill their partner. vulnerable women in the criminal justice system, not This is fairly unsurprising, given women’s relative size least women’scentres such as the one run by Nelson Trust and physical strength and their knowledge of their in Gloucester or Anawim in Birmingham. They, along partner’s capacity to be violent. with others, have numerous stories to tell of how However, as other noble Lords have pointed out, domestic abuse has driven someone to use force against this contrasts with the legal leeway given to householders their abuser. I am a big advocate of community-based if they kill or injure a burglar. Therefore, we need support, which, as we have heard, offers a holistic, legislative reform to extend provisions of householder trauma-informed response to these women. I am glad defence to women who use force against their abuser. about the development of much-needed, police-led It is discriminatory to have a defence available to diversion work, and that judges and magistrates have householders defending themselves but not to women been given the resources and information to sentence in abusive relationships defending themselves against women appropriately. someone who they know can be dangerous and violent However, this legislation is also required here. As I towards them. said in Committee, we are not talking in the abstract. In the week that Sarah Everard was abducted and, The decisions we make have a real and lasting impact we suppose, killed—because remains have been found on people’s lives. The most vulnerable, with limited life in a woodland in Kent—I argue that, at the next choices, deserve our attention and voice. However, if opportunity for any Bill that is appropriate, I might the compassionate argument is not strong enough and put in an amendment to create a curfew for men on finance is your only focus, it makes no sense to spend the streets after 6 pm. I feel this would make women a nearly £50,000 a year to lock someone in prison when lot safer, and discrimination of all kinds would be about £5,000 a year would enable a women’s centre, lessened. with professional expertise, to support, holistically in However, once convicted, women’s chances of the community, someone who has been diverted from successful appeal are extremely slim. Society’s the criminal justice process, in recognition that their understanding of domestic abuse has come such a alleged offending was the direct result of their experience long way, even in the last few years, yet a jury is forced of abuse—and where their prosecution would not be to apply outdated ideas of self-defence,such as responding in the public interest. This legislation will enable that to a threat of imminent harm, which have no relation to to happen. the realities of domestic abuse. The Government have said that they are persuaded Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP): My Lords, I on the issue but will agree with every word that we have heard so far, and I “monitor the use of the existing defences and keep under review have signed all three of these amendments—I think the need for any statutory changes.” that they are superb and have been carefully and I simply do not believe that that is true. It is not expertly drafted. It is deeply unfortunate that the appropriate for the sort of crimes that we are talking Government have not adopted them as part of their about. As such, can the Minister please tell me which unusually co-operative approach in this Bill. Minister is charged with this review, how many civil The need is very clear: the deeply sad Sally Challen servants are involved and when will they report? case was only one proof point of the lack of legal protection available for survivors of domestic abuse. Lord Paddick (LD) [V]: My Lords, my noble friend Women get a terrible deal in the criminal justice system. Lady Hamwee has already set out our support for all Most are there for non-violent offences, and many are three of these amendments but I want to address the there for really minor things like not paying their TV Minister’s remarks in Committee on Amendment 50. licence. However, sometimes, violence does happen, I have seen misogyny described as the hatred of and, where that is related to domestic abuse, there women who fail to accept the subordinate role ascribed needs to be a sufficient legal defence to recognise the to them by a patriarchal society, who fail to conform reduced culpability. to the misogynist’s belief that women should be no It is obvious that judges and, sometimes, lawyers do more than compliant and decorative, whose role is to not understand coercive control and other abuses. The serve the needs of men. Out of such a false and excellent report from the Centre for Women’s Justice, outdated narrative comes the idea that physically stronger which the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, men should stand and fight while physically weaker referred to, is called Women Who Kill—I will give a women should run away. I am very sad to say that this copy of the executive summary to the Minister afterwards appeared to be the Government’s position when we to make sure that he reads it. It lays out the response discussed these amendments in Committee. 1751 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1752

In Committee, the Minister said correctly that what 9.30 pm is sought is an extension to the current provisions to We then had what appeared to be an attempt to enable victims of domestic abuse to have the same level cling to the wreckage of the Government’s failed of protection as those acting in response to an intruder arguments: the assertion that the amendment in their home. That is, the degree of force used in “would need to be accompanied by guidance and training for the self-defence by the defendant would have to be grossly police, the CPS, the probation service, defence lawyers and the disproportionate rather than simply disproportionate. judiciary to ensure that it was applied as intended.”—[Official Report, 3/2/21; col. 2286.] The Minister suggested that judges have developed Well, I would jolly well hope so. Presumably, that is common law defences and that we should trust them exactly what happened when the Government enacted to apply these to domestic abuse cases. However, the Section 76 of the 2008 Act. If it was not a problem Government did not trust the judges when it came to then, it should not be a problem now. someone acting in response to an intruder in their I have the utmost respect for the Minister and I take home,passing primary legislation to change the acceptable full account of the fact that he repeatedly prefaced his degree of force to include disproportionate force in remarks in Committee with “We have been advised such circumstances by means of Section 76 of the that”. But I suggest to him, for the reasons I have Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. explained, that there is more of a case for this amendment The Minister took up the challenge I put to him to than there is for Section 76 of the 2008 Act. Perhaps demonstrate the difference between this amendment one of the reasons why the Government, and potentially and Section 76. He said that in the case of an intruder, noble Lords around the House, might disagree is that the householder is put in a position where they are they may more easily envisage themselves in the situation acting of confronting an intruder than of being the victim of domestic abuse. I do not blame them for that. Personally, “on instinct or in circumstances which subject them to intense I never understood why battered wives went back to stress.”—[Official Report, 3/2/21; col. 2285.] their abusers, until I became a victim of domestic He also noted that the amendment did not appear to violence myself. deal with the defendant’s option to retreat. Section 76 I have been in both these situations: being attacked makes it clear there is no duty for a householder to by an intruder and by a lover. From that objective retreat. With the greatest respect to the Minister, I position, I personally support Amendment 50 and we, suggest that it would appear from the Government’s as Liberal Democrats, support all the amendments in response that neither he nor those advising him have this group. I am glad that the noble Baroness, Lady been the victim of domestic violence. I have, and I can Kennedy of The Shaws, has said that she will press her tell the Minister that when you are cornered in your amendments to votes because we on these Benches own home—the one place where you should feel safe— will be voting with her. by an abusive partner who is using physical violence against you, you are subjected to intense stress Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op): My Lords, and there is a distinct possibility that you will react Amendment 50 is proposed by my noble friend instinctively. Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, along with Amendments 51 and 66. These amendments were debated in Committee As I said in Committee, in my experience, having and when my noble friend tests the opinion of the been physically threatened by an intruder and having House at the end of this debate, the Labour Benches been physically assaulted by my then partner, the will support her. Today and during Committee my intense stress is far worse and sustained when the noble friend, and other noble Lords who have spoken, person you rely on for love and affection snaps and have highlighted how domestic abuse can lead to attacks you or subjects you to abuse over a prolonged death. We all know of the terrible figures about women time. My own experience of domestic violence is that who die at the hands of a partner or former partner. retreat just encourages further violence. Why should a victim of domestic violence retreat but the victim of a My noble friend’s amendment draws attention to burglary stand and fight? the tragic situation where some women—the victims of the abuse—find themselves in the dock when they As noble Lords will have gathered by now, I am not have in the end killed their abuser, often after years of a believer in domestic abuse being defined as a gendered horrific abuse and in situations where they feared they crime—that it is overwhelmingly male violence against were going to be killed. The Sally Challen case is an women. In my case, it was the fact that my abusive example of where coercive control had not been fully partner was far stronger than me that meant he felt understood by the courts; further, pleading self-defence able to attack me. However, two-thirds of victims are has not been working for women. My noble friend, women and the overwhelming majority of them will who has many years of experience in the criminal be victims of male violence. Men are, on average, justice system, has told the House of truly tragic physically stronger than women and abusive men mayeven situations where women have not been treated fairly, seek out weaker women to facilitate their abuse. Women or where the horror of the situation that they and their are therefore far more likely to have to resort to the children found themselves in has not been properly use of a weapon in what would otherwise be an appreciated. unequal physical contest when they are attacked by These amendments seek to correct this imbalance a male partner. Their use of force is therefore and would, in my opinion, put the law in the right more likely to be considered disproportionate, albeit place by protecting those victims who have had to understandable. defend themselves in situations where they have feared 1753 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1754

[LORD KENNEDY OF SOUTHWARK] where an intruder, who is unlikely to be known to the for their life. The law should provide them with the householder, puts the householder in a position where ability to mount a defence, along with an understanding they react instinctively as a result of intense stress. By by the court of the horrors of domestic abuse and the comparison, in domestic abuse cases, the response need, when your life is in danger from an abusive may not be a sudden instinctual one but may follow partner or ex-partner, to take actions which are not years of physical and/or emotional abuse. grossly disproportionate to defend oneself. Furthermore—and this is an important point—the As my noble friend said, a situation often plays out current law on self-defence and loss of control allows where a woman is taken along a route where she has to that any previous and extended history of domestic plead guilty to manslaughter and is convicted. On abuse be taken into account. I respectfully disagree release from prison, such women have problems for with the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Jones the rest of their lives, for example with employment; of Moulsecoomb, that the law on self-defence is, to they may also find that they have lost their home, or use her word, outdated. It is not. As a result, it does their children may be taken into care. not seem necessary to extend Section 76 of the 2008 My noble friend also carefully explained the intent Act to a wider set of circumstances as proposed by this behind Amendment 51; the noble Lord, Lord Randall amendment, given the defences that already exist in law. of Uxbridge, drew attention to his support for it. It I note too that no mention has been given in this mirrors the coercive control provisions of the Modern new clause to a defendant’s option to retreat from the Slavery Act. abuse, and I make that point with due care.I acknowledge, The noble Lord, Lord Paddick, asked a powerful and am well aware, that an abused woman or man may question: why is it that victims of domestic abuse are not have that option. However, although Section 76 of meant to retreat while someone under attack from the 2008 Act makes clear that there is no duty to retreat, intruders in their home has greater protection? That the option to retreat remains a factor, and, where that cannot be right. is established on the facts of the particular case, it is a This has been a very good debate and I look forward matter that will always be taken into account. to the Minister’s response. As I said, we on these Therefore, although I warmly reciprocate the kind Benches will certainly support the noble Baroness words that the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, said about when she divides the House. me, and while I respect and acknowledge his personal history and experience, about which he has spoken Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, I am extremely movingly on a number of occasions, I know extremely grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy that he will not like what I am going to say. I stand by of The Shaws,for providing a full and detailed explanation the points that I have just made about the comparison of the reasons she believes that these amendments or lack thereof between the householder situation and should be included in this Bill. In addition to the noble the situation of a victim of domestic abuse. I think at Lords who have spoken today,I am aware of the support one point he came close to an implied charge of that these proposals received last Thursday evening at misogyny. I respectfully say that that does not easily sit the parliamentary event hosted by the noble Baroness with my approach to many amendments to the Bill or and Jess Phillips MP on this subject. So that noble Lords indeed the way in which I have dealt with the Bill itself. do not think that only Kennedys can support other The issue between us is one of principle. Kennedys, I join the noble Lord, Lord Kennedy of I am aware too that the noble Baroness who proposed Southwark, in acknowledging and paying tribute to the the amendments has stated that there are difficulties noble Baroness’s work in, and experience of, this area. with establishing the common-law defence of self-defence The noble Baroness has put two amendments before in cases of reactive violence by a survivor of domestic the House; they are conceptually distinct, so I will abuse against their abusive partner or former partner. address them in turn. Amendment 50 deals with the As I stated in Committee, the ethos of the Bill is to defence of the reasonable use of force by victims of improve and provide better support for victims of domestic abuse who, in self-defence, react to violence domestic abuse and to recognise and indeed highlight from an abusive partner. Amendment 51 would create the wide-ranging impacts and implications of such a new statutory defence for victims of domestic abuse behaviour. In raising the profile of domestic abuse, the who commit a criminal offence. The third amendment, Government hope to strengthen not only statutory Amendment 66, is intimately linked to and logically agency support for victims and survivors but to improve consequent on Amendment 51. the effectiveness of the justice system in better protecting I turn first to the reasonable use of force and those who suffer such abuse while bringing perpetrators Amendment 50. Although the Government are wholly to justice. sympathetic to the plight of victims of domestic abuse, we To that extent, I share the aims of the right reverend are unpersuaded that there is a gap in the law here that Prelate the Bishop of Gloucester. I assure her that this needs to be filled. Nor do we feel that the circumstances is not a question of finance; it is a question of the of a victim of domestic abuse, who has often experienced proper approach that the law should take in this area. that abuse over a prolonged period, are necessarily That is because it is important for the Government to comparable to that of a householder who suddenly ensure that there is fair and equal access to justice for finds an intruder in their home and acts instinctively. all. The law has to balance both the recognition of the Let me expand on that point. Section 76 of the abuse that has been suffered and the impact that it has Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 covers a had on a victim against the need to ensure that people, specific circumstance. Its focus is on those occasions wherever possible, do not revert to criminal behaviour. 1755 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1756

I was pleased to hear that the noble Baroness, remains problematic. If we accept that the proposed Lady Hamwee, agreed with me, at least on the latter statutory defence of compulsion to do an act is attributable proposition. The Government believe that that balance to a person being a victim of domestic abuse—rather is currently reflected in the law—a law that continues than a victim of trafficking, slavery or other relevant to evolve but nevertheless strikes the right balance exploitation under the Modern Slavery Act—the question between those factors. becomes: at what point in time, and to what type or In making that last point, I referred in Committee level of domestic abuse, should any statutory defence to the fact that courts can often be quicker, more be available? nuanced and more flexible in developing the common When it comes to providing a defence to a potentially law than can Parliament in introducing a statutory serious criminal charge, it is not appropriate simply to provision that can be too rigid and narrowly drawn say that there can be any level of abuse that gives rise and may become more problematic than useful. I to such a defence, which is a complete defence to the expressed myself as a fan of the common law, and I charge, or that such abuse can be defined, as the Bill confirm again this evening that my enthusiasm for it is does—and I am proud of that—in the widest possible undimmed. Of course I agree with the noble Baroness, sense. That is not the case with the provisions relating Lady Hamwee, that sometimes Parliament can lead to modern slavery. The defence there does not apply to the way—but not here. the widest definition of exploitation of a person, but Before I conclude my remarks on this amendment, instead applies to behaviour which meets an existing I shall reply to one other point made by the noble criminal offence threshold—a threshold for a reasonable Baroness, Lady Jones. She said that the Government person to withstand behaviour directed against them. have moved on several parts of the Bill, so why not Weare concerned about what could amount to domestic this one? The reason is that, for the reasons I have set abuse in this context, and therefore what could trigger out, there is a principled argument that we make and this absolute defence. That means that the position is which we stand by. I suggest that that argument is so wide-ranging that it potentially provides a full rooted properly in the way that the law is now applied defence to any criminal act, save those offences specifically and in the distinction between the domestic abuse case listed. That is the first broad point. and the householder case. Towards the end of her remarks, the noble Baroness asked me a couple of Secondly, the Government are also concerned that quickfire questions. I am not sure that I have picked a full defence for a defendant who has been subject them all up, so if, on reading the Official Report, I find to domestic abuse would create difficulties for other that they are relevant to this amendment, I will respond defendants who had been subject to other forms of to them. harm, such as racial harassment or sexual harassment Although the Government are sympathetic to the from strangers. aim behind Amendment 50, we remain entirely Thirdly, the proposed statutory defence would not unpersuaded that it is needed, given the current defences only overlap with existing defences and prosecution that exist in law and the increased help, support and policies, but undoubtedly cause confusion as to which advice that will be available to victims of domestic law or policy would be applicable. Uncertainty within abuse throughout the rest of the Bill. the criminal law is not to be welcomed, as it increases the risk of making the law inconsistent, unfair and 9.45 pm possibly ineffective. That is not in the interests of I now turn to the conceptually distinct Amendment 51 justice. and the linked Amendment 66. These propose a statutory defence for victims of domestic abuse who commit an Fourthly, the Government are aware of anecdotal offence. These amendments provide such a new statutory evidence from law enforcement partners and others defence for victims of domestic abuse who commit a that the Section 45 defence is being misused. I made criminal offence and set out the offences to which the that point in Committee. There are reports that some defence for victims of domestic abuse who commit an offenders are falsely claiming that they are victims of offence will not apply.The Government here also remain modern slavery to escape justice. That is a very worrying unpersuaded. We are unpersuaded that the model on development. It is why the Government are now working which the proposed new clause is based—Section 45 with criminal justice partners to assess how that defence of the Modern Slavery Act 2015—is either apt or is being used in practice, and why the Government are effective. so cautious about the creation of a similar defence which might also be abused in a similar manner. I make four broad points in this context. First, we are particularly concerned about the anomalies that There are currently several defences potentially available these amendments could create for other offences. As I in law to those who commit offences in circumstances stated in Committee, there are a range of serious connected with their involvement in an abusive relationship offences to which the Section 45 defence does not or situation. There are full defences—duress and self- apply.They are mainly serious sexual or violent offences, defence—as well as, in homicide cases, the partial and the Section 45 defence does not apply to avoid defences of loss of control or diminished responsibility. creating legal loopholes through which serious criminals These defences are available to a defendant who is a could escape justice. They are set out in Schedule 4 to victim of domestic abuse. Full defences, including the 2015 Act, which the amendment here seeks to duress and self-defence, are defences to any crime and, replicate. While I note that the proposed new schedule if pleaded successfully,result in acquittal. Partial defences, seeks to replicate that list of excepted offences,pinpointing such as diminished responsibility and loss of control, the behaviour that caused the offence nevertheless reduce a charge from murder to manslaughter. 1757 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1758

[LORD WOLFSON OF TREDEGAR] that and the householder is really without merit and Moreover, where a person accused of a criminal not convincing. I am sure he is having to read from a offence has been subjected to domestic abuse, this will brief and he will know himself. be considered throughout the criminal justice system, Anyone who really knows about domestic abuse from the police investigation, through the CPS charging knows that this is instinctive: when someone snaps, in decision, to defences under the existing law, and finally the end, it is because they cannot take any more. That as a mitigating factor in sentencing. One thing the Bill is why they reach for a weapon; they know that they does is raise awareness and understanding of the cannot take on the sort of force that they have experienced devastating impact of domestic abuse on victims,survivors in the past. This is a failure of understanding. It is and their families. But defendants also need to make being unable to stand in the shoes of someone in these sure that their legal representatives and the CPS are circumstances. aware, as soon as possible, of whether they have I do not blame the noble Lord, Lord Wolfson, in previously been a victim of domestic abuse and provide any way. It is just that there is a process of learning details of their domestic abuse history, as this will have here, which we have all been on. It may be easier to an impact on any charging decisions and when considering understand someone nearly being strangled, but harder guilty pleas. to understand the moment when, instinctively and in That will need to be offset against the recognition terror, a person who has been abused over a long period of the harm done by the perpetrator of the crime, and suddenly reaches for a weapon in their defence. Not to the impact on the victim. It is important to ensure, as I understand that is regrettable, so I will move both said earlier, that wherever possible, people do not these amendments and test the opinion of the House. resort to criminal behaviour. It is this ethos that is currently reflected in the law and which seeks to strike 9.55 pm the right balance between these various factors. For those reasons, the Government are unable to support Division conducted remotely on Amendment 50 the need for a new statutory defence, or indeed for a Contents 298; Not-Contents 241. new defence on the reasonable use of force by victims of domestic abuse. Given that defences are available Amendment 50 agreed. now in law, and given that courts can interpret and Division No. 3 take account of any previous history of domestic abuse in their consideration of a case before them, CONTENTS amendments seeking new defences are considered Adams of Craigielea, B. Brown of Eaton-under- unnecessary and likely to prove extremely problematic Addington, L. Heywood, L. in their application in practice. We will keep the current Adebowale, L. Browne of Ladyton, L. defences under review. Adonis, L. Bruce of Bennachie, L. Alderdice, L. Bryan of Partick, B. In response to the point made by the noble Baroness, Allan of Hallam, L. Bull, B. Lady Hamwee, about the discussion of the Bill in Alli, L. Burnett, L. another place, there is a distinction between the defence Alliance, L. Burt of Solihull, B. to an offence, which is what we are talking about, and Alton of Liverpool, L. Cameron of Dillington, L. the sentencing approach, which is, I think, what she Amos, B. Campbell of Pittenweem, L. Anderson of Ipswich, L. Campbell-Savours, L. was referring to. Anderson of Swansea, L. Carter of Coles, L. We will keep the position under review but, for the Andrews, B. Cashman, L. reasons I have set out, we have principled objections to Armstrong of Hill Top, B. Chakrabarti, B. both amendments. The noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy, Bach, L. Chandos, V. Bakewell of Hardington Chapman of Darlington, B. intends to divide the House on each amendment and, Mandeville, B. Chartres, L. as she has given that intimation of her intention, I Bakewell, B. Clancarty, E. invite all noble Lords to reject each of them. Barker, B. Clark of Kilwinning, B. Bassam of Brighton, L. Clark of Windermere, L. Beecham, L. Clement-Jones, L. The Deputy Speaker (The Earl of Kinnoull) (Non-Afl): Beith, L. Collins of Highbury, L. I have received no requests to speak after the Minister; Benjamin, B. Cooper of Windrush, L. accordingly, I call the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy Bennett of Manor Castle, B. Cox, B. of The Shaws. Berkeley, L. Crawley, B. Best, L. Crisp, L. Bichard, L. Cromwell, L. Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws (Lab) [V]: My Billingham, B. Cunningham of Felling, L. Lords, I am of course disappointed but not surprised Birt, L. Curry of Kirkharle, L. by the response, as it was indicated that I would not Blackstone, B. Davidson of Glen Clova, L. receive the response that some other amendments Blunkett, L. Davies of Brixton, L. have. It is regrettable, because all the evidence points Boateng, L. Davies of Oldham, L. Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury, Davies of Stamford, L. towards problems in both these areas. There are women B. Derby, Bp. being convicted of crimes where they have clearly been Bowles of Berkhamsted, B. Desai, L. coerced and their abusive partners are forcing them to Boycott, B. Devon, E. commit crime. In relation to homicide and, indeed, Bradley, L. Dholakia, L. lesser crimes, self-defence is not available to women Bradshaw, L. Donaghy, B. Brady, B. Donoughue, L. because of the “disproportionate” issue. The measure Brennan, L. Doocey, B. should be just the same as in the intruder case. The Brinton, B. Drake, B. distinction that the noble Lord seeks to make between Brown of Cambridge, B. Dubs, L. 1759 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1760

Eames, L. Lister of Burtersett, B. Sheehan, B. Thornton, B. Elder, L. London, Bp. Sherlock, B. Thurlow, L. Evans of Watford, L. Ludford, B. Shipley, L. Thurso, V. Falconer of Thoroton, L. MacKenzie of Culkein, L. Sikka, L. Tope, L. Featherstone, B. Mackenzie of Framwellgate, Simon, V. Touhig, L. Finlay of Llandaff, B. L. Smith of Basildon, B. Triesman, L. Foster of Bath, L. Mair, L. Smith of Finsbury, L. Tunnicliffe, L. Foulkes of Cumnock, L. Mallalieu, B. Smith of Gilmorehill, B. Turnberg, L. Fox, L. Manchester, Bp. Smith of Kelvin, L. Tyler of Enfield, B. Smith of Newnham, B. Freyberg, L. Mandelson, L. Tyler, L. Gale, B. Mann, L. Snape, L. Somerset, D. Uddin, B. Garden of Frognal, B. Marks of Henley-on-Thames, Verjee, L. German, L. L. Southwark, Bp. St Albans, Bp. Walker of Aldringham, L. Giddens, L. Masham of Ilton, B. Wallace of Saltaire, L. Glasman, L. Massey of Darwen, B. Stair, E. Stephen, L. Wallace of Tankerness, L. Gloucester, Bp. Maxton, L. Walmsley, B. Goddard of Stockport, L. McAvoy, L. Stern, B. Warwick of Undercliffe, B. Golding, B. McConnell of Glenscorrodale, Stevenson of Balmacara, L. Goudie, B. L. Stone of Blackheath, L. Watson of Invergowrie, L. Grantchester, L. McDonagh, B. Stoneham of Droxford, L. Watts, L. Greaves, L. McIntosh of Hudnall, B. Storey, L. West of Spithead, L. Greengross, B. McKenzie of Luton, L. Stowell of Beeston, B. Wheatcroft, B. Greenway, L. McNally, L. Strasburger, L. Wheeler, B. Grender, B. McNicol of West Kilbride, L. Stuart of Edgbaston, B. Whitaker, B. Grey-Thompson, B. Meacher, B. Stunell, L. Whitty, L. Griffiths of Burry Port, L. Mendelsohn, L. Suttie, B. Wigley, L. Grocott, L. Miller of Chilthorne Domer, Taverne, L. Wilcox of Newport, B. Hain, L. B. Taylor of Bolton, B. Willis of Knaresborough, L. Hamwee, B. Mitchell, L. Taylor of Goss Moor, L. Wood of Anfield, L. Hanworth, V. Monks, L. Teverson, L. Woodley, L. Harris of Haringey, L. Morgan of Drefelin, B. Thomas of Gresford, L. Worcester, Bp. Harris of Richmond, B. Morgan of Huyton, B. Thomas of Winchester, B. Wrigglesworth, L. Haskel, L. Morris of Aberavon, L. Thornhill, B. Young of Old Scone, B. Haughey, L. Morris of Yardley, B. Haworth, L. Neuberger, B. NOT CONTENTS Hayman of Ullock, B. Newby, L. Hayman, B. Northover, B. Aberdare, L. Choudrey, L. Hayter of Kentish Town, B. Nye, B. Agnew of Oulton, L. Clarke of Nottingham, L. Healy of Primrose Hill, B. Oates, L. Anelay of St Johns, B. Coe, L. Henig, B. O’Loan, B. Arran, E. Colgrain, L. Hilton of Eggardon, B. O’Neill of Bengarve, B. Ashton of Hyde, L. Colwyn, L. Hogan-Howe, L. Osamor, B. Balfe, L. Cormack, L. Hollick, L. Paddick, L. Barran, B. Courtown, E. Hollins, B. Palmer of Childs Hill, L. Barwell, L. Couttie, B. Howarth of Newport, L. Pannick, L. Bates, L. Craig of Radley, L. Hoyle, L. Parekh, L. Bellingham, L. Craigavon, V. Humphreys, B. Parminter, B. Benyon, L. Crathorne, L. Hunt of Bethnal Green, B. Patel, L. Berridge, B. Cruddas, L. Hunt of Kings Heath, L. Pinnock, B. Bethell, L. Cumberlege, B. Hussain, L. Pitkeathley, B. Black of Brentwood, L. Dannatt, L. Hussein-Ece, B. Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L. Blackwell, L. Davies of Gower, L. Janke, B. Prashar, B. Blackwood of North Oxford, De Mauley, L. Jay of Paddington, B. Prescott, L. B. Deech, B. Jolly, B. Primarolo, B. Blencathra, L. Dobbs, L. Jones of Cheltenham, L. Prosser, B. Bloomfield of Hinton Dodds of Duncairn, L. Jones of Moulsecoomb, B. Purvis of Tweed, L. Waldrist, B. Duncan of Springbank, L. Jones of Whitchurch, B. Puttnam, L. Borwick, L. Dunlop, L. Jones, L. Quin, B. Botham, L. Eaton, B. Jordan, L. Ramsay of Cartvale, B. Bottomley of Nettlestone, B. Eccles of Moulton, B. Judd, L. Ramsbotham, L. Bourne of Aberystwyth, L. Eccles, V. Kennedy of Cradley, B. Randall of Uxbridge, L. Brabazon of Tara, L. Empey, L. Kennedy of Southwark, L. Randerson, B. Bridges of Headley, L. Erroll, E. Kennedy of The Shaws, B. Razzall, L. Browne of Belmont, L. Evans of Bowes Park, B. Kerslake, L. Rebuck, B. Browning, B. Fairfax of Cameron, L. Khan of Burnley, L. Redesdale, L. Brownlow of Shurlock Row, Fairhead, B. Kidron, B. Rennard, L. L. Falkner of Margravine, B. Kingsmill, B. Ricketts, L. Buscombe, B. Farmer, L. Kramer, B. Ritchie of Downpatrick, B. Butler of Brockwell, L. Faulks, L. Lawrence of Clarendon, B. Roberts of Llandudno, L. Butler-Sloss, B. Fink, L. Layard, L. Rooker, L. Caine, L. Finkelstein, L. Lea of Crondall, L. Rosser, L. Caithness, E. Fleet, B. Lee of Trafford, L. Rowlands, L. Callanan, L. Fookes, B. Lennie, L. Royall of Blaisdon, B. Carey of Clifton, L. Forsyth of Drumlean, L. Levy, L. Russell of Liverpool, L. Carrington, L. Foster of Oxton, B. Liddell of Coatdyke, B. Sandwich, E. Cathcart, E. Fox of Buckley, B. Liddle, L. Scott of Needham Market, B. Chadlington, L. Framlingham, L. Lincoln, Bp. Scriven, L. Chalker of Wallasey, B. Fraser of Craigmaddie, B. Lipsey, L. Sharkey, L. Chisholm of Owlpen, B. Freud, L. 1761 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1762

Frost, L. Montrose, D. Wharton of Yarm, L. Wyld, B. Fullbrook, B. Morgan of Cotes, B. Whitby, L. Young of Cookham, L. Gadhia, L. Morris of Bolton, B. Williams of Trafford, B. Gardiner of Kimble, L. Morrissey, B. Wolfson of Tredegar, L. Younger of Leckie, V. Gardner of Parkes, B. Morrow, L. Garnier, L. Moylan, L. 10.08 pm Geddes, L. Moynihan, L. Gilbert of Panteg, L. Nash, L. Glenarthur, L. Neville-Jones, B. Glendonbrook, L. Neville-Rolfe, B. Amendment 51 Godson, L. Newlove, B. Moved by Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws Goldie, B. Nicholson of Winterbourne, Goldsmith of Richmond B. 51: After Clause 68, insert the following new Clause— Park, L. Noakes, B. “Defence for victims of domestic abuse who commit an offence Goodlad, L. Northbrook, L. Grabiner, L. Norton of Louth, L. (1) A person is not guilty of an offence if— Grade of Yarmouth, L. Parkinson of Whitley Bay, L. (a) the person is aged 18 or over when the person does Greenhalgh, L. Patten of Barnes, L. the act which constitutes the offence, Griffiths of Fforestfach, L. Penn, B. (b) the person does that act because the person is Grimstone of Boscobel, L. Pickles, L. compelled to do it, Hailsham, V. Pidding, B. Hamilton of Epsom, L. Polak, L. (c) the compulsion is attributable to their being a Hammond of Runnymede, L. Popat, L. victim of domestic abuse, and Hannan of Kingsclere, L. Porter of Spalding, L. (d) a reasonable person in the same situation as the Hannay of Chiswick, L. Price, L. person and having the person’s relevant characteristics Harris of Peckham, L. Ranger, L. would have no realistic alternative to doing that act. Haselhurst, L. Ravensdale, L. Hay of Ballyore, L. Rawlings, B. (2) A person may be compelled to do something by another Hayward, L. Reay, L. person or by the person’s circumstances. Henley, L. Redfern, B. (3) Compulsion is attributable to domestic abuse only if— Herbert of South Downs, L. Renfrew of Kaimsthorn, L. (a) it is, or is part of, conduct which constitutes domestic Hill of Oareford, L. Ridley, V. abuse as defined in sections 1 and 2 of this Act, Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, Risby, L. L. Robathan, L. including but not limited to conduct which constitutes Hoey, B. Rock, B. the offence of controlling or coercive behaviour in Hogg, B. Rogan, L. an intimate or family relationship as defined in Holmes of Richmond, L. Rose of Monewden, L. section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 (controlling Hooper, B. Rotherwick, L. or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family Horam, L. Sanderson of Welton, B. relationship), or Howard of Lympne, L. Sarfraz, L. (b) it is a direct consequence of a person being, or Howard of Rising, L. Sassoon, L. having been, a victim of such abuse. Howe, E. Sater, B. (4) A person is not guilty of an offence if— Howell of Guildford, L. Scott of Bybrook, B. Hunt of Wirral, L. Seccombe, B. (a) the person is under the age of 18 when the person Jenkin of Kennington, B. Selkirk of Douglas, L. does the act which constitutes the offence, Johnson of Marylebone, L. Sharpe of Epsom, L. (b) the person does that act as a direct consequence of Jopling, L. Sheikh, L. the person being, or having been, a victim of domestic Kamall, L. Shephard of Northwold, B. abuse as defined at subsection (3)(a) above, and Keen of Elie, L. Sherbourne of Didsbury, L. Kilclooney, L. Shields, B. (c) a reasonable person in the same situation as the King of Bridgwater, L. Shinkwin, L. person and having the person’s relevant characteristics Kirkham, L. Shrewsbury, E. would do that act. Kirkhope of Harrogate, L. Smith of Hindhead, L. (5) For the purposes of this section “relevant characteristics” Lamont of Lerwick, L. Stedman-Scott, B. means age, sex, any physical or mental illness or disability Lancaster of Kimbolton, L. Sterling of Plaistow, L. and any experience of domestic abuse. Lang of Monkton, L. Stewart of Dirleton, L. Lansley, L. Strathclyde, L. (6) In this section references to an act include an omission. Leigh of Hurley, L. Stroud, B. (7) Subsections (1) and (4) do not apply to an offence listed Lexden, L. Sugg, B. in Schedule (Offences to which the defence for victims of Lilley, L. Suri, L. domestic abuse who commit an offence does not apply). Lindsay, E. Swinfen, L. Lingfield, L. Taylor of Holbeach, L. (8) The Secretary of State may by regulations amend Schedule Liverpool, E. Taylor of Warwick, L. (Offences to which the defence for victims of domestic Livingston of Parkhead, L. Tebbit, L. abuse who commit an offence does not apply). Lothian, M. Trefgarne, L. (9) The Secretary of State must make arrangements for Mackay of Clashfern, L. Trenchard, V. monitoring of the types of offence for which victims of Mancroft, L. True, L. domestic abuse are prosecuted and use this evidence to Manzoor, B. Tugendhat, L. inform an annual review of the offences listed in Maude of Horsham, L. Udny-Lister, L. Schedule (Offences to which the defence for victims of Mawson, L. Ullswater, V. domestic abuse who commit an offence does not apply) McColl of Dulwich, L. Vaizey of Didcot, L. and any amendment to Schedule (Offences to which the McGregor-Smith, B. Vere of Norbiton, B. defence for victims of domestic abuse who commit an McInnes of Kilwinning, L. Verma, B. offence does not apply).” McLoughlin, L. Vinson, L. Mendoza, L. Wakeham, L. Member’s explanatory statement Meyer, B. Waldegrave of North Hill, L. This new Clause would provide a statutory defence for survivors Mobarik, B. Wasserman, L. of domestic abuse, in some circumstances, who commit an offence. It Mone, B. Wei, L. is closely modelled on section 45 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015. 1763 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1764

10.08 pm Khan of Burnley, L. Ritchie of Downpatrick, B. Kidron, B. Roberts of Llandudno, L. Division conducted remotely on Amendment 51 Kingsmill, B. Robertson of Port Ellen, L. Kramer, B. Rooker, L. Contents 283; Not-Contents 245. Lawrence of Clarendon, B. Rosser, L. Layard, L. Royall of Blaisdon, B. Amendment 51 agreed. Lea of Crondall, L. Russell of Liverpool, L. Division No. 4 Lee of Trafford, L. Sandwich, E. Leitch, L. Scott of Needham Market, B. CONTENTS Lennie, L. Scriven, L. Levy, L. Sheehan, B. Adams of Craigielea, B. Derby, Bp. Liddell of Coatdyke, B. Sherlock, B. Addington, L. Dholakia, L. Liddle, L. Shipley, L. Adebowale, L. Donaghy, B. Lincoln, Bp. Sikka, L. Alderdice, L. Donoughue, L. Lipsey, L. Simon, V. Allan of Hallam, L. Doocey, B. Lister of Burtersett, B. Smith of Basildon, B. Alli, L. Drake, B. London, Bp. Smith of Finsbury, L. Alton of Liverpool, L. D’Souza, B. Ludford, B. Smith of Gilmorehill, B. Amos, B. Dubs, L. MacKenzie of Culkein, L. Smith of Kelvin, L. Anderson of Swansea, L. Eatwell, L. Mackenzie of Framwellgate, Smith of Newnham, B. Armstrong of Hill Top, B. Elder, L. L. Snape, L. Bach, L. Featherstone, B. Mair, L. Soley, L. Bakewell of Hardington Foster of Bath, L. Mallalieu, B. Somerset, D. Mandeville, B. Foulkes of Cumnock, L. Manchester, Bp. Southwark, Bp. Bakewell, B. Fox, L. Mandelson, L. Stair, E. Barker, B. Freyberg, L. Marks of Henley-on-Thames, Stephen, L. Bassam of Brighton, L. Gale, B. L. Stern, B. Beith, L. Garden of Frognal, B. Masham of Ilton, B. Stevenson of Balmacara, L. Benjamin, B. German, L. Massey of Darwen, B. Stone of Blackheath, L. Bennett of Manor Castle, B. Giddens, L. Maxton, L. Stoneham of Droxford, L. Berkeley, L. Gloucester, Bp. McAvoy, L. Storey, L. Best, L. Goddard of Stockport, L. McConnell of Glenscorrodale, Stowell of Beeston, B. Bichard, L. Golding, B. L. Stuart of Edgbaston, B. Billingham, B. Goudie, B. McDonagh, B. Stunell, L. Birt, L. Grantchester, L. McIntosh of Hudnall, B. Suttie, B. Blower, B. Greaves, L. McKenzie of Luton, L. Taverne, L. Blunkett, L. Greengross, B. McNally, L. Taylor of Bolton, B. Boateng, L. Greenway, L. McNicol of West Kilbride, L. Taylor of Goss Moor, L. Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury, Grender, B. Meacher, B. Teverson, L. B. Grey-Thompson, B. Mendelsohn, L. Thomas of Gresford, L. Bowles of Berkhamsted, B. Grocott, L. Miller of Chilthorne Domer, Thomas of Winchester, B. Boycott, B. Hain, L. B. Thornhill, B. Bradley, L. Hamwee, B. Mitchell, L. Thornton, B. Bradshaw, L. Harries of Pentregarth, L. Morris of Aberavon, L. Thurlow, L. Brennan, L. Harris of Haringey, L. Morris of Yardley, B. Thurso, V. Brinton, B. Harris of Richmond, B. Murphy of Torfaen, L. Tope, L. Brown of Eaton-under- Haskel, L. Neuberger, B. Touhig, L. Heywood, L. Haughey, L. Newby, L. Triesman, L. Browne of Ladyton, L. Haworth, L. Northover, B. Tunnicliffe, L. Bruce of Bennachie, L. Hayman of Ullock, B. Nye, B. Turnberg, L. Bryan of Partick, B. Hayman, B. Oates, L. Tyler of Enfield, B. Bull, B. Hayter of Kentish Town, B. O’Loan, B. Tyler, L. Burnett, L. Healy of Primrose Hill, B. O’Neill of Bengarve, B. Uddin, B. Burt of Solihull, B. Henig, B. Osamor, B. Verjee, L. Campbell of Pittenweem, L. Hilton of Eggardon, B. Paddick, L. Walker of Aldringham, L. Campbell-Savours, L. Hogan-Howe, L. Palmer of Childs Hill, L. Wallace of Saltaire, L. Carter of Coles, L. Hollick, L. Parminter, B. Walmsley, B. Cashman, L. Hollins, B. Patel, L. Walney, L. Cavendish of Little Venice, B. Howarth of Newport, L. Pinnock, B. Warwick of Undercliffe, B. Chakrabarti, B. Hoyle, L. Pitkeathley, B. Watson of Invergowrie, L. Chandos, V. Hughes of Stretford, B. Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L. Watts, L. Chapman of Darlington, B. Humphreys, B. Prashar, B. West of Spithead, L. Chartres, L. Hunt of Bethnal Green, B. Prescott, L. Wheatcroft, B. Clancarty, E. Hunt of Kings Heath, L. Primarolo, B. Wheeler, B. Clark of Kilwinning, B. Hussain, L. Prosser, B. Whitaker, B. Clark of Windermere, L. Hussein-Ece, B. Purvis of Tweed, L. Whitty, L. Clement-Jones, L. Janke, B. Puttnam, L. Wigley, L. Cohen of Pimlico, B. Jolly, B. Quin, B. Wilcox of Newport, B. Collins of Highbury, L. Jones of Cheltenham, L. Ramsay of Cartvale, B. Willis of Knaresborough, L. Crawley, B. Jones of Moulsecoomb, B. Randall of Uxbridge, L. Wills, L. Crisp, L. Jones of Whitchurch, B. Randerson, B. Wilson of Dinton, L. Cromwell, L. Jones, L. Ravensdale, L. Wood of Anfield, L. Cunningham of Felling, L. Judd, L. Razzall, L. Woodley, L. Curry of Kirkharle, L. Kennedy of Cradley, B. Rebuck, B. Woolf, L. Davidson of Glen Clova, L. Kennedy of Southwark, L. Redesdale, L. Worcester, Bp. Davies of Brixton, L. Kennedy of The Shaws, B. Rees of Ludlow, L. Wrigglesworth, L. Davies of Oldham, L. Kerr of Kinlochard, L. Rennard, L. Young of Hornsey, B. Davies of Stamford, L. Kerslake, L. Ricketts, L. Young of Norwood Green, L. 1765 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1766

NOT CONTENTS Livingston of Parkhead, L. Robathan, L. Lothian, M. Rock, B. Aberdare, L. Fall, B. Mackay of Clashfern, L. Rose of Monewden, L. Agnew of Oulton, L. Farmer, L. Mancroft, L. Rotherwick, L. Ahmad of Wimbledon, L. Fink, L. Manzoor, B. Sanderson of Welton, B. Anderson of Ipswich, L. Finkelstein, L. McColl of Dulwich, L. Sarfraz, L. Anelay of St Johns, B. Finn, B. McCrea of Magherafelt and Sassoon, L. Arbuthnot of Edrom, L. Fleet, B. Cookstown, L. Sater, B. Arran, E. Fookes, B. McGregor-Smith, B. Scott of Bybrook, B. Ashton of Hyde, L. Forsyth of Drumlean, L. McInnes of Kilwinning, L. Seccombe, B. Balfe, L. Foster of Oxton, B. McIntosh of Pickering, B. Sharpe of Epsom, L. Barran, B. Fox of Buckley, B. McLoughlin, L. Sheikh, L. Barwell, L. Framlingham, L. Mendoza, L. Sherbourne of Didsbury, L. Bates, L. Fraser of Craigmaddie, B. Meyer, B. Shields, B. Bellingham, L. Freud, L. Mobarik, B. Shinkwin, L. Benyon, L. Frost, L. Montrose, D. Shrewsbury, E. Berridge, B. Fullbrook, B. Morgan of Cotes, B. Smith of Hindhead, L. Bertin, B. Gadhia, L. Morris of Bolton, B. Stedman-Scott, B. Bethell, L. Gardiner of Kimble, L. Morrissey, B. Sterling of Plaistow, L. Black of Brentwood, L. Gardner of Parkes, B. Morrow, L. Stewart of Dirleton, L. Blackwell, L. Garnier, L. Moylan, L. Strathclyde, L. Blackwood of North Oxford, Geddes, L. Moynihan, L. Stroud, B. B. Gilbert of Panteg, L. Naseby, L. Sugg, B. Blencathra, L. Glenarthur, L. Nash, L. Suri, L. Bloomfield of Hinton Glendonbrook, L. Neville-Jones, B. Swinfen, L. Waldrist, B. Godson, L. Neville-Rolfe, B. Taylor of Holbeach, L. Borwick, L. Gold, L. Newlove, B. Taylor of Warwick, L. Botham, L. Goldie, B. Nicholson of Winterbourne, Trefgarne, L. Bottomley of Nettlestone, B. Goldsmith of Richmond B. Trenchard, V. Bourne of Aberystwyth, L. Park, L. Noakes, B. Trevethin and Oaksey, L. Brabazon of Tara, L. Goodlad, L. Northbrook, L. True, L. Brady, B. Grabiner, L. Norton of Louth, L. Tugendhat, L. Bridgeman, V. Grade of Yarmouth, L. Pannick, L. Udny-Lister, L. Bridges of Headley, L. Greenhalgh, L. Parkinson of Whitley Bay, L. Ullswater, V. Browne of Belmont, L. Griffiths of Fforestfach, L. Patten of Barnes, L. Vaizey of Didcot, L. Browning, B. Grimstone of Boscobel, L. Pearson of Rannoch, L. Vere of Norbiton, B. Brownlow of Shurlock Row, Hailsham, V. Penn, B. Verma, B. L. Hamilton of Epsom, L. Pickles, L. Vinson, L. Buscombe, B. Hammond of Runnymede, L. Pidding, B. Wakeham, L. Butler-Sloss, B. Hannan of Kingsclere, L. Polak, L. Waldegrave of North Hill, L. Caine, L. Hannay of Chiswick, L. Popat, L. Wasserman, L. Caithness, E. Harris of Peckham, L. Porter of Spalding, L. Wei, L. Callanan, L. Haselhurst, L. Price, L. Wharton of Yarm, L. Carrington of Fulham, L. Hay of Ballyore, L. Ranger, L. Whitby, L. Cathcart, E. Hayward, L. Rawlings, B. Williams of Trafford, B. Chadlington, L. Henley, L. Reay, L. Wolfson of Tredegar, L. Chalker of Wallasey, B. Herbert of South Downs, L. Redfern, B. Wyld, B. Chisholm of Owlpen, B. Hill of Oareford, L. Renfrew of Kaimsthorn, L. Young of Cookham, L. Choudrey, L. Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, Ridley, V. Young of Graffham, L. Clarke of Nottingham, L. L. Risby, L. Younger of Leckie, V. Colgrain, L. Hoey, B. Colwyn, L. Hogg, B. 10.22 pm Cormack, L. Holmes of Richmond, L. Courtown, E. Horam, L. The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Barker) (LD): We Couttie, B. Howard of Lympne, L. now come to the group consisting of Amendment 52. Craigavon, V. Howard of Rising, L. Anyone wishing to press this amendment to a Division Crathorne, L. Howe, E. Cruddas, L. Howell of Guildford, L. must make that clear in debate. Cumberlege, B. Hunt of Wirral, L. Dannatt, L. Jenkin of Kennington, B. Davies of Gower, L. Johnson of Marylebone, L. Amendment 52 De Mauley, L. Jopling, L. Deech, B. Kamall, L. Moved by Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames Deighton, L. Keen of Elie, L. 52: After Clause 68, insert the following new Clause— Devon, E. Kilclooney, L. Dobbs, L. King of Bridgwater, L. “Controlling or coercive behaviour by persons providing Dodds of Duncairn, L. Kirkham, L. psychotherapy or counselling services Duncan of Springbank, L. Kirkhope of Harrogate, L. (1) A person (“A”) commits an offence if— Dundee, E. Lamont of Lerwick, L. Dunlop, L. Lancaster of Kimbolton, L. (a) A is a person providing or purporting to provide Eaton, B. Lang of Monkton, L. psychotherapy or counselling services to another Eccles of Moulton, B. Lansley, L. person (“B”), Eccles, V. Leigh of Hurley, L. (b) A repeatedly or continuously engages in behaviour Empey, L. Lexden, L. towards B that is controlling or coercive, Erroll, E. Lilley, L. Evans of Bowes Park, B. Lindsay, E. (c) the behaviour has a serious effect on B, and Fairfax of Cameron, L. Lingfield, L. (d) A knows or ought to know that the behaviour will Fairhead, B. Liverpool, E. or may have a serious effect on B. 1767 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1768

(2) A’s behaviour has a “serious effect” on B if— psychological damage upon them. The noble Baroness, (a) it causes B to fear, on at least two occasions, that Lady Finlay, with all her extensive experience, tellingly violence will be used against B, or described this unscrupulous exploitation of vulnerability, (b) it causes B psychological harm which has a substantial which is what this amendment aims to stop. adverse effect on B’s usual day-to-day activities. My understanding is that the Government maintain (3) For the purposes of subsection (1)(d) A “ought to know” their position that the new offence we advocate should that which a reasonable person in possession of the same not be part of the Bill because, they say, there is a information would know. concern to confine the Bill to the domestic context, (4) In proceedings for an offence under this section it is a and these so-called counsellors and psychotherapists defence for A to show that— provide their services outside their victims’ homes. I (a) in engaging in the behaviour in question, A believed disagree with that position for two reasons. The first is that he or she was acting in B’s best interests, and that this abuse is in fact domestic abuse, because its (b) the behaviour was in all the circumstances reasonable. perpetrators, although not operating from within their (5) A is to be taken to have shown the facts mentioned in victims’ family homes, are usurping the position of subsection (4) if— their victims’ parents and family members. As the (a) sufficient evidence of the facts is adduced to raise noble Baroness, Lady Finn, put it in Committee, an issue with respect to them, and “the self-styled development coach preys on their vulnerable (b) the contrary is not proved beyond reasonable doubt. clients and tears them away from their families, to the extent that (6) The defence in subsection (4) is not available to A in they break off all contact and become estranged. There are relation to behaviour that causes B to fear that violence countless such cases. The goal of such therapy is coercion and will be used against B. control, to debilitate and disable—abuse, if ever there was.”—[Official (7) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable— Report, 8/2/21; col. 23.] (a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a Secondly, I do not believe we should be too precious term not exceeding five years, or a fine, or both; about the ambit of a particular piece of legislation, (b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a including this Bill. The Domestic Abuse Bill before us term not exceeding 12 months, or a fine, or both.” amends other legislation in a large number of its provisions. Our amendment would add a new clause modelled on Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD): My Lords, Other amendments have been made to that Act in we had an extensive debate on our amendment in this this Bill, notably the non-fatal strangulation offence form in Committee. We have brought it back on incorporated in the Bill this afternoon, which inserts a Report because we are determined to make progress clause of general application after Section 75—a clause on criminalising the fraudulent behaviour of the charlatan which is not restricted to domestic abuse. psychotherapists and counsellors this amendment is directed at. I believe we have made some progress since I suggest that if new legislation is necessary and Committee and I am grateful to the noble Lord, within scope of the Bill—as the Public Bill Office Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay, and the noble Baroness, decided our amendment was when it accepted it—we Lady Penn, from the Department of Health and Social should legislate. The way to legislate on this issue is by Care for their time, attention and sympathetic response adapting Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act, as we at the meeting they arranged for a number of us who advocate. support this amendment. It is high time for legislation. In Committee, the I certainly think the meeting increased government noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, explained the understanding of the truly shocking wrongs these history of his involvement with seeking legislation on charlatans perpetrate towards the young people they this issue when he was Solicitor-General. He raised the prey on, the prevalence of this behaviour and the question of why, if they can legislate to outlaw this perniciousness of its effects—with the lives of many young behaviour in France, Belgium and Luxembourg, we and vulnerable people ruined, often permanently. Our cannot legislate here. We have received no answer to debate and the meeting also reminded the Government that question. of a long history of attempts to secure legislation curbing The noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, also made this behaviour and of the strength of feeling and the point that we have been trying fruitlessly to make determination of those who strive for change on this issue progress for more than 20 years. The noble Baroness, —an issue which is certainly not going to go away. Lady Mallalieu, pointed out that this type of alienation As we discussed in Committee,these totally unqualified is nothing new; domestic alienation has been happening charlatans ply their trade by offering what they call for 50 years, with the quasi-healers operating with counselling or psychotherapy services, mostly to young immunity. So have the other forms of domestic abuse adults, to whom they often charge very substantial we are tackling in this Bill—but we are now trying to fees. They then build up in their patients or clients—in tackle them. The Bill involves an enlightened process reality, their victims—a misplaced trust in them and on which we are embarked, but we should take care engineer a false dependence by a process of transference. that in seeking enlightened progress, we do not make it This exploitation is often assisted by the perpetrators exclusive. implanting entirely false memories in their victims of Both before and since the debate in Committee, I imagined but illusory abuse during their childhood, have received a number of letters—some long, all well usually by their parents. argued, clearly emotional and universally tragic—from The process is aimed at alienating these young parents and other family members who have, through people from their parents and other family members— no fault of their own, lost the relationships they once often permanently—inflicting profound and long-lasting enjoyed with children and relatives, leaving them 1769 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1770

[LORD MARKS OF HENLEY-ON-THAMES] respected professional bodies. Quacks and charlatans heartbroken and bereft, on the basis of falsehoods do not bother with accreditation; they do not bother peddled by exploitative quacks.My noble friend Lady Jolly with qualifications gained after years of study. But if pointed out the degree to which this so-called therapy accreditation is to have value, it needs to be underpinned is entirely unregulated, and she powerfully demonstrated by the force of the criminal law to deter the quacks how relevant that was. and charlatans. At our meeting, the noble Baroness, Lady Penn, No doubt, requiring psychotherapists to be raised the possibility of regulating psychotherapists professionally qualified and accredited members of a by statutory instrument, and that is something we professional body would enable well-motivated counsellors would be keen to follow up. However, it will certainly to gain standing and proper recognition. It already continue to be insufficient, as it has been to date, to assists members of the medical and legal professions— rely on voluntary registration with the Professional such as the noble Baronesses, Lady Finlay and Standards Authority, as mentioned by the noble Lord, Lady Mallalieu, the noble Lords, Lord Marks and Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay, in Committee. Lord Alderdice, and me—to be members of the royal Strong and effective regulation will help and should societies, colleges or other bodies regulating our respective be introduced, as proposed by my noble friend professions. It also, of course, assists our patients and Lord Alderdice in his Private Member’s Bill as long clients. ago as 2001. However, the thrust of our amendment is More pertinently, however, it is a criminal offence to criminalise this predatory abuse,and we need legislation under Section 49 of the Medical Act 1983—not just a to do that on the statute book. The Government seem breach of a regulation or professional etiquette—for to sympathise with that aim and the direction of our someone wilfully and falsely to pretend to be, take or amendment, their unhappiness being at the prospect use the name or title of of including it in this Bill. But the one thing I have not “physician, doctor of medicine, licentiate in medicine and surgery, heard from the Government is any suggestion that a bachelor of medicine, surgeon, general practitioner or apothecary, coercive control offence modelled on Section 76, as or any name, title, addition or description implying that he is this amendment is, is not a suitable way to achieve our registered under any provision of this Act, or that he is recognised aim. We therefore encourage the Government, even at by law as a physician or surgeon or licentiate in medicine and this late stage, to accept this amendment or commit to surgery or a practitioner in medicine or an apothecary.” legislation in this area. A similar criminal offence is set out in Section 21 of the Solicitors Act 1974, and a man was recently jailed 10.30 pm for over four years for a string of deception-related If our amendment is not accepted, we will be back. offences that included pretending to be a barrister by If the Government cannot accept it now, will they unlawfully carrying out what is known as a reserved please say what they propose? If not now, when? This legal activity. cannot wait much longer. Victims and their families My noble friend the Minister accepted the argument continue to suffer. They all need and deserve statutory put by the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, that as a protection. I beg to move. country we have been slow to appreciate the scale of coercive behaviour. He further acknowledged that most Lord Garnier (Con): My Lords, I co-signed and noble Lords who supported this amendment in Committee spoke in favour of this amendment when it was moved had pointed to evidence and indeed to specific cases in Committee by the noble Lord, Lord Marks of suggesting that fraudulent psychotherapists and Henley-on-Thames, and supported by the overwhelming counsellors were taking advantage of their position to majority of contributors to that debate. His arguments supplant friends and families in the minds and affections are as powerful today as they were in February. I join of their clients for the purpose of turning them against him in thanking my noble friends Lord Parkinson and those friends and families. Lady Penn for discussing the issue with us on Zoom So far as worries about the Bill’s “dynamic” or since Committee. It was a helpful and useful meeting. “architecture” are concerned, one can accept or reject I explained in Committee—reasonably cogently, I them depending on how urgently one thinks the problem hope—whythisamendmentwouldworkboththeoretically needs to be addressed. I suggest that this is no more and practically as an addition to the criminal law and than a variation of the oft-repeated line that this or that, although not an exact replica, it is similar to laws that amendment, while commendable in almost every in force in at least three other countries that adhere to respect, is being attached to the wrong Bill. The Minister the European Convention on Human Rights, namely told us in Committee that he did not want to be seen Belgium, France and Luxembourg. to be downplaying the seriousness of the issue, and of The Government raised two substantive arguments course I accept his word without question. It may well against the amendment in Committee. First, my noble be that this amendment does not fit into the precise friend Lord Parkinson of Whitely Bay said in his definition of domestic abuse within the particular courteous response that a new offence criminalising relationships specified in the Bill, but as the noble controlling or coercive behaviour by persons providing Lord, Lord Marks, has just said, it is in order and it psychotherapy or counselling services would alter the complies with its Long Title. “dynamic” of a Bill specifically about domestic abuse Like other amendments which have been accepted and, further, would upset the Bill’s “architecture”. by the Government today, in my submission this Secondly, my noble friend said that there were other amendment does not upset the Bill’sarchitecture.Looking remedies more suited to dealing with the issue such as at just two relatively recent Acts of Parliament, one is registration with, or accreditation by, existing and entitled to ask if the Government’s architectural analogy 1771 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1772 is a good one. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 deals If they can access psychotherapists, psychologists with subjects as varied as search warrants, bail, cautions, or others through the health service, there is a degree disclosure, mode of trial, appeals, bad character evidence, of protection. Even in a context where there is no sentencing and release on licence. The Policing and statutory registration of psychotherapists working within Crime Act 2009 covers subjects as diverse as the the health service, as is the case, there is a degree of appointment of senior police officers, prostitution, protection for the patient or client. But the majority of selling alcohol to children, gang-related violence, psychotherapists do not work in the health service; confiscation of property and airport policing, among they work in private practice, community facilities or others. The architectural combination of the Baroque, voluntary organisations, but not in the health service. the Romanesque and the Gothic in the cathedral of Santiago de Compostela has a more cohesive theme This produces two kinds of vulnerability. First, as than many Acts of Parliament. If that building has we have already discussed, the victims themselves are open stood for many centuries, I suspect that this Bill can to be abused by those who claim to be psychotherapists, accommodate this amendment. but who have a malign influence. I do not think I Many of our criminal law statutes are Christmas would have to go terribly far in your Lordships’ House trees on to which people hang the latest fad, but this to find uncertainty or confusion about what is a amendment has been carefully thought about. It is psychiatrist, psychologist, psychotherapist or similar necessary and it is timely. I would not want it to be title. One could hardly expect vulnerable victims to be thought that the Government’s desire to get this right more able to parse and find an appropriately trained through further cautious study was simply an excuse person. for delay and the cultivation of long grass. There is a further complexity, which has been made worse by Covid. Many perfectly reasonable and helpful Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB) [V]: My Lords, we people who are not registered psychotherapists and, in discussed in Committee that there are no laws against some cases, are not registered with any organisation anyone operating as a therapist, psychotherapist or never mind statutorily are working in quite isolated counsellor. Cheap online courses allow people to cheat situations themselves now. I have talked to some to complete them, leading to qualifications that are psychotherapist colleagues, who are working from often meaningless. The Health and Care Professions morning until night, every day of the week, on Zoom, Council is a statutory regulator for practitioner with very vulnerable people. They are isolated themselves, psychologists in the UK. “Registered psychologist” socially and professionally, so their relationships with and “practitioner psychologist” are protected titles, as their patients and clients begin to have a degree of are the specialist titles “clinical psychologist”, “counselling dependency. These people are not even professionally psychologist”, “health psychologist” and others. The protected so, apart from the malign individual who title “chartered psychologist”is also protected by statutory consciously exploits the victim of domestic abuse, regulation, meaning that a psychologist is a chartered either currently or after their victimhood, it is not member of the British Psychological Society, but not hard to see how a person who is not particularly necessarily registered with the Health and Care Professions malign may find themselves behaving in that way, for a Council. However, the title of “psychologist” by itself series of psychological reasons. is not protected, meaning that if psychologists do not use one of the protected titles, they can offer their What is troubling is that the knowledge of this has psychological services without any regulation. The been around for a long time. In 1971, the Government public have no idea that these people are not regulated commissioned and received a report from Sir John Foster. in any way; even if serious concerns are expressed or It was stimulated by concern about the Church of complaints raised about them, they remain immune Scientology, but it looked at people who used coercive from investigation because they are not registered. or controlling behaviour when providing psychotherapy These people can wreak huge harm and havoc in or counselling services under that institution. The other people’s lives. They can drain them of all their recommendation was that there needed to be registration finances, create false assertions, produce false evidence —50 years ago. In 1978, Paul Sieghart produced a and exploit them, driving them away from family report with the same recommendations and, in 1981, members who love them and would support them, and Graham Bright produced a Private Member’s Bill in trapping them in a cycle of ever more dangerous the other place based on Paul Sieghart’s report to psychological dependency. Yet, the victims of such register psychotherapy. charlatan practitioners have no redress. That is why this amendment is needed and I strongly support it. When I was appointed as the first consultant psychiatrist in psychotherapy in Ireland, north or Lord Alderdice (LD) [V]: My Lords, in addition to south, I started training in psychotherapy through the the powerful arguments that have already been brought medical faculty at Queen’s University Belfast, not just by noble friends, I have a few more. The first question for those who were medically qualified but for others is whether the amendment is appropriate to a Bill who were not, to enable them to become properly about domestic abuse. Few would argue that the victims qualified. However, I quickly discovered that there was of domestic abuse are not entitled to seek emotional lots of what I call “wild psychotherapy”, so I talked to and psychological help and support. The problem is the Department of Health and Social Services, which that, either when they are undergoing the abuse or agreed and provided some funds. We appointed one of when they are trying to put their lives back together my staff, Gillian Rodgers, to do a report, and she after a period as a victim of abuse, they are likely to presented it to the department in May 1995—nothing seek psychological help. was done. 1773 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1774

10.45 pm The bogus practitioners of talking therapies, at As has already been referred to, I went to see the whom this amendment is directed, currently do not noble Baroness, Lady Hayman, who was Health Minister have to register; as a start, they should be required to in the Lords, in 1999. She agreed, saying, “Yes, there is do so. These people use a variety of names for what a serious problem; will you try to do something about they do and might well try to change their descriptions it?” I did: I got together with all the psychotherapy to avoid mandatory registration of a particular category. organisations and we eventually brought forward a Bill, However, a generic name can surely be found and such with their agreement, in the early 2000s—two Bills in a relatively minor difficulty overcome. After all, they fact. The Government did not follow either of them, are all talking therapists. although the second went through your Lordships’House. It became clear from our meeting that members of This is not a recent problem, but it is getting worse the public but also, surprisingly, some of those who for a whole series of reasons. If the Government argue direct them to these services, such as GPs, need to be that this is not the Bill, I do not think that is valid: it is better informed of the importance of using only registered the Bill that can address it, at least for the victims of practitioners. The public surely deserve to be better domestic abuse. I think that the Government are bound protected and compulsory registration would help to to let us know when and how they intend to bring in do just that. However, more is required, too: having to the registration of psychotherapy for the protection of register might make it difficult for those who do not clients and patients, and vulnerable therapists, who meet the required standards, but not impossible for themselves are working outside the health service and the unscrupulous to continue to operate. There are do not have the protection that they need in these criminal elements to the way in which some of these difficult times. I look forward to what the Minister has so-called therapists operate, which this amendment to say, and I hope that he will be able to go further addresses. They will still need to be addressed in than Governments have gone in 50 years of failure to addition to compulsory registration. If that cannot be follow up on the report that they themselves commissioned done in the Bill, as the Government contended in in 1971. Committee—I still hope that they will change their mind—it can and should be met by a provision, possibly in a forthcoming health Bill or, as suggested by the Baroness Mallalieu (Lab) [V]: My Lords, the arguments noble Lord, Lord Marks, and the noble and learned about the Bill being suitable for this measure that have Lord, Lord Garnier, in other legislation to be brought been advanced again today by the noble Lords, forward as soon as possible. Lord Marks and Lord Alderdice, and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, were powerfully deployed These are not isolated cases. When the noble Baroness, in Committee. They cut no ice with the Minister, and I Lady Jolly, raised this matter in the House last year, have seen nothing to indicate since then that there is she received an astonishingly large response from victims likely to be any change of heart. This will mean that and their families. This type of abuse, as the noble this is yet another missed opportunity to deal with a Lord, Lord Alderdice, just said, has gone on unchecked very real problem. for many years. It continues to sever children from their families, causes mental harm and misery to victims In Committee, the noble Lord, Lord Parkinson, and their relations, and in some cases leads to serious accepted that there is a need to find a remedy for this false allegations being made. All sides agree that a damaging and often criminal preying on the vulnerable remedy is needed yet every time an attempt is made to who seek help for mental distress from unregulated find one, successive Ministers have said, “Not this and often totally unqualified self-styled talking therapists. Bill—not my department, guv”. There is ample evidence of the harm that has been caused: the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, has just given us Two common defects in our present system of some. Victims have been alienated from their families, government are stopping abuses being prevented in and, as I remember from my years in practice at the future. The first, I fear,is a culture of siloed departments: criminal Bar, on occasion this led to criminal trials “We can’t deal with this or that because it’s someone based on what later appeared to be false memories else’s brief, someone else’s department”. Too often, implanted by self-styled talking therapists. there is a reluctance or failure to collaborate across However, I believe that there has been a degree of departments to pass on and follow-up a problem progress since Committee, and I was very grateful to be which arises, or there is a change of Minister so that included in the meeting that the noble Lord, Lord Marks, the problem falls—as this one has done over and over arranged with the noble Baroness, Lady Penn, the again down the years—into a black hole of inaction Minister and others; I thank the Minister for that. It between them. It was therefore encouraging that the became clear from that meeting that there are at least noble Baroness, Lady Finn, also attended the meeting two ways in which a solution could be achieved if this with the noble Lord, Lord Parkinson. The second is Bill is not allowed to be the vehicle to deal with this. the shortage—not an absence but certainly a shortage—of Ministers who, when those in their department say Apparently, under the Health Act, regular reviews “We can’t do it” say to them: “This is a real problem. I take place to decide whether specific occupations should want to find a solution. Please go away and come back require compulsory registration. This means that a with a way in which we can do it.” successful applicant must meet proper standards and checks, and faces sanctions if the rules are broken. The Minister was very helpful in our meeting, which The change from voluntary to compulsory registration enabled us to focus on the direction of some possible can be made by regulation, so no primary legislation is solutions. What we now need from him, if he cannot required. change his mind about the admissibility of the amendment 1775 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1776 in this legislation, is a commitment that the issue will Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, have made excellent cases at least receive urgent attention across departments for outlawing these charlatans. I thank them all for and, after so long be treated as a priority. In this of all their robust and informed support. weeks, it is worth perhaps saying that people in mental Some time ago, I was approached by someone turmoil who need help will, we hope, go searching for whose child in their 20s had their life ruined by an it. Failure to guide them to genuine help from properly unregistered and untrained counsellor.Both the behaviour registered practitioners is allowing some to fall into of and treatment by this charlatan were coercive and unscrupulous and dangerous hands. I do hope that the turned the child completely against their family. This Minister will give us the assurance we need tonight. is not something that many families talk about at length, but after hearing the dinner hour debate in the House Lord Fairfax of Cameron (Con) [V]: My Lords, I some time ago, when my noble friend Lord Marks and too speak this evening in support of the amendment the noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, both spoke, of the noble Lord, Lord Marks. I apologise that I was a significant number of people approached me and unable to speak in Committee but I have read that provided the evidence that convinced us that this is an debate, including the speeches of the noble Lord, Lord issue that deserves attention from government. Marks, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, the What is done by these bogus counsellors is lawful noble Baronesses, Lady Finlay and Lady Jolly, and the but also amoral, unethical and without shame. I ask noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath. I agree with the Minister to support the proposed new clause. all that they said. Without it, charlatans posing as professionals will be I developed an interest in this subject because I able to ruin yet more families and more young, vulnerable personally knew two families where young adult, female lives. family members were, might I say, captured by what the noble Lord, Lord Marks, has called a charlatan Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op): My Lords, counsellor—with prolonged, distressing and tragic Amendment 52 moved by the noble Lord, Lord Marks consequences for the families and individuals in question. of Henley-on-Thames, seeks to insert a new clause But as he and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, into the Bill. This issue was debated in Committee and have reminded us this evening, this issue is much more I was clear then that I supported the intention of the widespread: so much so that, as the House has heard, proposed new clause but was not convinced that this France, Belgium and Luxembourg have legislated against was the right Bill. There is always a problem with this behaviour. finding ways to address issues, whether through primary At this late hour, I do not propose to repeat the or secondary legislation, or finding a Bill that is in arguments compellingly put both this evening and in scope or the regulation or order that can be used to Committee in favour of similar legislation being enacted make the necessary changes. here. My understanding is that the Government, as On the issue itself, both in Committee and on they have said before, may be sympathetic in general Report, a powerful case was made by the noble Lord, but, as several speakers this evening have intimated, Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames, the noble and learned too often one gets the timeworn mantra from the Lord, Lord Garnier,and my noble friend Lady Mallalieu. Government that this is not the right time and not the This is a serious matter where people can be victims of right Bill. I remember this particularly being said several some very dubious, unscrupulous and frankly criminal years ago in relation to the Leveson Section 40 point. practices. My question to the Minister this evening is the As we have heard, a traumatised person seeking same as that put by the noble Lord, Lord Marks, and help from a counsellor, therapist or psychotherapist other noble Lords. If that is the Government’s position, has absolutely no idea whether that person is properly when will be the right time to legislate against these trained and able to give them professional help—or, as reprehensible practices by charlatan counsellors who the noble Lord, Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames, cause so much distress to so many families? In closing, said, a charlatan preying on young people or vulnerable I respectfully suggest that, as the noble Lord, clients to debilitate and exert control. The risk is that Lord Alderdice, said, government inaction on this the counsellor is untrained and unqualified and will issue has already dragged on unacceptably long. do lasting damage to their client.

Baroness Jolly (LD) [V]: My Lords, this has been an 11 pm interesting debate and I thank all Members who have In responding to this debate, I hope the Minister is taken part. The proposed new clause in my name and able to set out a pathway to remedy this undeniably those of my noble friend Lord Marks of Henley-on- serious problem so that patients who run the risk of Thames and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, becoming victims of further trauma or abuse are both of whom have spoken very forcefully, would helped and supported. Is the remedy to seek some create an offence of: form of compulsory registration, for other health “Controlling or coercive behaviour by persons providing professionals to be clear about the importance of only psychotherapy or counselling services” using registered therapists, and to agree on a name on in a person’s home. which everyone is clear so that there is no confusion? We have heard that my noble friend Lord Alderdice, I hope there is some movement from the Government himself a psychiatrist, has long taken an interest in this today. Clearly, there have been a number of useful issue, even tabling a Private Member’s Bill. The noble meetings since Committee. I agree that we need to deal Baroness, Lady Finlay of Llandaff—another doctor—the with this serious problem, so I hope the Minister will noble Lord, Lord Fairfax of Cameron, and the noble be able to give us a positive response. 1777 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1778

Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con): My Lords, I time and engagement with us and with officials from am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Marks of Henley- both the Home Office and the Department of Health on-Thames,and all other noble Lords who have supported and Social Care. this amendment, for again setting out the case for it. As noble Lords noted, there is at present a system The amendment seeks to create an offence of controlling of accredited voluntary registration by the Professional or coercive behaviour for psychotherapists and counsellors Standards Authority for Health and Social Care. The providing services to clients. authority has a process for quality-assuring voluntary Amendment 52 seeks, in effect, to replicate the registers of health and care professionals in the UK coercive or controlling behaviour offence under Section 76 who are not subject to statutory regulation. It currently of the Serious Crime Act 2015. This offence was accredits 10 voluntary registers relating to counselling created to close a gap in legislation regarding patterns and psychotherapy, providing assurance to the public of coercive or controlling behaviour in a domestic in relation to around 50,000 talking therapy professionals. abuse context; that is, during a relationship between These registers should be used by service users to intimate partners, former partners or family members. choose a practitioner to meet their needs and to be As such, the offence applies only to those who are assured that they are safe, trustworthy and competent “personally connected” as defined within Section 76 to practise. To gain accreditation from the authority, of the 2015 Act. The amendment would extend the organisations must meet 11 standards for accredited offence beyond those who are personally connected as registers. I set those out in Committee so will not do defined by that Act so that it applied to psychotherapists that again now, but any registrant who is removed and counsellors. from an accredited register for conduct reasons cannot join another accredited register. In Committee, and again today, the noble Lord, Lord Marks, and others have strongly made the point I recognise that these registers are voluntary, as a that unregulated and fraudulent psychotherapists are number of noble Lords have pointed out, but they able to take advantage of their clients’ vulnerability by provide assurance that practitioners who are on the supplanting parents and families in the affections and registers are safe, trustworthy and competent. The minds of their clients, with the purpose of turning noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, is right that more can them against their friends and families through a be done in this area, and the Department of Health process called transference. The noble Lord has suggested and Social Care is working with the Professional Standards that this abuse should be caught by the controlling or Authority to improve awareness of the accredited coercive behaviour offence because therapists are abusing registers programme and to encourage service users their position of trust and the dependence of their and providers—people such as GPs, as she says—to clients. seek out the services of practitioners on an accredited register rather than unregistered individuals. As my noble and learned friend Lord Garnier noted, we have had a number of debates on this issue and on The Government are committed to a proportionate the importance—in the Government’s submission—of system of safeguards for the professionals who work preserving the meaning of “personally connected” in in the health and care system, and from time to time relation to domestic abuse, both in this Bill and, by we bring new professions into regulation. It is important extension, for the purposes of the Section 76 offence. The that decisions to regulate a profession are evidence-based Government recognise that noble Lords have raised and consider the risks posed by the profession in the an important issue and have made some spirited and round, not just the risks posed by unscrupulous cogent arguments in favour of doing something now. practitioners. The Professional Standards Authority However, we still feel it is important to acknowledge has developed its “right-touch assurance” tool with that domestic abuse, including controlling or coercive the aim of providing advice on how best to regulate behaviour, is a unique type of abuse underpinned by different groups in health and care.Where the Government an emotional and affectionate bond between the are satisfied that the conditions for regulation of a victim and the perpetrator, as well as a complex profession are met, that can be taken forward through power dynamic. The paid-for or commercial nature of secondary legislation using powers in the Health Act the psychotherapist-client relationship represents a 1999, a point that, as noble Lords mentioned today, fundamentally different power dynamic from that of we have explored in our helpful discussions since domestic abuse.In answer to the noble Lord, Lord Marks, Committee. my noble and learned friend Lord Garnier and others, The Department of Health and Social Care is that is why we do not believe that it is appropriate to currently conducting a programme of work to reform replicate the Section 76 offence in other contexts such the professional regulation framework for healthcare as this. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Kennedy professionals. That will provide an opportunity to of Southwark, for recognising that this might not be consider whether the professions protected in law are the right Bill in which to do it. the right ones and to ensure that the level of regulatory As I mentioned in Committee, this is a matter for oversight is proportionate to the risks to the public. consideration by the Department of Health and Social I am conscious, as the noble Lord, Lord Alderdice, Care. I am pleased that a number of noble Lords who set out in his contribution, that this is an issue that has have spoken in Committee and again tonight had the been around for a very long time—since 1971, in some opportunity to discuss it in more detail with my noble form—and he has been working on it for many years. I friend Lady Penn, on behalf of that department, and hope that reassurance and the points that have been with me. I am glad they found the discussion productive, raised, both in these debates and in our meeting since as we did. I am grateful to those noble Lords for their Committee, will be fed into that work. Perhaps this 1779 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1780 will provide further reassurance: as a couple of noble interesting to see whether the Government can move Lords have alluded to, one person who spoke in away from insisting on that distinction. I described it Committee but is not speaking today is my noble earlier as a precious distinction, but it is purist at best. friend Lady Finn. If nothing else, I hope noble Lords “Not this Bill, not now” is no answer to the suffering will note that they have another person on the government of victims. We need the Government to be prepared to side who is fully sighted on these issues. say, “Yes, this Bill and now”. At the very least, if they The noble Lords who have spoken in favour of the cannot say that, “The very next Bill, and soon”. We will amendment have once again underlined this important take such opportunities as we can to bring about issue, but I hope they will accept why we believe this is change. I accept that there will be opportunities to not the appropriate Bill in which to pursue the regulation come, as the noble Lord, Lord Parkinson of Whitley of psychotherapists and counsellors. I have no doubt Bay, indicated, and they may well be in health-driven that they will take the further opportunity to debate legislation. On that basis, I beg leave to withdraw this this issue soon in the context of Department of Health-led amendment tonight, but we will be back seeking change legislation and, moreover, as I have indicated, the issue in due course. of regulation can be considered afresh in the context of the forthcoming review of the regulation of healthcare Amendment 52 withdrawn. professionals. The noble Lord, Lord Kennedy of Southwark, spoke of a pathway. It may not have as many paving Schedule 2: Amendments relating to offences stones as noble Lords might wish but I hope that they committed outside the UK can discern one, and that on that basis the noble Lord, Lord Marks, will be content to withdraw his amendment. The Deputy Speaker (The Earl of Kinnoull) (Non-Afl): We now come to the group beginning with Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD): My Lords, Amendment 53. Anyone wishing to press this or anything it is late in the evening and I shall be brief. We have else in the group to a Division must make that clear in heard a detailed argument from the noble and learned the debate. Lord, Lord Garnier,and my noble friend Lord Alderdice as to why this amendment fits so clearly within the Amendment 53 ambit of the Bill. From my noble friend Lord Alderdice we also heard how close is the link between therapy Moved by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar and domestic abuse, and from all around the House 53: Schedule 2, page 65, line 37, leave out from beginning to we have heard how overdue this measure is and that it end of line 10 on page 66 is not a recent problem that we are seeking to address. Member’s explanatory statement It is also significant that this amendment attracts This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment support from doctors and lawyers and Members of at page 66, line 21. your Lordships’ House who are neither. The noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, said how common and how Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, these wrong it is that bogus therapists can take advantage of amendments fulfil an undertaking I gave in Committee their clients, causing them real harm. The noble Lord, in response to amendments tabled by my noble friend Lord Fairfax, was one of many Peers who know Lady Bertin that sought to ensure that UK citizens families who have been victims of this abuse, and he who commit marital rape in countries where such also powerfully argued for an end to inaction on the behaviour is not criminal may none the less be prosecuted part of government. My noble friend Lady Jolly was in the UK. another, who described graphically the behaviour of I said then that we would consider this matter ahead these charlatans as unethical and without shame. The of Report and, bearing in mind that the extraterritorial noble Lord, Lord Kennedy, described our case on the jurisdiction provisions are UK-wide, that we would amendment as a powerful case for change and called also consult the devolved Administrations to ensure a for action. So let us, please, not miss yet another consistent approach across the UK. We have done both opportunity, as the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, —we have considered and we have consulted. I am put it. As the noble Baroness said, compulsory registration pleased to say that, with the agreement of Ministers in must sit alongside criminal sanctions, in just the way Scotland and Northern Ireland, government Amendments as the noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, pointed 53 to 55, 58 to 61 and 63 to 65 achieve what my noble out. An offence of coercive control modelled on the friend intended, and will apply to relevant legislation Serious Crime Act may not be the only way to achieve throughout the UK. I shall remind the House briefly, it, but it is a good one. given the hour, of the provisions. Whatever form an amendment of the criminal law Schedule 2 to the Bill contains amendments to takes, the House and the Government know clearly various enactments to provide for extraterritorial what it is that we are trying to achieve. They really jurisdiction over certain offences under the lawof England ought now to be implementing change, rather than and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. This will closing the road to change. The Government need to ensure that, as required by the Istanbul convention, get over the temptation to insist on drawing the distinction the UK will be able to prosecute these offences when between what the noble Lord, Lord Parkinson, described they are committed outside the UK by one of our as the emotional and affectionate bond that characterises nationals or habitual residents. The scheme is this: domestic abuse and the type of abuse that these charlatans part 1 of the schedule covers England and Wales, part and quacks perpetrate on their victims. It will be 2 covers Scotland, and part 3 covers Northern Ireland. 1781 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1782

[LORD WOLFSON OF TREDEGAR] relation to extraterritorial sexual offences against children In keeping with the normal principles of extraterritorial and other provisions in this Bill extending extraterritorial jurisdiction and the terms of the convention, there is a jurisdiction to offences that do not currently have requirement that a prosecution for one of the relevant extraterritorial effect. The relevant provisions simply sexual offences—these include rape where the victim provide a procedure under which the defendant can of the offence is aged 18 or over—may be brought in challenge the prosecution to prove that what was done the UK only when the offending behaviour is also an was an offence under the laws of the country where offence in the country where it happens. This is known the act was done. as dual criminality. Again, I express my thanks to my noble friend Lady Bertin for raising this issue. For these reasons, I 11.15 pm beg to move. In most circumstances, that dual criminality requirement is not a barrier to prosecution because Baroness Bertin (Con) [V]: My Lords, given the most serious sexual offences against adults are likely hour I will be very brief. I thank the Government and to be criminal in most other countries. However, as my my noble friend the Minister for listening and laying noble friend Lady Bertin identified, it could mean their own amendments to close the loophole I raised that, in some circumstances, UK authorities would in Committee. It is a very small gap, but one it is right not be able to prosecute someone for marital rape to fill. Doing so sends the right signal domestically committed outside the UK if such behaviour is either and internationally. The UN said in a recent report that not included in or exempt from the equivalent offence the home is still one of the most dangerous places for in the other jurisdiction. This is a narrow gap, but we women. In many countries, sex is still seen as an automatic believe that it is right, as a matter of principle, to part of the marriage contract. No data on marital amend the Bill to cater for it. rape is collected in many countries, where not only is it As it stands, the Bill applies a dual criminality not a crime but social pressure means that it is rarely requirement for relevant sexual offences committed reported or discussed. We have been pioneers in this against adults outside the UK by UK nationals and by area of law; it is right that this country be able to UK residents. Government Amendments 53 to 55 would uphold the high standards of our legislation at all times. amend part 1 of Schedule 2 to remove the dual criminality Lord Paddick (LD) [V]: My Lords, I am very grateful requirement for UK nationals who commit offences to the noble Baroness, Lady Bertin, for identifying this under Sections 1 to 4 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 gap whereby marital rape is not an offence in some against adult victims outside the UK. With the agreement countries and therefore British nationals would not of Ministers in Scotland and Northern Ireland, have been convicted had they committed marital rape government Amendments 58 to 61 and 63 to 65 will in them. I am very grateful to the Minister for responding amend parts 2 and 3 of the schedule to make to the identification of that gap and closing it effectively. corresponding changes to the Scottish and Northern Irish legislation and orders. These amendments will Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op): My Lords, mean that UK nationals who commit marital rape in this group of amendments addresses marital rape, the small number of countries where such behaviour is whereby rape could be committed by a UK citizen in a not criminal may none the less be brought to trial in country that does not consider it a crime and, presently, the UK. no prosecution could be brought. The noble Baroness, However,a dual criminality requirement will continue Lady Bertin, brought the matter to the attention of to apply for UK residents. This means that we could the House in Committee and has been successful in prosecute UK residents who commit marital rape abroad persuading the Government of the merits of her case only if the behaviour is also criminal in the country and the importance of closing this loophole. where it is committed. We should not prosecute, for I offer her my sincere congratulations on her success. example, a Ruritanian national who is habitually resident Her actions will protect women and girls from the in England for doing something in Ruritania that is horrific crime of rape and ensure that no rapist or not criminal under Ruritanian law. I remind the House perpetrator of these vile crimes can evade justice through that existing law already makes the same distinction making use of this loophole in the law and hide between UK nationals and UK residents in relation to behind the fact that marital rape is not a crime in a extraterritorial sexual offences where the victim is small number of countries. This is a good example of aged under 18. the House of Lords doing its job well. An important In short, these amendments will ensure that our issue was raised, well argued and supported across the nationals comply with our laws even when abroad. At House; the Government considered it carefully and the same time, the amendments respect important responded positively, bringing forward their own principles of international law and comity in relation amendments to address the issue. to non-UK nationals ordinarily resident in the UK. Finally, government Amendments 56, 57 and 62 Lord Wolfson of Tredegar (Con): My Lords, I hope have been included at the request of Ministers in the House will forgive me again if my reply is very Scotland. These make additional amendments to part 2 brief, not because the issue is not important but because of Schedule 2 to provide—for offences where a dual there is obvious agreement across the House. I again criminality requirement is being retained—a rebuttable thank my noble friend Lady Bertin for bringing this presumption that the act in question constitutes an matter to the Government’s attention and for the offence under the law of the country where it took place. discussions we have had. I thank the noble Lord, This mirrors existing provisions throughout the UK in Lord Paddick, for his kind words on this matter this 1783 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1784 evening, which I appreciate. I also thank the noble 60: Schedule 2, page 67, line 42, at end insert— Lord, Lord Kennedy of Southwark; I am very pleased “(1A) If— to have his and his Benches’ support on this matter. I (a) a person who is habitually resident in Scotland does will not say any more given the time, but I commend an act in a country outside the United Kingdom, this amendment to the House. (b) the act constitutes an offence under the law in force in that country, and Amendment 53 agreed. (c) the act, if done in Scotland, would constitute an offence to which this subsection applies, Amendments 54 to 65 then the person commits that offence.” Moved by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar Member’s explanatory statement This amendment means that, for a person habitually resident 54: Schedule 2, page 66, leave out lines 12 and 13 in Scotland to commit an offence in Scotland in respect of an act Member’s explanatory statement in a country outside the UK, it remains a condition under This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment section 54D of the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 that the at page 66, line 21. act is an offence in that country. 55: Schedule 2, page 66, line 21, leave out from “Wales,” to 61: Schedule 2, page 68, line 1, leave out “subsection (1) “an” in line 22 and insert “subsections (1) and (2) of section 72 applies” and insert “subsections (1) and (1A) apply” also apply to” Member’s explanatory statement Member’s explanatory statement The effect of this amendment is that, for a UK national to be This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment guilty in England and Wales of rape or sexual assault as a result at page 67, line 42. of an act in a country outside the UK where the victim was 18 62: Schedule 2, page 68, line 3, at end insert— or over, it is not necessary for the act also to be an offence in “(2A) For the purposes of subsection (1A)(b), an act that country. punishable under the law in force in the country is 56: Schedule 2, page 67, line 17, at end insert— an offence under that law however it is described in “(2AA) For the purposes of subsection (2A)(a), an act that law. punishable under the law in force in the country is (2B) The condition specified in subsection (1A)(b) is to an offence under that law however it is described in be taken as satisfied unless, not later than such time that law. as may be prescribed by Act of Adjournal, the (2AB) The condition specified in subsection (2A)(a) is accused serves on the prosecutor a notice— to be taken as satisfied unless, not later than such (a) stating that, on the facts as alleged with respect to time as may be prescribed by Act of Adjournal, the the act in question, the condition is not in the accused serves on the prosecutor a notice— accused’s opinion satisfied, (a) stating that, on the facts as alleged with respect to (b) setting out the grounds for the accused’s opinion, the act in question, the condition is not in the and accused’s opinion satisfied, (c) requiring the prosecutor to prove that the condition (b) setting out the grounds for the accused’s opinion, and is satisfied. (c) requiring the prosecutor to prove that the condition (2C) But the court, if it thinks fit, may permit the is satisfied. accused to require the prosecutor to prove that the (2AC) But the court, if it thinks fit, may permit the condition is satisfied without the prior service of a accused to require the prosecutor to prove that the notice under subsection (2B). condition is satisfied without the prior service of a (2D) In proceedings on indictment, the question whether notice under subsection (2AB). the condition is satisfied is to be determined by the (2AD) In proceedings on indictment, the question whether judge alone.” the condition is satisfied is to be determined by the Member’s explanatory statement judge alone.” This amendment provides, in section 54D of the Sexual Offences Member’s explanatory statement (Scotland) Act 2009, for a rebuttable presumption that an act This amendment provides, in section 11 of the Criminal committed in a country outside the UK, which would be an Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, for a rebuttable presumption that offence if committed in Scotland, is an offence in that country. an act committed in a country outside the UK, which would be an 63: Schedule 2, page 70, leave out lines 5 to 15 assault if committed in Scotland, is an offence in that country. Member’s explanatory statement 57: Schedule 2, page 67, line 18, leave out “(2A)” and insert “(2AA)” This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment Member’s explanatory statement at page 70, line 22. This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment 64: Schedule 2, page 70, leave out lines 17 and 18 at page 67, line 17. Member’s explanatory statement 58: Schedule 2, page 67, line 35, leave out “or is habitually This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment resident in Scotland” at page 70, line 22. Member’s explanatory statement 65: Schedule 2, page 70, line 22, leave out from beginning to This amendment would limit section 54D(1) of the Sexual Offences “an offence” and insert “Paragraphs (1) and (2) also apply to” (Scotland) Act 2009 (being inserted by this Bill) to UK nationals only (and not also those habitually resident in Scotland) and is Member’s explanatory statement linked with the Minister’s amendments at page 67, lines 38 and 42. The effect of this amendment is that, for a UK national to be guilty in Northern Ireland of rape or sexual assault as a result of 59: Schedule 2, page 67, leave out lines 38 and 39 an act in a country outside the UK where the victim was 18 or Member’s explanatory statement over, it is not necessary for the act also to be an offence in that This amendment removes the condition in section 54D(1) of country. the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 that, for a UK national to commit an offence in Scotland in relation to an act in a country outside the UK, the act must also be an offence in that country. Amendments 54 to 65 agreed. 1785 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1786

Firearms Act 1968 Amendment 66 13 An offence under any of the following provisions of the Moved by Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws Firearms Act 1968— 66: After Schedule 2, insert the following new Schedule— (a) section 5 (possession of prohibited firearms); “OFFENCES TO WHICH THE DEFENCE FOR VICTIMS (b) section 16 (possession of firearm with intent to OF DOMESTIC ABUSE WHO COMMIT AN OFFENCE endanger life); DOES NOT APPLY (c) section 16A (possession of firearm with intent to Common law offences cause fear of violence); 1 False imprisonment. (d) section 17(1) (use of firearm to resist arrest); 2 Kidnapping. (e) section 17(2) (possession of firearm at time of committing or being arrested for specified offence); 3 Manslaughter. (f) section 18 (carrying firearm with criminal intent). 4 Murder. Theft Act 1968 5 Perverting the course of justice. 14 An offence under any of the following provisions of the 6 Piracy. Theft Act 1968— Offences against the Person Act 1861 (a) section 8 (robbery or assault with intent to rob); 7 An offence under any of the following provisions of the (b) section 9 (burglary), where the offence is committed Offences Against the Person Act 1861— with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm on a (a) section 4 (soliciting murder); person, or to do unlawful damage to a building or (b) section 16 (threats to kill); anything in it; (c) section 18 (wounding with intent to cause grievous (c) section 10 (aggravated burglary); bodily harm); (d) section 12A (aggravated vehicle-taking), where the (d) section 20 (malicious wounding); offence involves an accident which causes the death of any person; (e) section 21 (attempting to choke, suffocate or strangle in order to commit or assist in committing (e) section 21 (blackmail). an indictable offence); Criminal Damage Act 1971 (f) section 22 (using drugs etc to commit or assist in the 15 The following offences under the Criminal Damage committing of an indictable offence); Act 1971— (g) section 23 (maliciously administering poison etc so (a) an offence of arson under section 1; as to endanger life or inflict grievous bodily harm); (b) an offence under section 1(2) (destroying or (h) section 27 (abandoning children); damaging property) other than an offence of arson. (i) section 28 (causing bodily injury by explosives); Immigration Act 1971 (j) section 29 (using explosives with intent to do 16 An offence under section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971 grievous bodily harm); (assisting unlawful immigration to member state). (k) section 30 (placing explosives with intent to do Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 bodily injury); 17 An offence under section 170 of the Customs and Excise (l) section 31 (setting spring guns etc with intent to do Management Act 1979 (penalty for fraudulent evasion of grievous bodily harm); duty etc) in relation to goods prohibited to be imported (m) section 32 (endangering safety of railway passengers); under section 42 of the Customs Consolidation Act 1876 (indecent or obscene articles). (n) section 35 (injuring persons by furious driving); Taking of Hostages Act 1982 (o) section 37 (assaulting officer preserving wreck); 18 An offence under section 1 of the Taking of Hostages (p) section 38 (assault with intent to resist arrest). Act 1982 (hostage-taking). Explosive Substances Act 1883 Aviation Security Act 1982 8 An offence under any of the following provisions of the 19 An offence under any of the following provisions of the Explosive Substances Act 1883— Aviation Security Act 1982— (a) section 2 (causing explosion likely to endanger life (a) section 1 (hijacking); or property); (b) section 2 (destroying, damaging or endangering (b) section 3 (attempt to cause explosion, or making or safety of aircraft); keeping explosive with intent to endanger life or property); (c) section 3 (other acts endangering or likely to (c) section 4 (making or possession of explosives under endanger safety of aircraft); suspicious circumstances). (d) section 4 (offences in relation to certain dangerous Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 articles). 9 An offence under section 1 of the Infant Life Mental Health Act 1983 (Preservation) Act 1929 (child destruction). 20 An offence under section 127 of the Mental Health Children and Young Persons Act 1933 Act 1983 (ill-treatment of patients). 10 An offence under section 1 of the Children and Young Child Abduction Act 1984 Persons Act 1933 (cruelty to children). 21 An offence under any of the following provisions of the Public Order Act 1936 Child Abduction Act 1984— 11 An offence under section 2 of the Public Order Act 1936 (a) section 1 (abduction of child by parent etc); (control etc of quasi-military organisation). (b) section 2 (abduction of child by other persons). Infanticide Act 1938 Public Order Act 1986 12 An offence under section 1 of the Infanticide Act 1938 22 An offence under any of the following provisions of the (infanticide). Public Order Act 1986— 1787 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1788

(a) section 1 (riot); Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 (b) section 2 (violent disorder). 32 An offence under any of the following provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003— 23 An offence under section 134 of the Criminal Justice (a) section 1 (female genital mutilation); Act 1988 (torture). (b) section 2 (assisting a girl to mutilate her own genitalia); Road Traffic Act 1988 (c) section 3 (assisting a non-UK person to mutilate 24 An offence under any of the following provisions of the overseas a girl’s genitalia). Road Traffic Act 1988— Sexual Offences Act 2003 (a) section 1 (causing death by dangerous driving); 33 An offence under any of the following provisions of the (b) section 3A (causing death by careless driving when Sexual Offences Act 2003— under the influence of drink or drugs). Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 (a) section 1 (rape); 25 An offence under any of the following provisions of the (b) section 2 (assault by penetration); Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990— (c) section 3 (sexual assault); (a) section 1 (endangering safety at aerodromes); (d) section 4 (causing person to engage in sexual (b) section 9 (hijacking of ships); activity without consent); (c) section 10 (seizing or exercising control of fixed (e) section 5 (rape of child under 13); platforms); (f) section 6 (assault of child under 13 by penetration); (d) section 11 (destroying fixed platforms or endangering their safety); (g) section 7 (sexual assault of child under 13); (e) section 12 (other acts endangering or likely to (h) section 8 (causing or inciting child under 13 to endanger safe navigation); engage in sexual activity); (f) section 13 (offences involving threats). (i) section 9 (sexual activity with a child); Channel Tunnel (Security) Order 1994 (S.I. 1994/570) (j) section 10 (causing or inciting a child to engage in 26 An offence under Part 2 of the Channel Tunnel sexual activity); (Security) Order 1994 (SI 1994/570) (offences relating to (k) section 13 (child sex offences committed by Channel Tunnel trains and the tunnel system). children or young persons); Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (l) section 14 (arranging or facilitating commission of 27 An offence under any of the following provisions of the child sex offence); Protection from Harassment Act 1997— (m) section 15 (meeting a child following sexual grooming); (a) section 4 (putting people in fear of violence); (n) section 16 (abuse of position of trust: sexual (b) section 4A (stalking involving fear of violence or activity with a child); serious alarm or distress). Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (o) section 17 (abuse of position of trust: causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity); 28 An offence under any of the following provisions of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 — (p) section 18 (abuse of position of trust: sexual activity in presence of child); (a) section 29 (racially or religiously aggravated assaults); (q) section 19 (abuse of position of trust: causing a child to watch a sexual act); (b) section 31(1)(a) or (b) (racially or religiously aggravated offences under section 4 or 4A of the (r) section 25 (sexual activity with a child family member); Public Order Act 1986). (s) section 26 (inciting a child family member to engage Terrorism Act 2000 in sexual activity); 29 An offence under any of the following provisions of the (t) section 30 (sexual activity with a person with a Terrorism Act 2000— mental disorder impeding choice); (a) section 54 (weapons training); (u) section 31 (causing or inciting a person with a (b) section 56 (directing terrorist organisation); mental disorder impeding choice to engage in sexual (c) section 57 (possession of article for terrorist activity); purposes); (v) section 32 (engaging in sexual activity in the (d) section 59 (inciting terrorism overseas). presence of a person with a mental disorder impeding choice); International Criminal Court Act 2001 30 An offence under any of the following provisions of the (w) section 33 (causing a person with a mental disorder International Criminal Court Act 2001— impeding choice to watch a sexual act); (a) section 51 (genocide, crimes against humanity and (x) section 34 (inducement, threat or deception to war crimes); procure sexual activity with a person with a mental disorder); (b) section 52 (ancillary conduct). (y) section 35 (causing a person with a mental disorder Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 to engage in or agree to engage in sexual activity by 31 An offence under any of the following provisions of the inducement, threat or deception); Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001— (z) section 36 (engaging in sexual activity in the presence, (a) section 47 (use of nuclear weapons); procured by inducement, threat or deception, of a (b) section 50 (assisting or inducing certain weapons- person with a mental disorder); related acts overseas); (aa) section 37 (causing a person with a mental disorder (c) section 113 (use of noxious substance or thing to to watch a sexual act by inducement, threat or cause harm or intimidate). deception); 1789 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1790

(ab) section 38 (care workers: sexual activity with a Clause 71: Homelessness: victims of domestic abuse person with a mental disorder); (ac) section 39 (care workers: causing or inciting sexual activity); Amendment 66A (ad) section 40 (care workers: sexual activity in the Moved by Lord Randall of Uxbridge presence of a person with a mental disorder); 66A: Clause 71, page 56, line 12, at end insert— (ae) section 41 (care workers: causing a person with a mental disorder to watch a sexual act); “( ) In section 199 (local connection), after subsection (1) insert— (af) section 47 (paying for sexual services of a child); “(1A) A person who is, or is likely to become, a victim (ag) section 48 (causing or inciting child prostitution or of domestic abuse is deemed to have a local connection pornography); to any authority for the purposes of an application (ah) section 49 (controlling a child prostitute or a child to that authority under section 183.”” involved in pornography); (ai) section 50 (arranging or facilitating child prostitution or pornography); Lord Randall of Uxbridge (Con) [V]: My Lords, I am sure everyone will be relieved to know that I do not (aj) section 61 (administering a substance with intent); intend either to detain the House for long or to press (ak) section 62 (committing offence with intent to my amendment to a Division. I feel slightly guilty commit sexual offence); because I am keeping noble Lords late, but I raised (al) section 63 (trespass with intent to commit sexual this issue in Committee and, to be honest, was not offence); very satisfied with the answer. I looked again in Hansard (am) section 64 (sex with an adult relative: penetration); to see exactly what my noble friend said and would (an) section 65 (sex with an adult relative: consenting like to reiterate some of my concerns with that answer. to penetration); My amendment concerns the fact that somebody (ao) section 66 (exposure); who has suffered domestic abuse might well have (ap) section 67 (voyeurism); moved from the local authority where they lived when (aq) section 70 (sexual penetration of a corpse). suffering the abuse, either to a refuge or to a friend or Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 parent’s house. Then, being homeless, they present 34 An offence under section 5 of the Domestic Violence, themselves to the local authority.A lot of local authorities Crime and Victims Act 2004 (causing or allowing a child will say that to have housing provided to them, they or vulnerable adult to die or suffer serious physical must have a local connection—in other words, they harm). must have lived there for some time. Obviously, that Terrorism Act 2006 would not necessarily be the case, and they may want 35 An offence under any of the following provisions of the to be well away from where the abuse took place. Terrorism Act 2006— I looked again at my noble friend’s reply. She said: (a) section 5 (preparation of terrorist acts); “The existing legislation and guidance on this matter is clear (b) section 6 (training for terrorism); that a housing authority cannot refer an applicant to another (c) section 9 (making or possession of radioactive device housing authority where they have a local connection if they or or material); anyone who might be reasonably expected to reside there would (d) section 10 (use of radioactive device or material for be at risk of domestic abuse in that area.” terrorist purposes); That sounds fine, expect I was not quite sure what the (e) section 11 (terrorist threats relating to radioactive legislation was. My point, which I will get to in a little devices etc). while, is about the force of guidance. My noble friend Modern Slavery Act 2015 continued: 36 An offence under any of the following provisions of the “The Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities Modern Slavery Act 2015— makes clear that a housing authority is under a positive duty to inquire where the applicant would be at risk of actual or threatened (a) section 1 (slavery, servitude and forced or domestic violence.” compulsory labour); (b) section 2 (human trafficking). I am a little concerned that “actual or threatened domestic violence” might not be the whole gamut of Ancillary offences domestic abuse that we have been discussing throughout 37_(1) An offence of attempting or conspiring to commit an the Bill. She went on to say: offence listed in this Schedule. “It stipulates that authorities should not impose a higher (2) An offence committed by aiding, abetting, counselling or standard of proof of actual violence”.—[Official Report, 8/2/21; procuring an offence listed in this Schedule. col. 72.] (3) An offence under Part 2 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 That concerns me. Is it just where actual or threatened (encouraging or assisting) where the offence (or one of the offences) which the person in question intends or violence has taken place, rather than some of the believes would be committed is an offence listed in this other forms of abuse that we might be talking about? Schedule.” My noble friend said that the local connection test was Amendment 66 agreed. “to keep a degree of fairness to ensure that those who live locally are prioritised and that no one authority gets oversubscribed.”— The Deputy Speaker (The Earl of Kinnoull) (Non-Afl): [Official Report, 8/2/21; col. 72.] Wenow come to the group consisting of Amendment 66A. Of course, that is exactly what it is. Having been a Anyone wishing to press this amendment to a Division constituency Member of Parliament for many years, must make that clear in debate. housing was one of the top issues that people came to 1791 Domestic Abuse Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Domestic Abuse Bill 1792 see me about at my advice surgeries. However, if there who is homeless or at risk of homelessness, can approach are genuine concerns, that degree of fairness should be any local authority in England for assistance without given to those people who cannot live anywhere else. a local connection. Once a local authority has accepted The idea that they could be moved around, not only to an application, it will then make inquiries around return to where they have the local connection but to local connection, among other criteria. Ordinarily, if find a local authority that is sympathetic, worried me. someone does not have a local connection in the area, Finally, I wonder what the force of guidance is, as but has a local connection elsewhere, the local authority opposed to actual legislation. I hoped that this might may then refer that person to the other local authority. get into the Bill, just to give succour to those people. I However, the legislation is clear that a housing authority mentioned quite a few examples in Committee which I cannot refer an applicant to another housing authority will not go through again. The Minister is aware of the where they have a local connection if they, or anyone situation. Can she provide more clarity on what I have who might reasonably be expected to reside with them, just outlined? would be at risk of domestic abuse. The homelessness code of guidance makes clear 11.30 pm that a housing authority is under a positive duty to The Deputy Speaker (The Earl of Kinnoull) (Non-Afl): inquire whether the applicant would be at risk of I call the noble Baroness, Lady Burt of Solihull. We actual or threatened domestic abuse and stipulates are having connection difficulties. I call the noble that authorities should not impose a high standard of Lord, Lord Kennedy of Southwark. proof of actual violence in the past when making its decision. If an applicant is at risk, they can present at another local authority.As such, protections are already Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op): My Lords, in place for victims of domestic abuse which ensure I am pleased to offer my full support for Amendment that they are not housed in a local authority area 66A, moved by the noble Lord, Lord Randall of where there is a risk of violence or abuse and ensure Uxbridge. I would have happily signed the noble that local connection is not a barrier to accessing that Lord’s amendment and apologise for not doing so. homelessness assistance. The local connection test seeks The noble Lord set out his case well—namely, that to keep a degree of fairness, ensuring that those who victims of domestic abuse must often endure lifelong live locally are prioritised and no one authority gets risks from the perpetrator. The risk does not end when oversubscribed, which is an important point. the relationship comes to an end and, as the noble The statutory guidance already ensures that victims Lord, Lord Randall, told us, it is often when the of domestic abuse should not be hindered by local relationship has ended that the risk significantly increases. connection criteria when accessing support services. I can see, therefore, as I am sure other noble Lords As I indicated, the Government are committed to can, that some victims will want to get as far away as proactively engaging with local authorities to ensure possible from the perpetrator. However, the action of that there is a thorough and proper understanding of some local authorities in introducing a local connection the new duty and wider domestic abuse policy, including rule, whether for access to refuge places or for the in relation to local connection. provision of housing, puts victims at risk. The noble Lord’s amendment seeks to ensure that, in England, I acknowledge that it is clear from engagement with victims can seek the protection of moving away to the sector and points raised by noble Lords today that another place when seeking new housing, and that no there is perhaps a misunderstanding that Amendment local rules can be brought to bear that frustrate that 66A would impact on social housing allocations. Social protection or that desire if that is what the victims housing falls under a different part of the Housing wish to do. With this and the other amendments that Act 1996 so, regrettably, the amendment before us we are debating about enabling victims to make a would not meet my noble friend’s aim. choice that affords them the protection that they feel With regard to social housing legislation, since comfortable living with—that is what this is about—the 2012 local authorities have had the power to decide noble Lord is looking for a positive response from the who qualifies for social housing in their area, including Minister on how we can move this forward. I am through the use of a local connection test. However, confident that we shall get that. statutory guidance published in 2013 advises local I should declare my relevant interest as vice-president authorities to consider making appropriate exceptions, of the Local Government Association, as this is a including for people moving into an area to escape housing matter. I look forward to the Minister’sresponse. violence. Guidance issued in 2018 goes further and strongly encourages all local authorities not to apply a local connection test to victims of domestic abuse in Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con): My Lords, I refuges or other safe temporary accommodation. With hope I can provide that assurance. My noble friend those words, I hope I have been able to satisfy my Lord Randall explained that Amendment 66A seeks noble friend and, consequently, that he will be content to amend the Housing Act 1996. As the noble Lord, to withdraw his amendment. Lord Kennedy, just explained, that Act deems victims of domestic abuse to have a local connection to the relevant local authority in England when seeking Lord Randall of Uxbridge (Con) [V]: My Lords, I homelessness assistance under Part 7 of the Act. thank the noble Lord, Lord Kennedy, and my noble I indicated in Committee, and will say again, that friend. I am sorry that the noble Baroness, Lady Burt, the existing legislation and guidance on this matter are did not have her connection—obviously it was not a clear. A victim of domestic abuse, or indeed anyone local one. I will have to be satisfied; I think we are 1793 Domestic Abuse Bill [LORDS] Domestic Abuse Bill 1794

[LORD RANDALL OF UXBRIDGE] as we have today, I would have been able to speak to it nearly there. I noticed that my noble friend changed next time, but that will not happen. I shall leave it some of the words—to “abuse” rather than “violence”; there and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. I think that is right. Amendment 66A withdrawn. She has been slightly saved by the bell. It had been pointed out to me that the amendment was not quite Consideration on Report adjourned. fit for purpose in what I had aimed to do. I tabled another amendment late and, if we had not got as far House adjourned at 11.37 pm. GC 661 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 662

Grand Committee (10) In subsection (9) “Standard Variable Rate” means the variable rate of interest charged under the regulated mortgage contract after the end of any Wednesday 10 March 2021 initial introductory deal. (11) The FCA must ensure any rules that it is required to make as a result of the amendment made by Financial Services Bill subsection (7) are made not later than 31 July 2021.”” Committee (6th Day) Member’s explanatory statement This new Clause would require the FCA to introduce a cap on the Standard Variable Rates charged to consumers who cannot 2.31 pm switch to a different lender because of their characteristics and The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord McNicol who have a regulated mortgage contract with either an inactive lender or an unregulated entity. of West Kilbride) (Lab): My Lords, the hybrid Grand Committee will now begin. Some Members are here in person, respecting social distancing, others are Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Lab) [V]: My Lords, participating remotely, but all Members will be treated financial regulation has to ensure that consumers are equally. I must ask Members in the Room to wear face well protected. It is with this principle in mind that I coverings except when seated at their desks, to speak move the amendment in my name. I thank the noble sitting down and to wipe down their desks, chairs and Lords, Lord Sharkey and Lord Holmes of Richmond, any other touch points before and after use. If the for their support. We have also had an aperitif, in the capacity of the Committee Room is exceeded, or other sense that Amendment 127 in the name of the noble safety requirements are breached, I will immediately Lord has already been debated in an earlier group, adjourn the Committee. If there is a Division in the although its main focus is aligned with the amendments House, the Committee will adjourn for five minutes. in this group and I look forward to his comments. I will call Members to speak in the order listed. The recent report of the UK Mortgage Prisoners During the debate on each group I will invite Members, group referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Holmes of including Members in the Grand Committee Room, Richmond, when he spoke on the earlier group of to email the clerk if they wish to speak after the amendments, is graphic and shocking. It makes the Minister, using the Grand Committee address. I will call case that the Government need to come forward promptly Members to speak in order of request. with a fair deal for the 250,000 or so mortgage prisoners The groupings are binding. Leave should be given who have been stuck for some 10 years paying higher to withdraw amendments. When putting the question, interest rates than they needed to. The All-Party I will collect voices in the Grand Committee Room Parliamentary Group on Mortgage Prisoners has kept only. I remind Members that Divisions cannot take this issue alive, having been contacted by hundreds of place in Grand Committee. It takes unanimity to mortgage prisoners who describe the worry and stress amend the Bill, so if a single voice says “Not Content” that comes from being trapped as they are. This is a an amendment is negatived, and if a single voice says shameful episode. “Content” the clause stands part. If a Member taking I am grateful to the Economic Secretary to the part remotely wants their voice accounted for if the Treasury for meeting my noble friend Lord Tunnicliffe, question is put, they must make this clear when speaking myself and others last month. The Economic Secretary on a group. told us that he has a keen interest in settling this matter. He explained that there are difficulties including moral hazard, which means that it is not easy to sort. Amendment 99 However,while the issue continues, considerable injustice Moved by Lord Stevenson of Balmacara is occurring. The Government may well be right to say 99: After Clause 40, insert the following new Clause— that the SVRs currently paid by mortgage prisoners “Standard Variable Rates: cap on charges for mortgage prisoners are only a little higher on average than the SVRs of In section 137A of the Financial Services and Markets Act other lenders but, particularly during the pandemic, 2000 (the FCA’s general rules), at end insert— small differences matter. In any case, the assertion that “(7) The FCA must make rules by virtue of subsection the Government make that the differences are rather (1) in relation to introducing a cap on the interest minor does not ring true in the light of the report from rates charged to mortgage prisoners in relation to the all-party group. Its case studies, which include regulated mortgage contracts, with a view to securing nurses, teachers, members of the Armed Forces and an appropriate degree of protection for consumers. small business people, suggest that, for all those who (8) In subsection (7) “mortgage prisoner” means a are trapped and struggling with the consequences of consumer who cannot switch to a different lender the Government’s decisions when money is tight and because of their characteristics and has a regulated margins matter, these things need to be sorted. mortgage contract with one of the following type of firms— Surely the true comparison is that if mortgage (a) inactive lenders, or firms authorised for mortgage prisoners were with an active lender and of course up lending that are no longer lending; and to date with their payments, they would have access to (b) unregulated entities, or firms not authorised for a range of products to transfer to, which would give mortgage lending. them a lower fixed rate for their mortgages. In the (9) The rules made by the FCA under subsection (7) other place when this issue was discussed, the savings must set the level of the cap on the Standard available were said to be in the order of £5,000 a year. Variable Rate at a level no more than 2 percentage That is not an inconsiderable sum. Why are these people points above the Bank of England base rate. being singled out for this penalty? GC 663 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 664

[LORD STEVENSON OF BALMACARA] paying obscene interest rates for over a decade through no fault of The problem also seems to be the inability to access their own. They have been completely trapped in their mortgages the best market-matching deals, compounded by the and unable to escape the financial misery it causes … Coupled with the devastating impact of the pandemic on people’s finances, fact that the prison effect is reinforced by the inability urgent action is needed to prevent the situation from becoming to prevent mortgages being sold off to so-called vulture catastrophic. The independent LSE report I funded has a cogent funds, which are often unregulated. This matter has argument as to why an SVR cap isn’t a balanced long-term been left unresolved for far too long. The inability to solution. Yet in lieu of anything else, I believe for those on seek out new deals and to limit costs is causing stress, closed-book mortgages it is a good stopgap while other detailed and in some cases has caused families to lose their solutions are worked up, and I’m very happy the All-Party homes.As the Government have been involved throughout Parliamentary Group on mortgage prisoners is pushing it. This would provide immediate emergency relief for those most at risk this process, is it too much to ask them to explain what of financial ruin. No one should underestimate the threat to the plan is, and what the timetable for resolving the wellbeing and even lives if this doesn’t happen, and happen incarceration of these prisoners will be? soon.” In its recent report, UK Mortgage Prisoners says The Government will no doubt say that some mortgage that it has put the record straight on what it calls a prisoners are already paying rates lower than 3.5%, so “Government made scandal”. It is for the Government rates do not need to be capped. But those sold on by to defend themselves on that charge. UK Mortgage the Government to vulture funds like Cerberus are Prisoners complains that the Government have “effectively paying high rates. In the package sold by the Government ignored the issue”and that, where the FCA has intervened, containing more than 66,000 mortgage loans, 52% were it has done so in a limited and ineffective manner. Its paying rates between 4.5% and 5%, and 37% were paying asks seem very simple: an immediate cap on SVRs for rates of over 5%, when the mortgages were securitised. closed mortgages; introducing a tailored mortgage product for those affected; giving credit to prisoners The Government could have set strict conditions who have for a decade or more made overpayments; when selling the mortgages on the interest rates which stopping penalty charges for any excess arrears; and could be charged. But when they sold £16 billion of adjusting credit ratings going forward. Those are five mortgages to Tulip and Cerberus, they imposed only a simple steps for 250,000 people whose lives have quite 12-month restriction on increases to the standard variable simply been blighted. rate. These have long since expired and the chief executive of Tulip Mortgages told the Treasury Select Lord Sharkey (LD) [V]: My Lords, I declare an Committee that the firm now had interest as co-chair of the APPG on Mortgage Prisoners. “complete discretion to set the interest rate policy.” Mortgage prisoners exist almost entirely because the Treasury made a terrible mistake when it sold the first On the sale to Heliodor, the Government claimed tranche of former Northern Rock and B&B mortgages that the organisation which bought the loans would be to an unregulated American vulture fund called Cerberus. required to set their standard variable rates by reference Cerberus is the name of the multi-headed dog that in to the SVR charged by a Greek mythology sits at the entrance to the gates of “basket of 15 active lenders”. hell. That is not an inappropriate name, in view of what But when you read the details of the securitisation happened next. agreements for the mortgage loans sold, you will find Three things are needed to rescue mortgage prisoners. that, actually, the Government have required the SVR The first is to reduce immediately to comparable market to be set only at the level of the third highest of the rates the SVRs that they pay. The second is to make 15 active lenders. This is absolutely critical, as the sure that transfers to much less expensive fixed-rate third highest SVR is actually 4.49%. The lowest SVR deals are properly available to them. The third is to among those 15 active lenders is 3.35%, and the average make sure that new classes of mortgage prisoners cannot SVR weighted by market share is 3.72%. be created in the future. The latest and final sale of the Treasury-held mortgages Amendment 99, moved by the noble Lord, Lord was announced in February. The book was sold to Stevenson, to which I have added my name, deals with Davidson Kempner Partners and Citibank, with funding the first of those things. My Amendments 116 and 117 by PIMCO. The Government said that the SVR was deal with the second and third. Amendment 99, as he going to be charged by reference, again, to a basket of has so clearly and forcefully explained, would protect 15 active lenders, but there are no details about how the thousands of mortgage prisoners stuck paying this will work in practice. If it reflects the practice in high standard variable rates. It would introduce a cap earlier sales, it will not actually provide any protection on the standard variable rates paid by customers of to customers. The Government will also say that the inactive lenders and unregulated entities. That would FCA has changed the affordability test to enable mortgage provide immediate relief for thousands of mortgage prisoners to switch to a different lender. But the progress prisoners, and could give space for longer-term solutions has been very slow, with only a very small number of to be found. It would help mortgage prisoners who lenders willing to use these new flexibilities. took out loans with a fully FCA-regulated high-street bank which were then sold on to vulture funds. The cap on the SVR proposed by this amendment Money-saving expert and consumer champion Martin would provide immediate relief to mortgage prisoners Lewis supports this proposal, and on Monday he released who have been overpaying for the past 13 years. It a statement saying: would protect all mortgage prisoners, including those “While the government chose to bail out the banks in the who are unable to switch. It would give time for other financial crisis, it has never bailed out the banks’ customers who solutions to help mortgage prisoners to be developed. were victims of that collapse. Mortgage prisoners have been left The SVR cap would apply only to mortgages owned GC 665 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 666 by inactive lenders and unregulated entities. It would In 2018, lender trade bodies facilitated a voluntary have no impact on active lenders competing to attract agreement to offer these borrowers an alternative deal customers. where they meet certain criteria. This means that any The cap is supported by the campaign group UK borrower in the active market can access a new fixed-rate Mortgage Prisoners, as the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, deal if they are not in arrears and have a minimum of said. Members of the group have stated that this two years and £10,000 left on their mortgage. However, amendment is the difference between feeding their 250,000 mortgage prisoners with inactive lenders or children and themselves or continuing to rely on food unregulated firms were excluded from this, meaning banks.The Government created the problem of mortgage that they are stuck on standard variable rates. There is prisoners and it is their moral responsibility to rescue nothing these customers can do to gain control over them from the significant detriment that many still what, for many, is the largest part of their monthly face. I urge the Government to accept the amendment expenditure. in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson. Mortgage prisoners are worried about rates rising, I now turn to Amendment 116, which would extend and that this will come on top of recent increases in access to fixed interest rates to all mortgage prisoners, their monthly mortgage payments if they took a payment enabling them to gain control and certainty over their holiday. The FCA has claimed that mortgage prisoners monthly mortgage payments. When the time came for who cannot switch are paying SVR interest rates that the nationalised Northern Rock and B&B mortgages are only 0.4% a year higher than other customers with to be sold by the Government back to the private activelenders,butthiscomparisoniscompletelymisleading. sector, they could have pursued an approach which It ignores the fact that those with active lenders can ensured that these customers were in fact protected. access new deals. Only around 10% of customers at They could have sold them to active lenders or secured active lenders are paying the SVR, and most that are a commitment from purchasers to offer these new typically switch to a new deal very quickly. More than customers new deals. three-quarters of consumers with active lenders switch The risk to these customers was identified. In January to a new deal within six months of moving on to an 2016, the noble Lord, Lord McFall, wrote to the Treasury, SVR. If you take two customers, both paying an SVR UK Asset Resolution and the FCA to say that the of over 4% and both with a loan-to-value ratio of 75%, customers affected by these sales should be protected, the one with the active lender could access a new deal offered a fair deal and given access to fixed rates. at 1.8%. The mortgage prisoner is stuck on the SVR, UKAR responded that, by returning these mortgages costing them hundreds or thousands of pounds extra to the private sector, every year. These financial strains are having a massive “the option to be offered new deals, extra lending and fixed rates effect on mortgage prisoners and their families. should become available”. Amendment 116 would extend the benefit of being But this requirement was not written into the contract able to access fixed rates to mortgage prisoners. It would when mortgages were sold to funds such as Cerberus, not distort the market, but it would help ensure universal with the BBC reporting that UKAR is now claiming fair treatment and access to fixed rates for mortgage to have been “misled” by Cerberus. prisoners. Only inactive lenders exploiting their helpless A UKAR spokesman told BBC “Panorama” that and captive customer base would be affected. This Cerberus had the ability to lend to the former Northern amendment, and a cap on SVRs, would change the Rock customers and that UKAR believed that it intended lives of thousands of mortgage prisoners and their to do so. They said: families. Again, I urge the Government to acknowledge “The reply to Lord McFall sent on behalf of the UKAR the moral responsibility for the continuing harm their board of directors was based on information presented to UKAR careless and profit-driven mortgage sales have generated. and the board had no reason to disbelieve this at that time.” I urge the Minister to accept Amendment 116. Attheverybest,thisisevidenceof catastrophicincompetence. Amendment 117 would set new conditions for At worst, it is evidence that UKAR heartlessly pursued the transfer of a regulated mortgage contract. The profit over care for mortgage customers. Government have now sold all the nationalised mortgage Consumer champion Martin Lewis lays responsibility books from Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley, for the treatment of mortgage prisoners squarely with but the underlying problems illustrated by these sales the Government. He said that the Government remain. A lender can choose to sell a mortgage book “have sold these loans to professional debt buyers who do not at any time, and the pandemic may cause more mortgage offer mortgages and left these people in these types of mortgages, books to come up for sale. The lender can sell you on which have been too expensive, crippled their finances and destroyed their wellbeing.” to anyone. It does not have to sell you on to an active lender or a high-street bank; it can sell you on to an unregulated entity or a vulture fund. This amendment 2.45 pm would require a lender to obtain your consent if it was The APPG has heard from hundreds of mortgage to sell your mortgage to an inactive lender or unregulated prisoners, including nurses, members of the Armed entity. When asking for your consent, it would have to Forces and small business owners, all describing the give you clear information about the interest rates and frustration of taking out a mortgage with a high-street policies which you would be offered. You would need bank and being sold on to vulture funds which do not to give your consent only if you were being sold on to have to treat them fairly or offer them new deals. By an inactive lender or unregulated entity.If your mortgage contrast, in the wider mortgage market there have was being transferred to an active lender which committed been recent improvements in the deals available to to offer you the same deals and interest rates as its those with active lenders. existing customers, consent would not be required. GC 667 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 668

[LORD SHARKEY] problem borrowers. We should not try to solve the The Government have claimed in the past that this problems of a relatively small number of people with would have a negative impact on financial stability. blunderbuss legislation. This is simply not the case. Under this amendment, My main reason for speaking on this group is the Bank of England and the PRA would still be able Amendment 117, which is fundamentally misconceived. to use their powers under the special resolution regime My noble friend Lord True, when he spoke to the large to enable the transfer of mortgages from failing banks. group of amendments headed by Amendment 79 on They would not need the consent of customers when our previous Committee day,talked about the importance they used their resolution powers. of the securitisation market for mortgage providers. The Government have now also shown, at the very Securitisation ensures that lenders can carry on originating end of their sales of these mortgages, that they support new debt by freeing up capital and liquidity. This is applying covenants when mortgages are sold on. The especially important in the mortgage market. latest sale of £4.9 billion of mortgages announced last Amendment 117, which requires written consent week by the Government contained a requirement for every mortgage sold, is not practical. It is likely to that the legal title of the mortgages must not be sold mean that lenders will be shut out of the securitisation on to an unregulated firm. The Government have market. Mortgages are not sold individually: they are stipulated that these protections must be replicated in parcelled up into books. Requiring consent will make any future sale of the £4.9 billion of loans—meaning this very much harder to do and will significantly add that they will apply to these customers until they have to the costs of the procedure. Anyone who has tried to repaid their mortgages, no matter where the mortgages get responses from individual account holders where end up. there is no incentive for the account holder to respond We welcome the Government’s inclusion of these will tell you that this is mission impossible. requirements, although it is much too little and much Mortgage securitisation is a normal balance sheet too late. The Government should have applied this financing strategy for both retail and commercial lenders. provision in their earlier sales of mortgages to unregulated Making it more difficult or expensive for mortgages firms such as Cerberus or Tulip Mortgages. Everyone will have consequences for consumers, whether by needs the same protection from mortgages being sold restricting the availability of credit or increasing its to unregulated entities. This amendment would put cost, or both. I cannot support any of the amendments the customer back in control. It would require consumers in this group. to give their consent before their mortgage was sold on to an inactive lender or an unregulated firm. It would Lord Griffiths of Burry Port (Lab): My Lords, I will extend to the full market the protections the Government not detain the Committee long. I would not normally have shown that they support. be seen near a finance Bill, largely because I do not The Economic Secretary to the Treasury has said have and do not ever expect to have any finance to that he is committed to helping borrowers with inactive bother me. Nor would I presume to discuss mortgage lenders and that he “remains open” to “considering payments, since I do not have and never will have a practical solutions”. The Chancellor told Martin Lewis mortgage to worry about. However, what I do have is after the Budget that he would keep working on the some experience of people in all kinds of situations, issue and was committed to finding a workable solution. good and bad, from the cradle to the grave. Amendments 99, 116 and 117 are three practical solutions It was a conversation with someone whom I knew which we hope that he will consider. We very much well that made me aware of the truly dreadful situation hope that the Chancellor and the Economic Secretary that we are debating and that they found themselves will recognise their continuing moral obligation. We in. Here was someone who was in a bad—a very bad hope that they will support these three proposals and —situation: they and 250,000 others. My noble friend take action now to ensure that all mortgage prisoners Lord Stevenson of Balmacara and the noble Lord, are finally set free. Lord Sharkey,have done us a great service in highlighting the plight of these people and have worked out a Baroness Noakes (Con): My Lords, Amendments reasonable way to help them. I am happy to leave the 99 and 116 deal with the difficult area of mortgage heavy lifting on the matter to them and, no doubt, prisoners. Both amendments seek to go beyond what other Members of the Committee who will chip in on has already been achieved for mortgage prisoners by the same side of the argument. They have made a the relaxation of affordability rules by the FCA. compelling case in detail and with passion, all of which I have much sympathy for mortgage prisoners, but will help to disguise the extent of my own ignorance. we should not lose sight of the fact that these borrowers I simply must express my bewilderment at the way, do not have sufficient financial credentials to qualify when this subject was debated in the House of Commons, for new mortgage lending under current regulatory no less a person than the Economic Secretary to the rules and hence cannot remortgage. They are a hangover Treasury gave voice to some rather misleading statements. from the period when lending criteria were much less He said, for example, that “mortgage prisoners” were strict than they are now and include interest-only paying a mere 0.4% higher than average mortgages. borrowers who lack a credible way of repaying capital. That figure has been mentioned more than once and is We should be wary of going beyond what the FCA simply not true, according to the picture that I have has already done. In particular, making the FCA seen painted in reliable reports from various quarters. specify maximum interest rates is an unwarranted He also suggested that when the mortgages in question market intervention. The FCA is best placed to judge were sold to “vulture funds” and other non-regulated whether any further solutions can be found for these bodies, the borrowers retained all the same conditions GC 669 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 670 stipulatedintheiroriginalagreements.Fromtheconversation This seems eminently resolvable if the Government that I had and other cases that I have subsequently truly stand by, which I believe they do, a levelling-up read about, that just is not the case. agenda—an agenda of opportunity, possibility and The Government seem to have treated mortgage enablement. A simple amendment to resolve the issue prisoners as cash cows, a means of paying down of mortgage prisoners would fit well within that. If my Treasury debt, after the decision to rescue the banks Amendment 127, Amendment 99 in the name of the after the crisis of 2008. On the day that conversation noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, or the other amendments arose, I thought that it would be a friendly interchange in this group do not do the trick, will the Government on the streets of my home town, with perhaps a consider bringing forward an amendment of their mention of the unexpected good fortune of the Welsh own on Report to enable everybody who finds themselves rugby team—but it actually opened a can of worms. in this situation to have the freedoms and the flexibilities The person I was speaking to is considered to be a enjoyed by so many others who simply have the financial “problem borrower”, one of the people referred to by product of a mortgage? If not, why not? the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes. But my friend is a problem borrower largely because of the depredation Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, I have taken a of resources due to the fact that she has been paying vow to try to be brief in all my responses today, mortgages over the odds for 10 years now.Even someone recognising the time pressures of the day. I also listened whose only qualification for speaking in this debate is carefully to my noble friend Lord Sharkey and the an O-level in economics found himself smelling a noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, and I am not sure that rat as he spotted an egregious injustice being done to the case could be better made. mortgage prisoners. However,I must follow the noble Lord, Lord Griffiths The amendments seek to correct this situation. of Burry Port, in picking up an issue raised by the They are balanced and sensible. Martin Lewis, who was noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, who described mortgage quoted more than once by the noble Lord, Lord Sharkey, prisoners essentially as problem debtors. These are and is a true expert in this field, writes this: people the overwhelming majority of whom would “Mortgage prisoners are the forgotten victims of the 2008 not have any problem with their debt if they had been financial crash. The Government at the time chose to bail out the allowed to take advantage of the changes in interest banks, but unfairly—immorally—hundreds of thousands of their rates and mortgage terms that have been available victims were left without adequate help, trapped in their mortgages and the financial misery caused by it.” much more widely. The case to act for their protection No wonder they are problem borrowers. He continued: is simply overwhelming. If we had not had the financial crash and they had remained with regulated lenders, “And they have been forgotten ever since.” the vast majority of them would not be facing any The Bill and the amendments give us an opportunity issue. They would have had their mortgages restructured to unforget them, to make good on past failures, and to lower rates and they would not be facing stresses to bring justice to a situation yearning for it. The Minister and strains today. is a decent and fair man but will of course be bound by the usual conventions in a debate of this kind. It I have been sent information from a significant would be good to hear him promise to go back to his number of people who find themselves to be mortgage department to try to find a way of bringing a little prisoners and, frankly,the stories are often heart-breaking. hope and cheer to those who suffer in this way. I heard this morning from someone who is desperately ill in hospital, but the stress of the financial challenges Lord Holmes of Richmond (Con) [V]: My Lords, it is that he faces makes every day far worse and far more a pleasure to take part in the debate on this first group difficult to deal with. To me, it is inhuman that action of amendments. In doing so, I declare my interests as is not taken. The Government recognise that action set out in the register. I congratulate the noble Lord, must be taken, given the circumstances and the stress Lord Stevenson, on the manner in which he introduced that so many people face and the corners that they the amendment. I also thank him for giving a wave to have been pinned into. Surely such action should be my Amendment 127 on this subject, which found itself taken now and not be kicked down the road yet again. a prisoner in a different group of amendments but was very much to the purpose of this group. Simply put, it Lord Tunnicliffe (Lab) [V]: My Lords, the case for would prohibit any more individuals becoming mortgage reform in this area has been overwhelmingly made by prisoners in this way. my noble friends Lord Stevenson and Lord Griffiths, the noble Lord, Lord Sharkey, and the noble Baroness, 3 pm Lady Kramer. I wish not to delay the Committee any I support Amendment 99; I have put my name to it; longer, but simply to advise that the Labour Front I think it offers a solution to this problem. This entire Bench supports my noble friend Lord Stevenson’s debate could be summed up simply as: when Cerberus amendment and the generality of those proposed by showed its teeth, where was our financial watchdog? the noble Lord, Lord Sharkey. We know that there was no role that the FCA could play on this issue; it is not within its powers or rules as The Minister of State, Cabinet Office (Lord True) currently set out. One wonders why, having rescued (Con): My Lords, I acknowledge that the Government the Rock, which was the correct thing to do across all have a great deal of sympathy for borrowers who are FS at the time of the crash, we would then imprison so unable to switch their mortgage, and we are committed many of those customers and betray them in a somewhat to finding practical ways to help them. That is why we opaque fashion compared to the reality of how they have been working closely with the FCA, and I will set have found themselves in their current position. out the action that it has taken. GC 671 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 672

[LORD TRUE] thenewmodifiedaffordabilityassessments.TheGovernment In 2019, the FCA introduced a modified affordability will continue to monitor the situation and hope to see assessment, which allows active mortgage lenders to even more options available over the coming months. waive the normal affordability checks for borrowers Enabling people to switch into the active market is the with inactive lenders who meet certain criteria—for best way to help consumers secure new deals, and that example, not being in arrears and not wishing to is what we have been doing. borrow more. As a result of this, inactive lenders have Amendment 117 would require active lenders to been contacting borrowers who have had difficulty seek a borrower’s permission before transferring their with switching, setting out new options that may be regulated mortgage contract to an inactive lender. available for them on the active market. I am pleased There are already a number of protections in place for that a number of lenders, including Halifax, NatWest borrowers, meaning that their mortgage cannot be and Santander, have already come forward with options sold on to an unregulated servicer and their terms and specifically for these borrowers. conditions cannot change as a result of the sale, so the More widely, we have taken steps to support those benefit of explicitly seeking permission from the borrower unable to make mortgage payments during the pandemic. is unlikely to help them any further. Payment holidays have provided vital support for It is required that all loans within the UK must be consumers, including those with inactive lenders, with administered by a regulated entity, meaning that all over 2.75 million mortgage holidays granted since customerswillbeabletobenefitfromconsumerprotections March 2020. —for example, access to the FOS. The terms and However, policy should be based on clear evidence. conditions of a loan do not change upon sale, meaning The FCA’s analysis found that customers with inactive that consumers will be treated in line with their original lenders paid, on average, just 0.4% more than customers agreement even if their loan was sold to an unregulated in the active market with similar characteristics. There entity. has been comment in Committee on that figure. The As my noble friend Lady Noakes pointed out, the FCA’s analysis also found that, of the 250,000 borrowers amendment would also risk disrupting the residential with inactive lenders, half were in a position to switch mortgage-backed securities market as it may prevent to a new mortgage even before any action from the the effective securitisation of mortgages, where beneficial Government. That illustrates one aspect of the diversity ownership of a portfolio of mortgages is transferred of this group. to a special purpose vehicle. Securitisation is a common way for active lenders to fund themselves, and disrupting On the 0.4%, I am aware that there are other the securitisation market would likely have a negative estimates out there, including in a recent report, which impact on the availability and cost of mortgage credit has been referred to, published by the UK Mortgage in the United Kingdom. For those reasons, I ask that Prisoners action group on 8 March, just a few days the amendment be withdrawn. ago. Treasury officials have reviewed this analysis and noted that these figures seem to be based on surveys with small sample sizes. The comparisons are often Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Lab) [V]: My Lords, inappropriate—for example, contrasting rates that many I thank those who have contributed to this debate borrowers with active lenders would not even be offered. for the various points they have raised. The noble I hope that noble Lords will appreciate that this is a Lord, Lord Griffiths, has it right: this is a complex and complex topic. We are, as I have said, committed to detailed issue and it delves down way beyond most finding practical ways to help. people’s experience of how markets of this type operate. In those circumstances, we have a difficult choice as a Amendment 99 seeks to cap standard variable rate Committee on how one might want to take this forward. mortgages for some customers. Data from the FCA On the one hand, my noble friend Lord Griffiths is suggest that the majority of borrowers with inactive right that the end of the story is what is happening on lenders pay less than 3.5% interest. As I have already said, the ground to people who have ended up in this compared to those with similar lending characteristics, situation through no fault of their own but as a result consumers with inactive lenders pay on average only of government action. The Government therefore have 0.4% more than those with an active lender. This was to explain to the people of this country why, having also backed by the London School of Economics created this problem, they do not feel that they have recent report on mortgage prisoners, noting that it more than just a moral responsibility to see it resolved. does not recommend capping standard variable rates On the other hand, I take absolutely the Minister’s at a low rate. Capping mortgages with inactive lenders point that, it being a complex issue and the Government could have an impact on their financial stability, as it having seen some action already happening, they remain would restrict lenders’ ability to vary rates in line with committed to what he called finding a practical plan market conditions.That would also be unfair to borrowers forward; I hold on to that. However, the complexity in the active lending sector, particularly those in arrears, and the fact that this affects a relatively small number who are paying a higher standard variable rate. of people—although 250,000 people is not a small Amendment 116 seeks to provide new fixed interest number in my terms—do not mean that we should rate deals for certain mortgage customers with inactive simply allow the market to find the right balance lenders. I have already set out the FCA’s work in between the commercial pressures of offering loans introducing a modified affordability assessment and and the ability to service those loans and make a profit that a number of active lenders—household names—have out of them from those who have limited resource. come forward with offers. The FCA estimates that up There is no doubt at all that, having said all that, there to 55,000 borrowers could be eligible to benefit from is obviously a pandemic issue as well. GC 673 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 674

Where does that leave us? I take hope from the fact I know from my time as a Minister that having to put that the Minister said that there is work on the way to my own name to such an impact assessment made me try to take this forward. I recognise that it is a complex look much more effectively at any instrument I was issue—indeed, I said so in my opening remarks. However, signing and thus avoid cock-ups—which do unfortunately he must accept that the arguments made by myself but happen from time to time, even in the Treasury! Secondly, made in much more detail and with a much wider as so much of EU power is being transferred to the range of evidence by the noble Lord, Lord Sharkey, FCA and PRA, it requires them to publish their supported by the noble Lord, Lord Holmes of Richmond, proposed new rules on their respective websites for suggest that this is more than just a complicated public scrutiny and to add an impact assessment of problem which needs to be bottomed out by working the rules. By impact assessment I mean an analysis of with the market. We need convincing that there is the costs and benefits of the proposed change, compared work going on that will result in a workable solution with the existing position and other policy options, of benefit to those affected by this within a reasonable including the expected impact on UK businesses and timescale, otherwise we will come back on Report the economy. All I seek is a simple way of ensuring with a better-drafted amendment—perhaps covering that the authors of new rules always consider the some of the points made by the noble Baroness, Lady economic impact of their proposals in the interests of Noakes, but not all of them—in a way that makes it good government. clear that the Government cannot continue to let this So far, so good. But—and I accept it is a big but settle itself. It has to be taken forward in policy terms —in part these provisions seem to be required already otherwise too much damage will be caused. In the by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. as subsequently amended. I have been through the relevant explanations and websites and am still not Amendment 99 withdrawn. completely sure whether that is the case. Perhaps the Amendments 100 to 102 not moved. Minister can kindly explain the position and give us some encouraging words as to the present and future position on this important matter. If my proposed Amendment 103 provision is genuinely unnecessary,I am of course happy Moved by Baroness Neville-Rolfe to withdraw it. 103: After Clause 40, insert the following new Clause— Amendment 104 follows on from Amendment 103. “Impact assessments However, it is distinct and could be adopted alone. It (1) Regulations made under this Act, and under any requires the Secretary of State to publish an annual regulation-making powers inserted by this Act into any report on the impact of measures taken by the FCA, other Act, may not come into force until the Secretary of the PRA or the Government to regulate financial State has laid an impact assessment of each regulation before each House of Parliament. services with a particular focus on small business, innovation and competitiveness. While there has been (2) Rules made by the FCA or the PRA under rule-making powers given to the FCA or the PRA by this Act, and a great deal of excellent discussion in this Committee under any rule-making powers inserted by this Act into on holding financial service operators to account and any other Act, must be published on the website of the improving enforcement, we can lose sight of the value FCA or PRA (as appropriate) at least 30 days before of smaller operators, including those based outside they are due to take effect, together with an impact London. Moreover, innovation can bring huge value assessment of the rules. to consumers—online banking, easy money transfer (3) In this section, “impact assessment” means an analysis of overseas and share trading on mobile phones are good the costs and benefits of the proposed change, compared examples—and our strained economy will benefit from to the existing position and other options considered, including the expected impact on UK businesses and the the competitiveness and attractiveness of the UK’s UK economy.” financial sector. I know from my experience in the intellectual property 3.15 pm area, which I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Con): My Lords, I rise to of Balmacara, will remember as well, how valuable an speak to my Amendments 103 on impact assessments annual report of this type can be in focusing staff and 104 on reporting. I have been like a long-playing attention. Writing the report is a complement to the record on the importance of cost-benefit analysis of usual in-tray—the focus on risk and the avoidance of legislation, regulations and new rules in the form of an banana skins that exercises public servants, sometimes impact assessment. I return to the charge today with to the detriment of more strategic thinking. I look renewed vigour, as we are transferring very substantial forward to hearing from my noble friend the Minister powers from Brussels to Britain. I know that the on how we might best take some of these matters process of preparing a cost benefit and the sunlight of forward. I believe that they could encourage the intelligent transparency help enormously in avoiding difficulties scrutiny of new rules and their early dissemination and disasters. By the way, I thank my noble friend the and publication, and that a strategic look once a year Minister for producing an impact assessment on this will help the sector to stay ahead in the new world. Bill—always one of the most useful Bill documents, I beg to move. even if in this case it is shortish on numbers. Amendment 103 is in two parts. First, it requires Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) [V]: My Lords, the Secretary of State—in this case, usually Treasury for the purposes of today’s debates I again remind Ministers—to lay an impact assessment of each SI or Grand Committee of my financial services interests as regulation that they make before it comes into force. in the register. GC 675 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 676

[BARONESS BOWLES OF BERKHAMSTED] provisions were a mistake, and may move to make I have signed Amendments 103 and 104 and agree changes, but much damage has been done. An impact with the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, so I will assessment, such as recommended by my noble friend, not repeat what has already been said. It is a subject would have avoided this. that the noble Baroness pursues with diligence, and it I also mention the alternative investment fund managers is right to do so, even if at times—at least as far as I directive. When I worked in Brussels as director-general am concerned—the scope and content of impact of theEuropeanFundandAssetManagementAssociation assessments are a little disappointing. The amendment —EFAMA—my French and German colleagues said relates to the final impact assessments as rules are that they did not think that the EU should move to coming into effect, although, of course, to be useful, regulate alternative funds; that was London’s market, impact assessments are needed at each stage. Indeed, if and largely London’s alone. Furthermore, it was of proportionality is to be properly taken into account, interest only to professional investors, who did not that is surely a prerequisite for the regulator. need protection from investment risks. They thought But returning again to the FiSMA theme, where that it would be wrong for the EU to try to regulate it. much of the proportionality, flexibility—call it what However,threeyearslater,MichelBarnier,asCommissioner you will—will be done on an institution-by-institution for the Internal Market, moved to introduce the AIFMD. basis, so the rules will enable that but not demonstrate Again we were overruled and reluctantly went along how it is to be carried out, I am not sure how that will with it. An impact assessment might have encouraged be properly assessed in an impact assessment based the FSA to fight harder against it than it did. only on the rules. Therefore, it will also be important For the reasons so well explained by my noble to be able to capture what actually happens after the friend, I support her amendments and look forward to rules have come into operation. That might be by way hearing the Minister’s reply. of a retrospective impact assessment after a period of time,and would seem to be another matter that Parliament Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Lab) [V]: My Lords, will need to investigate. I am pleased to be part of this debate, which is narrow Included in that, it should be relevant to capture the in some senses but has the capacity to reach quite effects of frequency of rule change, which is presently widely. It is narrow in the sense that it has been framed greatly emphasised by regulators and the Government throughAmendments103and104,whichIbroadlysupport, as part of the reasoning behind the Bill, yet somehow about the need to try and get more of an impact I doubt that rule churning was what industry felt it assessment model into the way in which we review the was signing up for by supporting FiSMA. It will be changes that may come through as a result of the important to understand the scale and nature of that return to the UK of powers previously exercised at EU rule tweaking. Amendment 104 gets in part to that level. It also raises much wider issues, which I will come with the Government producing a report, but perhaps to before I end my short contribution to this debate. it should be part of the annual report or an annual I am sure that the case made by the noble Baroness, impact assessment from the regulators, so that it can Lady Neville-Rolfe, is about good government. Better be further queried and those regulated can be interviewed regulation was always part of the argument she used by the relevant parliamentary committee. So perhaps when she was a Minister. I well remember the discussions the Minister can confirm how this frequency of tweaking we had across the Dispatch Box about intellectual will be tracked, what is the Government’s planned part property, in both primary and subsequently secondary in it and would they support Amendment 104 in legislation. The material on this was much enhanced particular as part of the way to do that? by the good work done by her civil servants in bringing forward some of the issues raised and trying to give Viscount Trenchard (Con): My Lords, I declare them a quantitative—not just qualitative—feel when again my interests as stated in the register in respect of the debates were organised. A lot of the work that they financial services companies. I am delighted to support do on better regulation does not get properly recognised, Amendments 103 and 104 in the name of my noble and this is a good opportunity to pay tribute to it. As friend Lady Neville-Rolfe. My noble friend is a champion an example, I particularly enjoyed the annual work of impact assessments and she speaks from experience. that I was often asked to do in relation to the setting of The impact of many financial services regulations on the national minimum wage, now the national living smaller firms has been very damaging. I mention just wage. It was always accompanied by a formidable two examples. The unbundling provisions contained document, created mainly I think by the Low Pay within the MiFID II directive,requiring asset management Commission but endorsed by civil servants. It went companies to pay separately for research, have been into every conceivable aspect of the way in which the disastrous in their effect on smaller companies with setting of a minimum threshold for wages would, or interesting strategies, which have either been forced could, affect the labour market, with particular reference out of business or forced into mergers where their to women and other low-paid groups in society. It was innovative strategies have not been taken forward. The always a red-letter day in my diary when I saw that effects have been less choice for customers and less coming up; I knew that I was going to be given a very coverage as a result of the significant reduction in the meaty topic to research, read up on and debate. I enjoyed number of securities analysts, particularly those covering the debates that we had on that. smaller and growth companies. While I say yes to the thrust of what is being said The effects were predictable, but ESMA ploughed here, and recognise the benefits that will come from ahead and the FCA acquiesced. It is small comfort good impact assessments, properly debated, particularly now that ESMA itself realises that the unbundling in relation to the regulatory framework in the Bill, GC 677 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 678

I wonder whether there is a slight irony here. The Baroness Noakes (Con): My Lords, as many Members substance of what the noble Baroness is saying in her of the Committee have already noted, my noble friend amendment is that better scrutiny of proposals brought Lady Neville-Rolfe is well known in your Lordships’ forward for legislation—and, of course, for secondary House for her pursuit of impact assessments and is a legislation —would happen if there were better impact stern critic of government departments that hide behind assessments. I say in passing, and in reverse order, that the exact wording of Cabinet Office guidance. Recently, a secondary instrument is very much a creature of the many of us have joined her in being appalled by the primary legislation that has preceded it. It is not complete lack of impact statements published to support uncommon to find in SI impact assessments binary the Government’s coronavirus policies, involving—I choices, usually not very helpful in detailed essence. remind the Committee—the greatest ever peacetime The proposition set up in the impact assessment is infringement of civil liberties. The Department of often, “What would happen if this legislation did not Health and Social Care used the flimsy excuse that the go through?” and then “What will happen when it Cabinet Office does not require impact assessments does go through?” In other words, if there is a change for policies intended to have a temporary effect. in regulations, you impact; no change and you impact I am particularly interested in my noble friend’s the change. You do not get a range of options. Amendment 104, which requires an annual report 3.30 pm to Parliament. I am not wholly in favour of annual That range probably ought to come in the primary reports, because they can degenerate into boiler legislation discussion, but very often, of course, there plate and have a very short-term horizon; I prefer the is the tyranny of the Bill—which is my term for the concept of periodic reports that can look at impacts way in which Ministers often defend, beyond the point over a longer time span. However, whether such reviews of any reasonable, rational position, the wording of are annual or less frequent, I suggest to my noble the Bills they are presenting, simply because they have friend that the report could also usefully concentrate been told by their civil servants, “Ah, Minister, if you on the quality of consultation carried out by the give way on this point, your credibility will be shredded, regulators, and that would include the quality of impact you’ll never be able to stand up in the House and statements. defend any Bill, you can’t let even this comma be Consultations by the PRA and the FCA often feel changed to a full stop; please don’t even go down that like not much more than going through the motions. route.” I exaggerate slightly to make the point, but I They are not alone in the public sector in seeming to see from the grins around the table from those who exaggerate the benefits and underestimate the costs. have been Ministers that this is not an uncommon HMRC, for example, is a particular case in point, experience. The tyranny of the Bill, and the inability having been criticised more than once by the Economic to model it for what could happen if you flexed it Affairs Committee of your Lordships’ House for the slightly,is often a restriction on good debate and scrutiny. use of cost assumptions that seem to bear little relationship In fact, the most likely option for further work in to reality.Similarly,the PRA’sconsultation on ring-fencing this area would probably come with pre-legislative rules was widely regarded as a massive underestimate scrutiny, which has gone out of fashion recently but I of the cost of compliance, as was borne out by subsequent hope will come back. We know for certain that we will cost experience. A superficial impact assessment, or get the online standards Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny. one that overstates the benefits or systematically I would like to play a part in that, and declare my underestimates the costs, is worse than useless and can interest. That would be the point at which some modelling lead to poor policy-making. It would be wise to ensure of the impacts of what would happen on various that the regulator’s performance in this regard is kept ranges of options might be allowable, and would not under review. be subject to the constraints that I have been talking about in how legislation gets nailed down too quickly Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, in many of the and the chances for changing and discussing it are groups of amendments to the Bill we have discussed very limited. However, I am wittering on about a pet the issue of accountability, and it has been a very topic and I should not do that when we are short of important discussion. However, we have also discussed time for the Bill and the Committee needs to progress. the necessity to have proper evidence and information I will also say in passing that it is easy to criticise to make that accountability worthwhile,valid and effective. the Government for the work they do, but I am These amendments follow exactly that direction. absolutely at one with the noble Baroness, Lady Neville- One of the pleas that I will put in is that an impact Rolfe, in saying that we need good, intelligent impact assessment should be studied and then reviewed. The assessments, and I welcome her idea in Amendment noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, is not speaking in this 104 of an annual report on the work done in relation group of amendments but I can think of numerous to financial regulation, because, taken piece by piece, occasions when he has spoken on a financial services it is sometimes a bit difficult to get the hang of it. The Bill and pointed out that the information in the assessment requirement to do an annual report on all the changes did not seem to answer any of the obvious questions that have gone through and to have to evaluate whether that a sensible person would ask in order to understand they have been successful or not would give value, and the regulations involved. I would join him in that. We I support her in that. seem to have narrow definitions of what an impact This has been an interesting debate; I am glad the assessment is, and it seems to me that it should do noble Baroness has raised the issue and I hope that the what it says on the tin. It ought actually to assess the Minister will make a good response that will give hope impact in a way that is meaningful to the regulation or for some movement in this area. piece of legislation in front of us. GC 679 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 680

[BARONESS KRAMER] and the FCA to publish any rules made using the This push for evidence and information, and quality powers in the Bill in draft, alongside an impact assessment. in both, is an important thrust of the conversations I do not believe that the amendment is necessary, as and debates that we have had around the Bill. I very the Government and the regulators are already committed much hope that Ministers take that on board, because to identifying and publishing the expected impacts of this is starting a pressure that will not go away. In fact, subsequent rules and regulations made under the Bill. for the Government, if they want to produce the The Government have of course published an impact highest-quality legislation possible, the discussion created assessment alongside the Bill. In line with the guidance by developing a high-quality impact assessment will set out in the Government’s Better Regulation Framework, lead in the end to far better legislation. the impact assessment sets out HM Treasury’s current understanding of the costs and benefits of the measures. Lord Eatwell (Lab): My Lords, my initial reaction Where appropriate, further details will be set out in the to the amendment of the noble Baroness, Lady Neville- impact assessments that will accompany the secondary Rolfe, was to puzzle over exactly what sort of impact legislation made under the Bill. I remind my noble assessment she had in mind. Was she perhaps thinking friend Lady Neville-Rolfe that the regulators are required of the famous remark by the noble Lord, Lord Turner, by FSMA 2000, with some very limited exceptions, to that the banking sector in the UK does much that is undertake a cost-benefit analysis for proposed new not socially useful? After all, the ultimate rationale for rules, and to publish those alongside their draft rules regulatory activity is the enhancement of the common as part of their consultation. The PRA and FCA have good—the goal of good government. already published their first consultations on the draft However, this debate has clarified the issue before rules that they intend to make in relation to the prudential us, which is that an effective impact assessment requires measures in the Bill, and they include comprehensive not just thorough analysis but a definition of an cost-benefit analyses. objective or, perhaps, objectives. The lack of clear Amendment 104 would require the Secretary of objectives is the key weakness of Amendment 103. State to report on the impact on business that measures Amendment 104, therefore, is much stronger in that it taken by the regulators and the Government to regulate lays out a number of objectives against which an impact financial services may have, and particularly to report assessment might be calibrated. The key to resolving on the impact on small businesses, innovation and the dilemma—I apologise for sounding a bit like a competitiveness. We have spoken at length in this broken record—is to take the parliamentary role referred Committee about competitiveness, and I hope that I to in Amendment 103 and combine it with the sense of have demonstrated how importantly the Government Amendment 104. An effective parliamentary process take this issue. Additionally, my noble friend Lady and, dare I say, a parliamentary committee, could define Penn recently wrote to my noble friend Lady Neville-Rolfe the objectives to be addressed in any impact assessment about how the Government support smaller financial of the type referred to in Amendment 103—“We want services firms. to know the impact of this regulation on problem x, y I am sure that my noble friend Lady Neville-Rolfe or z”—and then seek annual reviews focusing on does not need to hear me say that the Government are matters that are deemed to be important at any given committed to ensuring that the financial services sector time, thereby avoiding the template issue referred to by supports competition and innovation, allowing new the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes. firms to compete and grow. Of course, both the FCA That is what is missing from the amendment—a and the PRA have a statutory objective to promote means of making the impact assessment an effective effective competition. means of acquiring information and an insight into In earlier debates, we have talked about the new the thinking of regulators, which can then be scrutinised accountability frameworks that the Bill puts in place in a coherent and consistent manner. for the prudential measures. Those require the PRA Earl Howe (Con): My Lords, as my noble friend and the FCA to have regard to UK competitiveness, Lady Neville-Rolfe has explained, these amendments among other things, when making rules to implement bring us to the question of how we report on the Basel or the investment firms prudential regime. They impact that regulation has on firms. Every noble Lord are required to report on how having regard to that who has spoken today has referred to the value of has affected their proposed rules. The FCA and PRA impact assessments for Parliament and the Government are of course already required to prepare annual reports, in particular, and I do not dissent from that general which are laid before Parliament for scrutiny. These proposition. My noble friend Lord Trenchard in particular reports cover the extent to which the regulators’objectives, spoke about the value of measuring the burden imposed which include promoting effective competition, have by certain EU rules when we were an EU member. I been advanced, and how they have considered existing hope that it is of comfort to him if I remind him that regulatory principles in discharging their objectives. the Chancellor has said that decisions about financial On this basis, I hope that my noble friend Lady services regulation after the end of the transition Neville-Rolfe agrees that I have said enough to make period—we have of course now passed through it—would her feel comfortable in withdrawing her amendment. be based on what was right for the UK, taking account of what is necessary to ensure financial stability, market 3.45 pm integrity and consumer protection. The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord McNicol Amendment 103 would require the Government to of West Kilbride) (Lab): I have received one request so lay impact assessments for each of the regulations far to speak after the Minister. I call the noble Baroness, made under the Bill. It would also require the PRA Lady Bowles of Berkhamsted. GC 681 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 682

Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) [V]: I am Amendment 103, we should make an effort, with the sorry to intervene again, but I feel I must correct what dissemination of the Bill, to ensure that the requirements the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, said—or at least are better understood. remind him that the unbundling of the analysts’ report That means that Amendment 104 is perhaps more was an invention of the FSA that the UK then sold to important, because it asks that we review regularly the EU, and now the EU is blamed for what the UK what is being done in the way of cost-benefit and did through the EU. There are many other examples impact assessment, and how the objectives set out are of that, although I can confirm that AIFMD was achieved. I suggested some objectives in Amendment definitely not one of those. It would be nice if sometimes 104; others will no doubt be concerned about other the Minister could intervene to at least have the record objectives of the regulators. As we have said on earlier straight. amendments, competition is not really the same as competitiveness. I was also keen to throw in small Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Con): My Lords, I thank all business—for reasons that my noble friend knows very noble Lords who have taken part in this debate, and I well—and innovation, because of their value. thank the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles of Berkhamsted, With this Bill, we need to satisfy ourselves that the for her thoughts and for raising the ante to talk about new framework satisfactorily replaces, indeed, improves a slightly more dynamic form of impact assessment. on, what went before. I take the point—the Chancellor I thank my noble friend Lord Trenchard for the is right—that we now have the chance to do the right very example that is now the subject of debate. I think thing in the UK, and to do it better than was done the point that he was making, which I would support, under the auspices of the EU. I may come back to this is that impact assessments can reduce the perverse on Report, because a simple well-understood system effects of such measures. We know—it is a matter of of impact assessment, and of annual review in some record, I think—that the number of analysts, especially form, would boost scrutiny and transparency, which small analysts, has gone down as a result of the MiFID has been a key theme of the Bill, as well as the legislation. An impact assessment on how it was enforced, governance of our largest and most important economic whether its origin was in the brain of the UK or of the sector. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. EU, could have been helpful. Of course, that is what my amendment is all about. Amendment 103 withdrawn. I was glad to have the support of the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, for working up a decent impact Amendments 104 to 106 not moved. assessment model. I share his tribute to public servants, having been one a long time ago, and the work of bodies that produce evidence for things, such as the Amendment 107 Low Pay Commission and social trends, and the MPC Moved by Lord Sikka in our own sector of financial services. Better scrutiny 107: After Clause 40, insert the following new Clause— would take place with better impact assessment. It is why, regarding proposed new subsection (3) which “FCA duty to make a statement about ministerial directions on investigations Amendment 103 would insert, I talked about both the existing position and other options, because I agree (1) The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 is amended as follows. with the noble Lord that it is much better if you can look at several options when developing difficult policies. (2) After section 1T (right to obtain documents and information) insert— I agree that pre-legislative scrutiny can sometimes be very useful. “1U Duty to make a statement about ministerial directions on investigations My noble friend Lady Noakes reminded us, rightly, Where a Minister directs, comments on, or intervenes of the lack of impact assessment on the various Covid with an FCA investigation into wrongdoing or measures. I thank her particularly for the suggestion malpractice by a company, the FCA must make a that the quality of consultation by the FCA, the PRA public statement about the nature of any such or the Government and of impact assessment should intervention.”” be added to any review. I was glad to hear noble Lords build on what an Lord Sikka (Lab) [V]: My Lords, Amendment 107 impact assessment system should look like, including seeks transparency about ministerial interventions in the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer—I echo her concerns regulatory investigations, by requiring the FCA to about accountability—and the noble Lord, Lord Eatwell. make a statement. I am grateful to the noble Baroness, There is a feeling that it is important to have a decent Lady Bennett of Manor Castle,for her support. Currently, system. ministerial interventions are made in secret, and neither My noble friend the Deputy Leader explained, as I Parliament nor the people are able to call Ministers to had already anticipated in my own remarks, that a account. Ministers intervene to stymie investigations, system does exist: both for government regulation and and the trail is often carefully concealed. Some years regulation by the two regulators, and for cost-benefit later, a few interventions do become visible. analysis to be produced. What I am not clear about is Consider the case of HSBC, a bank supervised by whether that is fit for purpose. It is very difficult to UK regulators, implicated in global money laundering find out what the requirements are and to read all the and protected by UK Ministers and regulators. In July various bits of paper.This is why I tabled the amendment, 2012, the US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on so that we could have an intelligent debate. Even InvestigationspublishedareportentitledU.S.Vulnerabilities if noble Lords do not want to go along with to Money Laundering, Drugs, and Terrorist Financing: GC 683 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 684

[LORD SIKKA] The Bingham report was published on 22 October HSBC Case History, which documented the fact that, 1992 and was highly critical of the Bank of England’s despite evidence, HSBC staff knowingly laundered failures.However,it was published without the supporting money for criminals and engaged in sanctions-busting. appendices containing extracts from a document In December 2012, HSBC was fined $1.9 billion by codenamed the “Sandstorm report”, which provided the US authorities—the biggest fine at that time. The information about some of the frauds and named US Department of Justice said that HSBC permitted some of the parties involved in them. “narcotics traffickers and others to launder hundreds of millions Meanwhile, the US Senate Foreign Affairs Committee of dollars through HSBC subsidiaries, and to facilitate hundreds investigated BCCI frauds and, in December 1992, of millions more in transactions with sanctioned countries”. published a report titled The BCCI Affair, which said It added that HSBC had that “accepted responsibility for its criminal conduct and that of its “BCCI’s British auditors, Abu Dhabi owners, and British regulators, employees.” had now become BCCI’s partners, not in crime, but in cover-up.” However,HSBC was not prosecuted, and instead entered The US Senate committee secured a censored version into a deferred prosecution agreement until 2017. The of the Sandstorm report from the Federal Reserve, levying of the largest ever fine on a UK bank and which had obtained it from the Bank of England. The admission of “criminal conduct” did not prompt an committee also secured an uncensored version and investigation of HSBC’s practices in the UK. Did the said that it bank engage in similar practices here? “revealed criminality on an even wider scale than that set forth in the censored version.” In March 2013, the US House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services began a review of The committee also had access to CIA files on BCCI, the US Department of Justice’s decision not to prosecute which have been made public. Despite this, the Sandstorm HSBC or any of its employees or executives for criminal report remains suppressed in the UK. activities. The committee’s July 2016 report, Too Big to Jail, showed that the Governor of the Bank of England, 4 pm the chief executive of the Financial Services Authority Some time later, a US academic and I began research and Chancellor George Osborne intervened to protect into some puzzling aspects of the BCCI episode. My HSBC. The report contained a two-page letter, dated co-author visited the US Congress Library and found 10 September 2012, from the Chancellor to Ben Bernanke, the censored version of the Sandstorm report. On chairman of the US Federal Reserve. It urged the US 3 January 2006, I used freedom of information legislation to go easy on HSBC, as it was too big to fail. The US to request a full copy of the Sandstorm report. The report reproduced some correspondence showing the Treasury refused, and the Information Commissioner determination of the UK Government and regulators agreed with the Treasury. To cut a long story short, I to protect a bank that had, by its own admission, pursued the matter. Five and a half years later, on engaged in “criminal conduct”. 11 July 2011, three judges in the case of Professor The FSA, Bank of England and Chancellor also Prem Sikka v Information Commissioner and HM urged the US to go easy on Standard Chartered Bank, Treasury unanimously ordered the Treasury to release which was fined $670 million for money laundering, the full version of the Sandstorm report to me. The sanctions busting and falsification of records.Its deception judges said: was aided by Deloitte. The US Treasury court documents “In our view there is considerable public interest in the public referred to the bank as a “rogue institution”. No seeing the whole of the Sandstorm Report so that it can be seen, statement was made at that time to the UK Parliament not just what happened, but what role was played by the governments, toexplainregulatorysilenceortheChancellor’sinterventions. institutions and individuals who were involved with an organisation … How do we improve banking regulation or hold anyone guilty of what the authors of the Sandstorm Report described as ‘an enormous and complex web of fictitious transactions in to account for nefarious practices when Ministers and what is probably one of the most complex deceptions in banking regulators collude to protect wrongdoers? history’”. I shall return to some questions after my next At paragraph 42 of the judgment, the judges rebuked illustration. It relates to the July 1991 closure of the the Treasury for shielding the identity of Bank of Credit and Commerce International. It was “the architects of a group-wide programme of fraud and the site of the biggest banking fraud of the 20th century. concealment”. BCCI was supervised by the Bank of England and By comparing the version of the Sandstorm report was closed only after investigations in the US. The UK given to me by the Government with the censored closure was followed by a few prosecutions and some version found in the US Library of Congress, one can parliamentary committee hearings. However, unlike get some idea of the parties being protected by the UK previous bank collapses in the 1970s and 1980s, or Government and regulators. These include individuals even subsequent ones such as Barings in the 1990s, there thought to be linked to al-Qaeda, Saudi intelligence, has been no independent forensic investigation and the royal families of Abu Dhabi and other countries in key documents continue to be suppressed to this day. the Middle East, as well as arms dealers, smugglers, On 19 July 1991, the Government appointed Lord fraudsters, convicted criminals, BCCI senior personnel Justice Bingham to examine some aspects of the Bank and politicians. The Government even fought to shield of England’s supervision of BCCI. The Prime Minister the identity of some criminals who had died in the John Major told Parliament: intervening years. Words such as “Grand Cayman”, “The conclusions of the inquiry will be made public.”—[Official “Bahrain”, “Turks and Caicos”, “North American Report, Commons, 22/7/1991; col. 755.] Finance and Investment”, “Arab Livestock Company”, GC 685 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 686

“Saudi National Commerce Bank” and “Royal Bank and the impact that it had on European banks were of Scotland” had also been concealed by the UK spoken about in Brussels. It is fair to say that there Government. were concerns from other European countries. I do Since the 2011 court judgment, there have been a not think that the UK was the first to write. The number of requests in Parliament to place the Sandstorm financial stability point on fines for things that we also report in the parliamentary Libraries. The Government thought were pretty shocking was openly discussed in have refused. I asked a Written Question and on Brussels, including in my committee. Indeed, I recall 2 November 2020 the Government replied: havingconversationsaroundfinancialstabilityimplications “There are currently no plans to publish an unredacted version with the president of the ECB and with the Fed and of the report by Lord Justice Bingham into the Supervision of the US Treasury, although I do not think that one needs Bank of Credit and Commerce International.” to advise people like Ben Bernanke about the relative So, after nearly 30 years the Sandstorm report is sizes of UK banks and the UK economy and the sitting in nearly 1,300 US libraries but it is still a state problems that that will create; you would get pretty secret here. Governments have gone to considerable short shrift in return. lengths to protect the wrongdoers. It is actually quite humiliating either to make or I have cited examples of ministerial interventions know about such interventions or to sit there while from different time periods to show that a culture of people say to you, “I’ve had a letter from your Minister.” cover-up is deeply institutionalised. Ministerial cover-ups I certainly felt humiliated about the need for such have only emboldened banks. Last September, we information by my country and humiliated by the learned of the FinCEN files, which showed that HSBC behaviour of important financial institutions from my allowed fraudsters to transfer millions of dollars around country. A normal response would be to try to make the world even after it had learned of their scams. In sure that it does not happen again, and I fear that relation to the ongoing saga of the RBS and HBOS progress has not been as good as it should have been. frauds, the Thames Valley police and crime commissioner Maybe one reason for that, I now realise, was that publicly stated: there was no such discussion about these occurrences in the UK in the same way as there was in Brussels, “I am convinced the cover-up goes right up to Cabinet level.” which I find quite shocking. But too big to fail should Some no doubt will remind me that we have the not mean too big to jail. We have been around that best regulation in the world—but best for whom? debate already, in the sense of needing fairly to prevent There is a huge difference between regulation on the offences, the construction of large companies, which books and regulation in practice. A commonsensical create organised irresponsibility, and the FCA failing understanding is that financial regulatory mechanisms us at a critical moment in the SMCR, so it has been exist to protect the interests of investors and depositors, undermined. but that cannot be done without investigation and a To get back to the point about disclosure—yes, it purge of corrupt practices. Anything less harms people, should be shared, and any humiliation should be industry markets and possibilities of democracy. By shared, so that those responsible at the time get more shielding wrongdoers, Governments may appease some, heat and there is greater resolve to make corrections. but what of the people’s right to know? How can Everything is all so much more diluted and dismissible Ministers and regulators be called to account when when it is looked at only as history. Governments and regulators protect wrongdoers? How can a good system of regulation be developed under Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP) [V]: My such circumstances? Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, for tabling Governments claim to adhere to seven principles of the amendment, to which I was delighted to attach public life, which include accountability, openness, my name. It is a great pleasure to follow the noble honesty and integrity. In the absence of disclosures Baroness, Lady Bowles of Berkhamsted, and I welcome about ministerial interventions, such claims will continue her support. to have little substance. My amendment would strengthen I do not think I need to add to the noble Lord’s democracy by requiring regulators to make disclosures detailed, forensic presentation of the clear, obvious about ministerial interventions. I beg to move, and I and systemic problem: that Ministers intervene to end hope that this Committee will support this call for or direct investigations into fraud, corruption and transparency. malpractice. As he clearly documented, they do that on what appears to be a semi-regular basis. This Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) [V]: My Lords, amendment seeks to stop that, or at least make it as the amendment suggests, I think it is necessary to illegal. Noble Lords might argue that it should not be; know when there have been interventions and why. I I certainly look forward to examining any contributions do not say that from a wish to create political opportunity that seek to do that. to complain—in fact, rather the opposite. When matters We have an institutional culture of cover-up, as the are transparent, there is generally less to complain noble Lord said. We cannot be sure that every case has about and more understanding. If there is a wish to been exposed—indeed, it would be very surprising if keep everything private, that in itself is a problem. The they had been—despite the often extraordinary efforts amendment does not ask for chapter and verse on of investigative journalists and academics such as the everything, just the nature of the intervention. noble Lord. We are most likely seeing the tip of an I recall the instances of HSBC and Standard Chartered. iceberg. That what has been done emerges only later, I was aware of them at the time, not from any information dragged into the light of day despite considerable from the Government but because the size of US fines resistance, is of considerable detriment to public and GC 687 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 688

[BARONESS BENNETT OF MANOR CASTLE] chairman of the UK Foreign Affairs Committee international trust in both the financial sector and the and David McAllister MEP, chairman of the EU British Government, as the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles, Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs.The authors just highlighted. say that corruption The most useful contribution that I can make to “threatens the resilience and cohesion of democratic governments this debate is to the politics and the sociology—and I around the globe and undermines the relationship between the mean politics with a small “p” for, as the noble Lord state and its citizens.” demonstrated, this behaviour is not contained to Governments of any particular political hue. He said 4.15 pm that ministerial cover-ups had emboldened banks. That is not a source I am likely to be quoting often, Behaviour that tolerates, supports and enables dishonest but it reflects a growing global understanding across and corrupt practices encourages the spread of those the political spectrum—a fact that the noble Lords practices. If there are indeed only a few rotten apples, who in this Committee keep assuring us that everything which I am sure many from the financial sector will is fine, clean, transparent and honest in the financial claim, the rot will spread if they remain in the barrel. sector might like to reflect on. It reflects what a few of Those people will still be in place in institutions—in us in this Committee—the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, many cases, in very senior places within those institutions the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles, the noble Lord, —and be sharing, passing down and directing others Lord Davies of Brixton, the right reverend Prelate the to continue their practices, approaches and morals. I Bishop of St Albans, and occasional other contributors— have an agricultural sciences degree; I can promise you have been saying: an upgraded financial sector with that the rot will spread through the barrel. tighter controls and stronger enforcement are crucial to the security of all our futures. We are now without the protective umbrella of EU regulation and what was once seen as a force independent The amendment would be a modest but important of one particular financial centre that enforced some step forward. I do not necessarily expect acceptance degree of cleanliness among all of them—albeit that from the Government today—although one can always the UK had an inordinate, often baleful influence on live in hope—but I hope that they will at least go away attempts to tighten regulation and prevent fraud and and think seriously about this and other upgrading corruption. With the UK making its own rules, the measures proposed in this Committee. behaviour of both the UK Government and the UK financial sector will come under greater scrutiny. The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Duncan The EU is—not coincidentally after the UK’s of Springbank) (Con): I call the next speaker, the Lord departure—looking in the coming years to significantly Bishop of St Albans, but I cannot hear anything. tighten regulations on tackling fraud and corruption, I wonder whether he might be on mute. on stopping tax dodging, on preventing greenwashing and on reining in the inordinate economic power of TheLordBishopof StAlbans[V]:MyLords,Iapologise; the internet giants. What happens in the UK will be I am so sorry. weighed against that, which is why tightening up this I am glad to speak in support of Amendment 107 Bill with this measure and others is crucial. What we in the names of the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, and the need is not a more “competitive” financial sector but noble Baroness, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle. an upgraded one, one that is honest, straightforward Throughout the course of this debate, there have been and trustworthy. a number of comments on the current functioning of There is also the politics in the broadest sense: the the FCA, the scope of its remit and whether it is issue of how the Government are regarded, which is a properly undertaking its duties. long-running, serious issue for the UK. The place of As the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, pointed out, there politicians at the bottom of trustworthiness rankings have been occasions when financial misconduct has is a source of jokes and bitterness but a serious and not been fully disclosed, and it is worrying that this significant problem for our body politic. It has to be may have been due to interventions from those within tackled. This amendment, a legal commitment to honesty government. As we establish our new position in the and transparency, would be a significant step. world following Brexit and seek to build on our financial We are seen, from many sides of politics, to have a services sector, it is vital that we are known for our Government of the few, a Government for the money, honesty and transparency throughout the world. Our a Government for the City of London, to the detriment future will depend on this. So surely the amendment of the country.This has to change if we are as a country is entirely uncontroversial. The FCA is meant to be to go forward. an independent regulator, not a direct arm of the I shall finish with a quote. The Government. Hence, if Ministers have sought to intervene in any sort of FCA work or investigation, it should be “trend toward globalized corruption has been enabled in crucial a matter of transparency and disclosed. part by regulatory asymmetries among key international economic actors and a lack of resources and political will in law enforcement.” Recently, the FCA dropped its investigation into That comes not from the Tax Justice Network or Lookers, arguing it had instead made its concerns Transparency International. It comes from a foreword clear relating to the to a report from the Center for American Progress “historic culture, systems and controls” entitled Turning the Tide on Dirty Money, signed by of the group. Why the investigation was not carried Senator Robert Menendez, chairman of the US Senate out to the full remains unclear—certainly to me, despite Foreign Relations Committee, Tom Tugendhat MP, trying to find out. I imagine that many, including me, GC 689 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 690 find the FCA’s answer unsatisfactory. It does not give what I considered to be real weakness in the way that it us the assurances that we would hope an independent handled the HBOS Reading fraud and in its treatment regulator would give. of Jes Staley,chief executive of Barclays. As we discussed Some commentators have noted that the dropping earlier, he was fined by the PRA and FCA, under the of this investigation seemed to coincide rather conveniently senior managers and certification regime, something with the FCA’s new rules relating to car finance, in excess of £600,000 for, among other things, hiring brought in at the end of January 2021. Yet even these private detectives to try to hunt down the identity of changes fell short of a mis-sell, which would undoubtedly an internal whistleblower. have cost the providers of finance billions—strongly I note that it was the US authorities—one of the hinted at by the FCA’s 2019 report into car finance. New York regulators, I think—that fined Barclays How the FCA came to its decision was in-house, $15 million for the same behaviour,not the UK authorities. even if it was sometimes perplexing to those of us Some Members of your Lordships’ House may be outside. Nevertheless, in this instance, for example—and aware that the US regulators visit the UK—I have in many others—what we do not know is whether certainly met with the CFTC when they have been there has been any direct ministerial intervention to doing this—in order to get the message over to bankers steer the FCA into any specific course of action. here that, if they come across any wrongdoing that Manypeople would like reassurances that anyintervention potentially has an impact on the United States, as well should be made in the interests of all and for the common as informing the UK regulators they should also make good, particularly in customers’ best interests. immediate contact with US regulators, who start from The amendment, in shining a light on what happens a position that they will be far more aggressive in behind the FCA’s closed doors, would be a valuable hunting down wrongdoing. addition to the Financial Services Bill. It would help I am afraid that the reputation of the UK for in a mission that I know many in this House share to hunting down wrongdoers is not good. I wish we did create a more transparent, robust and, dare I even say, not see ourselves in that position. That is one of the moral financial system that in the long run will benefit reasons why I am hopeful for an office of the whistle- all of us. I hope that the Government will look closely blower. If there is any suspicion that a Minister had at either the amendment or something similar as we intervened inappropriately, it is through a whistleblower return to the matter later during the passage of the Bill that that information would be exposed. We need an through your Lordships’ House. absolute safe haven for such a whistleblower to make contact, in order for that exposure to happen. Again, I Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, I need to spend look forward to hearing from the Minister how the more time, frankly,trying to understand the amendment. Ministerial Code impacts on a situation such as this. If I would be genuinely shocked if Ministers interfered it does not, or is ineffective, the answer seems to me to with an investigation of any of the regulators—certainly be: strengthen the Ministerial Code. the FCA, the body at the centre of the amendment. I am not sufficiently familiar,I confess, with the Ministerial Lord Eatwell (Lab): My Lords, my noble friend Code, but if the code does not make that clear, it would Lord Sikka has made a powerful case for greater seem absolutely necessary that it does. transparency in regulatory matters. I think it is clear to I perfectly understand concerns about the effectiveness everybody that nothing undermines confidence in the of the FCA as a regulator in dealing with wrongful regulatory system so much as the sort of cases to behaviour. It needs to be much more aggressive and which my noble friend referred. What is often evident transparent. Wehave talked earlier in Grand Committee is that these matters eventually come out, and so the about the HBOS Reading fraud scandal. The FCA traditional rule that the cover-up is worse than the was finally pressured into commissioning a report original transgression exerts itself once again. from Promontory, then did not publish it—only a The Government have made a virtue of transparency summary that did not reflect in any significant way the and openness in several aspects of the regulatory actual conclusions of the report. That was extremely system. Not least, for example, we have discussed in disturbing. We have also talked about the FCA’s actions this Committee the case of beneficial ownership, and under the senior managers and certification regime we heard the noble Baroness, Lady Penn, make the against Jes Staley, chief executive of Barclays— argument for transparency of the beneficial ownership record of Companies House as a great virtue at an The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Duncan earlierstageof ourconsiderations.Surelythatcommitment of Springbank) (Con): My Lords, there is a Division, to transparency should be quite general, covering all so we shall adjourn for five minutes and reconvene regulatory matters, and not limited just to selected parts thereafter. of the regulatory system.

4.22 pm Earl Howe (Con): My Lords, Amendment 107 would require the FCA to make a public statement on the Sitting suspended for a Division in the House. nature of any intervention a Minister may make into an FCA investigation into an individual firm. 4.28 pm The current legislative framework established the Baroness Kramer (LD): I was in the middle of FCA as an independent, non-governmental body saying that we need the FCA to be much more aggressive responsible for regulating and supervising the financial and transparent in its pursuit of wrongdoing within services industry. I listened with great care to the noble the financial services industry. I gave the example of Lord, Lord Sikka but, with respect to him, and without GC 691 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 692

[EARL HOWE] I hope that this has clarified the legal underpinning belittling the value of lessons from history, the examples of the FCA’s independence, and the very limited powers of investigations that he cited are ones that are unrelated that Ministers and the Treasury have in this area. I to investigations carried out by the Financial Conduct hope that what I have said has reassured the noble Authority. That is a key point because, although the Lord that appropriate legislation is in place, and that Treasury sets the legal framework for the regulation of he is content to withdraw his amendment. financial services, it has strictly limited powers in relation to the FCA. The Treasury is the FCA’s sponsor in government Lord Sikka (Lab) [V]: I am grateful to all noble but, in view of the regulator’s independence, it is not Lords for their contributions, but somewhat disappointed appropriate for the Treasury or Ministers to seek to by the Minister’s response. The examples I gave—if I intervene in individual cases. In particular, the Treasury had time, I could add another dozen—all inevitably has no general power of direction over the FCA. I will relate to the past, when, despite government efforts, write to the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, on the things have come to public attention. At no point have content of the Ministerial Code, but I am not aware of Ministersevervolunteeredinformationormadestatements any loopholes in the code that would permit the kind that they have stymied investigations. of conduct that has been talked about. In the parliamentary debate on the Banking Act Weare talking here about an independent organisation. 1987, which formally made the Bank of England the The independence of the FCA is vital to its role. Its supervisor of banks, Ministers claimed that the Bank credibility, authority and value to consumers would be would be an independent regulator. Then we discovered undermined if it were possible for the Government to that there was a whole process of cover-up—the BCCI intervene in its decision-making. I realise that the case, for example. When the Bank of England ceased noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, has some mistrust of to be an independent regulator, the next one, the Government Ministers, but I hope that that fact is of Financial Services Authority, came in. Again, it was at least some reassurance to her. claimed that that was independent. Well, under ministerial pressure, it did not intervene. It did not investigate That is not to say that the FCA is not accountable HSBC’s misdemeanours in the UK, and indeed it was for its actions when investigating potential wrongdoing a party to cover-up in the US. The US House of or malpractice by firms because, equally, the noble Representatives committee report contains some Baroness, Lady Bennett, should be reassured that the correspondence showing how the Bank of England, FCA is governed by the framework of duties set out in the FSA and the Chancellor were pressuring the officials legislation by Parliament. It would be unlawful for it there to go easy on HSBC. The idea that somehow the to act outside this framework in order to further vested FCA is some brand new version of independence interests. The decisions of the FCA can be subject to which we ought to believe simply neglects what has judicial review and, under legislation, the FCA must happened in the past, and that is not really very maintain arrangements for the investigation of complaints. helpful. Of course, Ministers can allay all public fears In the event of a significant failure to secure an by simply saying, “Yes, we will embrace independence.” appropriate degree of protection for consumers, where What is wrong with that? those events might not have occurred but for a serious I have visited the US on many occasions. I have met failure in the regulatory system, Section 73 of the Financial many academics, regulators and businesspeople, and I Services Act 2012 imposes a duty on the FCA to always ask them two questions when I deliver a seminar investigate. Situations can arise in which the Government or after a meeting. The first question I ask is, “If you determine that it is appropriate to intervene. In such could commit financial crime, where would you like to situations, the relevant legislation—Section 77 of FSMA commit it?” The response is always, “The US, because —provides a mechanism for the Treasury to direct the there is a lot of money to be made.” The next question FCA to conduct an investigation where it suspects I ask is, “If you are caught, where would you like to be that there may have been regulatory failure. prosecuted?” At that point, laughter sets in and they Under Section 77, the Treasury can require the all say, “The UK.” Indeed, this country has become regulators to conduct an investigation into relevant kind of a standing joke in regulatory circles. If I were events where the Treasury considers there to be a public referring to any other country and explaining how interest. In addition, Section 77 investigations can consider Ministers and regulators have colluded to protect aspects outside the regulatory system as established by organisations which, by their own admission, engage FSMA, allowing a comprehensive review to be undertaken in criminal conduct, many Members of the House would in the public interest. However, it is important to note say, “Well, that country is corrupt” or “It is a banana that a Minister cannot use a Section 77 direction to republic”. But I find it surprising that the ministerial do anything else at all, or to stop the FCA doing response is basically “Well, we are good, and we don’t anything else. really need to take account of any of these events.” The most recent example of Section 77 in action That is really the tip of a corrosive iceberg, because was in relation to the regulation of London Capital & this corruption goes very deep. Finance, when the Economic Secretary to the Treasury I have asked Ministers a number of times to comment laid a direction before Parliament on 23 May 2019, on the public statement of Anthony Stansfeld—the and formally directed the FCA to launch an independent Thames Valley police and crime commissioner—that investigation. The direction was public and transparent, there is a “cover-up” at Cabinet level of the HBOS and as we would always expect to be the case. The report RBS frauds. It is interesting that no Minister has was laid before Parliament on 17 December 2020. denied it, and no Minister has confirmed it. I have GC 693 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 694 quoted a statement from a very senior law enforcement (g) access to institutions and people who can represent officer—what could be a greater indictment of the UK’s workers’ interests; regulation? (h) participation of workers in determining and improving Finally, could the Minister please tell us why the working conditions; Sandstorm report, which is sitting in 1,300 US libraries, (i) access to facilities for career guidance and training.” is still a state secret in this country after 30 years? I do not know if it is appropriate for him to reply but I Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts (Con) [V]: My Lords, would not be opposed to that. I move Amendment 108 and speak to Amendments 109, 110 and 122, which, collectively, take us into a fresh policy area. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Knight of The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Duncan Weymouth, and the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles of of Springbank) (Con): Does the Minister wish to respond? Berkhamsted, for their support. Support is always welcome and cross-party support is doubly so when, Earl Howe (Con): My Lords, the noble Lord has the as I say, we enter a new policy area. advantage over me, because I am not personally privy I draw the attention of the Committee to my entry to the case history that he cited, which is now 30 years in the register of interests, which shows that I am the or so old. However, I will consult my officials and chairman of the Founder Circle of the Institute for write to him with an answer to his question. the Future of Work. It is the research that I have seen undertaken by the IFOW that provides much of The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Duncan the background to and reasons for my tabling these of Springbank) (Con): Can I confirm with the noble amendments. Lord, Lord Sikka, that he does not wish to press his It is widely argued that there is a high and perhaps amendment? growing level of dissatisfaction with how our system of government operates—or perhaps some would say Lord Sikka (Lab) [V]: I will withdraw the amendment how it fails to deliver a fair distribution of economic for the time being. and other advances. The result has been a series of what one might call “uprisings” against what is seen by many as the conventional establishment view; the Amendment 107 withdrawn. Brexit vote in the UK and the election of President Trump in the US are but two examples. Although both Amendment 108 those events are behind us, there will surely be aftershocks that will shape our society over the next decade or so. Moved by Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts 108: After Clause 40, insert the following new Clause— 4.45 pm “Duty to take account of impacts on sustainable good work Members of your Lordships’ House and this (1) When undertaking duties and using powers under the Committee will all have their individual views on the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, the FCA must relative importance of the different causes of this take into account— general dissatisfaction, but it is becoming clear that (a) the impacts or potential impacts on sustainable the nature of modern employment, too often disembodied good work in the United Kingdom as a consequence and with employees treated primarily as factors of of the provision of financial services with particular production, is an important factor. The Government regard to the evaluation of— have rightly emphasised their success in job creation (i) net gains in total employment; and are to be congratulated on their efforts, but it is (ii) quality of work available; important at the same time to remember that the (iii) terms and conditions of work available; definition of employment by the Office for National (iv) opportunities for training and reskilling; Statistics is one hour or more of paid employment a (b) the desirability of providing financial services and week—just one hour. So if you are a young person on investment supporting the creation of sustainable a zero-hours contract or a member of a minority good work across the United Kingdom; and community locked into a low-pay, low-prospect job, (c) the desirability of advancing the international reputation or if you are aged over 50 and finding it difficult to get of the United Kingdom for promoting inclusive and any job at all, it is perhaps not surprising that you do sustainable economic growth and decent work for not have unbridled enthusiasm for the present system. all pursuant to the United Nationals Sustainable In addition, many argue that the world stands at an Development Goals. important juncture. It is not just a question of what (2) The FCA must publish guidance to organisations providing permanent changes to our working lives will have been financial services about fulfilment of the requirements specified in subsection (1)(a)(i) to (iv). caused by the pandemic; it is, no less importantly, about the impact on employment of the fourth industrial (3) In this Act, “good work” means work which provides and promotes— revolution, artificial intelligence and robotics, leading to the phenomenal increase in computing power that (a) fair pay; brings previously unbelievable developments, such as (b) fair conditions; driverless cars, within reach. (c) equality and freedom from discrimination; Industrial psychologists tell us that people go to (d) dignity; work for three broad reasons. The first is money, and (e) autonomy of workers; we should not be precious about that—but it is not (f) physical and mental wellbeing; just about money, although, disappointingly, many GC 695 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 696

[LORD HODGSON OF ASTLEY ABBOTTS] as Mark Carney has suggested that the most effective appear to think that that is all that matters. Indeed, the way to tackle the challenges of climate change is debate in the House of Commons in Committee on through the investment process, I argue that the same this Bill, at column 163 on 24 November last year, is true of the creation of good work. By anchoring focused essentially only on this one aspect. But a second good work principles in our financial regulatory structure, important strand is what is known as self-actualisation: the country has the opportunity, with our post-Brexit “Am I in a job that enables me to develop to my full freedoms, to become a world leader in a policy area potential? Do I have access to career development and that will surely assume ever-increasing importance in opportunities for training?” That theme is about “me” the years ahead. as a person. The third reason why we go to work is I turn briefly to my four amendments. Amendment about “we”: “Do I work in a pleasant atmosphere 108 has three purposes: first to require the FCA to with fellow human beings to whom I relate? Am I take into account the impact of sustainable work as a proud of where I work? Does the job I do perform a consequence of the provision of financial services, useful service for our society?” It is to move the and to do so by reference not only to gains in employment discussion on from the important but too often narrow but to the quality and conditions of the work, as well and rather predictable debate about remuneration levels as opportunities for reskilling and retraining. Secondly, to discuss the “me” and “we” factors of employment it requires the FCA to do this in a way that builds the that I have tabled these amendments. international reputation of the UK for encouraging The pandemic has sharply reminded us of the value economic growth in line with the United Nations and impact of work on society—that many of the sustainable development goals. Thirdly, the FCA should people in our society with the highest levels of insecurity, provide guidance to the financial sector on how to often suffering poor pay and with poor-quality work, fulfil these requirements. are those most responsible for its functioning. They Amendment 109 imposes a duty on regulated have kept society and the economy going during the organisations to explain how they have complied pandemic. The pandemic has also reminded us of the with the guidance issued by the FCA, and to do so role of companies as social institutions. Government within 12 months of such guidance being published. support has changed the pact between corporation Amendment 110 proposes that there should be a member and society, which may call for a higher level of of the governing body of the FCA with responsibility responsibility and scrutiny. Research, including The for promoting good work. Without such an appointment, Good Work Monitor report from the Institute for the there must be a danger that this policy area will be Future of Work, has made it clear that the availability overlooked.Finally,Amendment122requirestheregulator of good work is an important determinant of health to take into account the impact of employee share and social outcomes; it is even a determinant of diseases, schemes. This aspect is of a piece with the plan to depression and suicide. Further, good work builds foster good work generally. Indeed, the FCA’s chief resilience, prosperity and personal well-being. executive himself has endorsed research which shows Some Members of the Committee may be asking the link between share schemes and the fostering of a why these amendments, worthy though they may be in sense of ownership and involvement. themselves, should form part of a Financial Services To conclude, this will be a long journey, but one Bill. Where good work is not made available, it places an which we need to set out on without delay, and all increased strain on government finances.The externalities those who believe that our present system, for all its of bad work include higher social security payments, a inadequacies and imperfections, provides the best hope greater burden on the NHS, restrictions on social mobility, for our society as a whole, should be joining in. I beg and the perpetuation of inequalities.The financial services to move. sector is a strategically important part of the UK economy, responsible for the employment of up to 2.2 million Lord Knight of Weymouth (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I people. It will, therefore, play a critical role in financing amhappytoputmynametoandsupportAmendments108 the country’s recovery from the Covid crisis. to 110. I pay tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, As my noble friend the Minister has repeatedly for introducing the amendments. reminded us, this Bill is the first part of a wholesale From President Biden, to the OECD, to the UK rethink of financial regulation, and an opportunity Government, everyone around the world wants to for the Government to employ strategic regulation to “build back better”. The amendment is squarely in that steer the sector towards greater consideration of the vein. As we all start to see a path out of this pandemic, importance of good work. If regulators are required the economic consequences loom ever larger. The to consider good work, those offering financial services same people most likely to have lost their lives due to will also need to, and ultimately there will be a trickle-down Covid are now losing their livelihoods. In this country, effect to society as a whole. Put simply, it is in every our challenge of rebuilding also must address our new investor’sinterest to ensure that we address any underlying life outside the European Union. We must account for dissatisfactions about modern employment, since failure the threats and opportunities of new trading arrangements to do so will result in a society increasingly at unease and a new regulatory environment, and the Bill is a with itself, with all the consequent impacts on economic part of that. I see opportunities here to move to more performance, and so on our prosperity. intelligent regulation of the financial sector as we Broadly speaking, there are currently few legal move into this new reality. instruments for encouraging or protecting good work The financial sector is a strategically important through the investment process, beyond the provisions part of the UK economy, as the Committee knows, about the minimum wage and modern slavery. So, just employing up to 2.2 million people. The sector will GC 697 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 698 play a critical role in financing the country’s recovery 2016 and 2018, the proportion of UK investors integrating from the Covid-19 crisis.There is therefore an opportunity environmental, social and governance guidelines into for the Government to deploy strategic regulation to their investment decisions grew by 76%. Up to $2 trillion steer the sector towards a greater consideration of the of UK assets are now managed according to those importance of good work. ESG principles. As has been said, these amendments would ensure that financial regulators understand and give due weight 5 pm to the importance of creating sustainable good work These amendments are clearly not anti-business or across the United Kingdom. The amendments have anti-growth; they go with the grain of where business been designed to build on the great work of the is going. They are also with the grain of new approaches Institute for the Future of Work, which was established to government regulation. Traditionally,we have regulated following the Future of Work Commission, of which I to prevent bad practice by a minority—that might be was a member.Wefound that good work builds resilience, in relation to the minimum wage, fraud or some prosperity and well-being. I commend the institute’s environmental protections. These are hard-won in this Good Work Charter and Good Work Monitor to the House. I campaigned for years to give parents the Committee; as the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, said, it right to bereavement leave if one of their children found that the availability of good work is an important died. I was delighted we finally got there last year with determinant of health and social outcomes. This is Jack’s law. reinforced by the findings of the Carnegie Trust. Conversely, when good work is not available it places a However, this traditional approach to regulation is strain on government finances through the higher cost rigid, as the real world is moving and changing at a of health and welfare services, and depleted tax revenues. pace that legislation cannot keep up with. That is why the Government are now proposing in their online On Budget day last week, those of us on the National harms policy a “duty of care” to be imposed on Plan for Sport and Recreation Committee, whose meeting technology companies. This flexible approach is to be I am missing at the moment and to which I send my applauded and is echoed in these amendments. This apologies, were lucky enough to hear from the Deputy approach of going beyond minimum standards also Prime Minister of New Zealand, Grant Robertson. allows us to calibrate what the good, positive criteria He is currently the Finance Minister and the Sports for the “S”look like in ESG investment—ESG standing and Recreation Minister for his country. I was struck for environmental, social and governance. So far, ESG by what he said when he launched New Zealand’s first matrices have been focused on the “E” and the “G”; “well-being Budget” in 2019: the pandemic points to the “S”, to the social, and the “In the election that led to the formation of this Government, dimensions of good work should help find materiality New Zealanders were asking a core question: If we have declared around that. It could also offer bite and focus in the success because we have a relatively high rate of GDP growth, basisforstandardisedreporting,addressingsomecriticisms why are the things that we value going backwards like child wellbeing, a warm, dry home for all, mental health services or increasingly pitched at that ESG investment. rivers and lakes that we can swim in?” I therefore commend these amendments. They are He went on to say that the Treasury should be responsible good for business and good for people, and they for, reflect the postcode realities that the job of building “measuring and focussing on what New Zealanders value—the back better should not rely exclusively on government health of our people and our environment, the strengths of our action. Good work builds prosperity, resilience and communities and the prosperity of our nation.” well-being, and it is one of the best and most effective I argue to the Committee that we need a similar ways to align human, social, economic and environmental mindset shift. We need to start by accepting that not interests. It should be embedded into the post-Budget all that we value can be measured by EBITDA, a recovery plan’s vision and the very architecture of balance sheet or shareholder value. Then we need to decision-making across government and the regulators. think about what we value and how to incentivise and Businesses want to play their part, and these amendments regulate for that. will help to move things in the right direction. I hope that the Minister will give them proper consideration I have worked in the public, voluntary and private between now and Report. sectors. I run my own business, have started co-ops and charities, and worked at chief officer level for private equity-owned businesses. My current commercial Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) [V]: My Lords, clients include a US B corp, and one heavily financed I have signed these amendments from the noble Lord, by US venture capital. In my range of work, I too Lord Hodgson, and I agree with what he and the often see an increasing values imbalance the more that noble Lord, Lord Knight, have said. I am aware that the enterprise is engaged with financial services businesses. the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, has a long record of Good business balances shareholder value with customer engagement in these matters, because from time to value, staff value and societal value. Too often, values time I discover that I am following in his footsteps. are sacrificed for shareholder value. If one thinks only The “good work” amendments recognise that we need of the value of financial services in financial measures structural changes in how companies operate to ensure such as share price, one is missing the rounded value that they provide good work in the face of technological of the sector. This is like thinking that all the value of and societal changes. With the financial services sector a school is in test scores, or all the value of a job both supporting all businesses and being our largest candidate is in their qualifications. A growing number industry, it has a special, strategic leadership role to of investors do not see business in that way. Between play, and ways that this can be brought about are GC 699 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 700

[BARONESS BOWLES OF BERKHAMSTED] they were all zero-hours contract jobs and that particular contained in Amendments 108, 109 and 110. This week they had not delivered enough money for that would be in line with the principles of Section 3B(1)(c) person to feed themselves and their family. of FSMA, which states that there is role for ensuring However,it is important that we do not just focus—the “the desirability of sustainable growth in the economy of the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, did not—on those who United Kingdom in the medium or long term”. are in desperate poverty and inequality, as awful as In my book, sustainable growth must encompass that is. As he was speaking, I could not help but think technological and societal changes as well as the of what the late, great David Graeber called—here I environment, but I fear there is a long way to go to live may be about to use what is unparliamentary language up to that. here, but it is a direct quote—“bullshit jobs”. The In the interests of time, I shall concentrate on noble Lord referred to people’s desire to get meaning, Amendment 122. There has been all-party support for to feel that what they are doing, how they are using employee share ownership in all its forms for a long their time and talents, is worthwhile and contributing time. Such schemes provide rewards and motivations to society. Indeed, a failure to acknowledge and in ways that wages cannot. At its best, an employee understand that—a focus purely on the pounds, shillings share plan will also give employees a say in how a and pence—is at the root of a lot of our problems: the business is run and can help to achieve many of the financialisation, to which the noble Lord, Lord Knight, aims of the Good Work Charter, such as dignity, fair referred, of our entire economy—not just the financial rewards, participation and learning. parts but the real economy, the care economy, the public Employee share ownership and employee ownership service economy. have many positive effects, and I want to highlight The noble Lord, Lord Knight, referred to managing research on how well employee-owned companies deal things in a different way.I point again to New Zealand’s with financial adversity. living standards framework, that guides its Treasury— Research published by the Cass Business School based on a system not that dissimilar to our own—where after the 2008 financial crisis established that employee- they judge the quality of work, people’s security, the owned companies create jobs faster than non-employee- quality of the environment and the economy all together owned counterparts and withstood the recession better and seek to manage them to a stable, secure, decent as it deepened. They recruited when non-employee-owned whole. companies were laying off staff, and had motivation Theseareimportantamendmentsandcrucialprinciples, where others found it hard to motivate staff. so I wanted to speak briefly in favour of them. More recently, I chaired an inquiry into the effects of employee ownership and the report, entitled Ownership Lord Holmes of Richmond (Con) [V]: My Lords, it is Dividend, found evidence that showed that employee- a pleasure to speak to this group of amendments. In owned businesses performed better, were more resilient doing so, I declare my interests as set out in the and more rooted in local economies—hence why the register. I shall speak particularly to Amendment 122. term “ownership dividend” was coined. Therefore, as It is evident that employee share ownership is a positive has been said, such companies have a strong part to force within our economy, and speaks so much to the play in the UK’s plans to build back better and restart current Covid environment and what kind of economic the economy. sector, work and business basis we can have to our Amendment 122 suggests an emphasis on analysing economy as we built out of Covid. impact of sustainable growth provided by employees It is no surprise that Sir Nicholas Goodisson, after share schemes. As I mentioned previously, it should taking the London Stock Exchange through the big already be covered in the principles, but the urgency bang and seeing some of the early privatisations, then around “sustainable” in all its forms does not seem to moved on to a role heading up the Wider Share be present. Therefore, I commend Amendment 122, as Ownership Council. He saw the benefits and the positive well as the good work amendment. impact that it had for people to have a stake in something, and there could be no better example of Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP) [V]: My that than employees having a stake—a share—in the Lords, I will speak briefly to Amendments 108, 109 company for which they work on a daily basis. and 110 in the names of the noble Lords, Lord Hodgson I believe we will see more innovative models of Ashley Abbotts and Lord Knight of Weymouth. I broadly employee ownership coming through. The EOT, for agree with everything they said. example, is still very much in its embryonic phase but The noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, in his introduction, it is a very positive concept and construct. There will referred to the level of dissatisfaction in our society: be further developments in this area and I believe the threats from poverty, inequality and insecurity. I Amendment 122 sets out the case very well that when would say that these amendments are digging here employees have a share, a stake and a say in the into some of the depth of the problems that I referred business for which they work, it benefits all concerned. to in my speech on a previous group and seek to provide some remedies. As he was speaking, I thought Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, first, I have to of meeting an USDAW representative in Sheffield correct an error I made in the last group of amendments. referring to one of her members who had just come to I referred to the HBOS Reading scandal when I was her to seek a voucher for a food bank. The member talking about the Promontory report, and of course I was not, as you would expect as an USDAW member, should have been talking about the RBS GRG scandal; unemployed; in fact, that member had seven jobs, but I am afraid I got my scandals wrong. My apologies for GC 701 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 702 that—there really are too many to choose from. I hope important both in empowering people in their everyday that one day I find there are no choices; that would be life as a workforce and in making sure that they drive a very good situation to be in. the direction of the company they are working for. We I find this group of amendments wonderfully refreshing all know that the old-fashioned view that all that and a very important change of direction. Amendments matters is the shareholder is essentially part of the 108, 109 and 110 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord past, and I very much welcome all these amendments Hodgson, build on the concepts that we already have as part of the future. in the UK Stewardship Code but take that further. In many ways, one can see a relationship with the duty of 5.15 pm care amendments that we talked about earlier in this Lord Tunnicliffe (Lab) [V]: My Lords, the noble debate. That duty of care was focused on customers Lord, Lord Hodgson, has tabled a number of interesting but in many ways that is now extending that perspective amendments relating to the quality of work, as well as to employees. I find that exciting and worthwhile. on the topic of employee share schemes. As I am sure I and my colleagues in the Liberal Democrats have the Minister will mention, the latter topic is the subject long talked about the need for a very different social of a call for evidence issued alongside last week’s contract between employers and the workforce. Very Budget. However, as that exercise only covers the often that workforce may not be an official workforce operation of one specific scheme, I do hope that we in the formal sense; it maybe people who are self-employed will hear about the Government’swider plans to promote and working freelance but who in effect are working employee ownership and employee share ownership. very closely with an organisation. The whole of that With an eye to the next group, I suspect that many workforce needs a very different social contract as we fintech start-ups would be interested in taking up such go forward into a different era. options to help attract the talent they need. I think we both have different standards about how In studying the first three amendments in this group, we treat each other and different expectations. However, I was reminded of a remark I made at Second Reading, we are also about to go into a period of transition to where I praised the financial services sector for the the digital age. That will be disruptive. It creates real many well-paid and relatively secure jobs it provides, issues for a large swathe of people and we cannot not just in the City of London but across the whole of passively step back and look at a group of people just the United Kingdom. While I stand by that generalisation, as collateral damage as we make that transition. The I must acknowledge that, as in any other sector,exceptions obligations to the workforce have become far more do exist. For example, as tranche after tranche of local significant than they might have been in a fairly steady bank branches reduce their opening hours or close and static era when everything was expected and was their doors for good, we cannot possibly pretend that not changing very significantly. the job security of those workers is as high as it was, say, two decades ago. While working practices are I have long been a fan of what is loosely called rapidly changing across the financial services sector, triple bottom line accounting—and have probably talked certain strands of it retain a reputation for featuring about it too often in this House—whereby issues such long, unsociable hours or a cut-throat working as the environment and the social impact along with environment that many would struggle with. the financial impact are measured when we look at The proposals put forward by the noble Lord, Lord both individual accounts and when we look globally Hodgson, are intriguing. The amendments raise several at a nation’s accounts. We had earlier amendments questions about access to talent and the treatment of around the issue of well-being, which are well related it. As we have said on a number of occasions, we very to all that. much hope that the sector will go from strength to I was excited to hear the example of New Zealand strength, bringing a steady stream of quality new jobs. that the noble Lord, Lord Knight, detailed to a fairly The noble Lord is right to probe the Government on significant degree. Nearly 20 years ago I spoke to a how they will create the ecosystem that makes this conference in Auckland around these issues as New hope a reality. However, these considerations are not Zealand was making its decision to revisit the way in unique to financial services. As the economy recovers which it managed its national accounts and looked at from Covid-19, we will want to see gains in employment corporate accounts. I notice that very often, when we across the board. If we are to build back better, as the look at an English-speaking country with close ties to Government claim they want to do, we will need to the UK, we find it much easier to absorb the examples ensure that workers have good terms and conditions, and to treat them in a sense as a pilot from which we as well as opportunities to undertake training or reskilling. can learn. I therefore hope very much that the principles Therefore, for me the real question raised by these in these amendments will be enhanced. amendments is when we can expect to see the long-awaited Like the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, and my noble employment Bill. The 2019 Conservative manifesto friend Lady Bowles, I am a great believer in employee made a range of commitments on employment rights, share schemes. There is always a downside to be aware and the last Queen’s Speech promised legislation to of. If something goes wrong in a company, you want enact them. Regrettably, despite a longer than normal to make sure that employees have also built other parliamentary Session, we have yet to see any concrete pension resources, have diversification and all those proposals. So, while the Minister may not be responsible kinds of opportunities. A principle that is held as very for the forthcoming legislation, I hope that, during his important for senior management ought to be extended response to these amendments, we will get a firm down throughout the employee base. Where you have commitment that the employment Bill will appear ownership, you have a voice, and having a voice is soon. GC 703 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 704

Earl Howe (Con): My Lords, I am grateful to my success of the businesses for which they work. To noble friend Lord Hodgson for directing the Committee’s encourage this, we offer several tax-advantaged employee attention to a set of issues that lie at the heart of share schemes. These provide a range of tax benefits the agenda for workers’ rights and social justice in the to participating employees and businesses. We keep all workplace. Let me begin by saying to him that the employee share schemes under review, to ensure that Government are committed to making the UK the best they remain effective in these ways. place in the world to work, and I found myself in However, once again I do not believe that the UK’s considerable sympathy with a great deal of what he financial services regulators are best placed to carry said about the connection between employee well-being, any changes forward. It is important that they remain high-quality work and national prosperity. focused on their core objectives. Giving them a diffuse The Government certainly have a role in furthering set of objectives could undermine focus on consumer those ends, and I hope that my noble friend will agree protection, financial stability and the sound functioning that we have already made good progress in bringing of financial markets. The body best placed to keep forward measures that support our flexible labour employee share schemes under review is the Government, market, while also ensuring the protection of workers’ and we see no need to impose this additional condition rights, such as: banning the use of exclusivity clauses on the FCA and the PRA. So, while I am the first to in zero-hours contracts; extending the right to a written acknowledge the importance of the matters that my statement of core terms of employment to all workers; noble friend has raised in this debate, I hope he will closing a loophole whereby agency workers are employed understand why I do not think it appropriate to amend on cheaper rates than permanent workers; introducing the Bill in the way that he proposes. a right for agency workers to receive a key facts page when signing to a company; and quadrupling the Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts (Con) [V]: My maximum fine for employers who treat their workers Lords, I am exceptionally grateful to everybody who badly. has taken part in this debate, including the noble The Government are committed to bringing forward Lord, Lord Knight of Weymouth, who was the first to measures to establish an employment framework that raise the concept of building back better, which was is fit for purpose and keeps pace with the needs of later picked up by everybody, including my noble friend modern work practices, in due course. We are also the Minister. committed to building back better from Covid-19. I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles, Alongside the Budget, we published our wider economic who always brings a degree of detailed and forensic plan for significant investment in skills, infrastructure expertise to these areas. Of course, I am well aware of and innovation, in Build Back Better:Our Plan for Growth. her work with the employee share ownership association, During the pandemic we have taken unprecedented as I am of the work of my noble friend Lord Holmes action to protect jobs, most notably through the of Richmond on employee ownership trusts, which coronavirus job retention scheme—one of the most are critical. I share the interest of the noble Lord, generous such schemes in the world. And from April Lord Tunnicliffe, in finding out the results of the 2021, the national living wage will increase by 2.2%, consultation that is under way in this general area. It is from £8.72 to £8.91, and will be extended to 23 and not often that I find myself supported by the noble 24 year-olds for the first time. Taken together, these Baroness, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle, but I am increases are likely to benefit around 2 million workers. glad to have her along for the ride. The noble Baroness, I fully appreciate that if we are to build back better, Lady Kramer, was certainly right to remind us all how progress should be measured by more than just dry fast everything is changing and that we need to make economic trends. However, most people would agree sure that we are not trying to tackle yesterday’s problems that a large part of human and civic well-being lies in and failing to tackle tomorrow’s. people’s livelihoods, and I remind the Committee that I am not surprised that my noble friend the Minister in last week’s Budget the Chancellor set out his plan to could not accept these amendments.He rightly emphasised protect the jobs and livelihoods of the British people. the work that the Government have done both in Amendments 108, 109, and 110 would essentially employment generally and as a result of the pandemic. require the FCA to have regard to “sustainable good If he had accepted the amendments, I probably would work” when conducting their functions, and to embed have fainted with surprise and been unable to reply to this principle in the financial system as a whole. Financial the debate. However, this issue is not going to go away. servicesfirmswouldthenberequiredtoapplytheprinciple The weakness of our present regulatory system is that in all their activities, including investment decisions. it merely catches and tries to prosecute the bad. In this part of the century, given all the challenges we face, The FCA is responsible for a large number of firms the system should be doing more than that; it should and has been given three operational objectives: to be encouraging the good. This is an area where good protect consumers; to protect and enhance the integrity could be encouraged, and that would have a huge trickle- of the UK financial system; and to promote competition. down effect on our society as a whole. So I am afraid I do not believe that the FCA is the right body for this function, given its current role, Perhaps I may leave noble Lords with a quote from particularly as the issues go far beyond the subject of Robert Kennedy, who said that GDP measures … financial services. “everything except that which makes life worthwhile”. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 122 would require the FCA and the PRA to consider the impact of employee share schemes Amendment 108 withdrawn. on sustainable economic growth. The Government want to support hard-working people to share in the Amendments 109 to 111 not moved. GC 705 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 706

The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Duncan offer on the whole question of financial inclusion, not of Springbank) (Con): We now come to the group least in giving us the ability to reimagine and reconsider beginning with Amendment 112. credit scoring in real time. I would put it to the Committee that, if we had had fully understood and deeplydeployedfintechandindeedalliedregtechthroughout Amendment 112 our financial services sector, we might have had a Moved by Lord Holmes of Richmond different set of circumstances in 2008-09. 112: After Clause 40, insert the following new Clause— The questions around fintech go to the questions of “Designated artificial intelligence officer competitiveness. Brexit and Covid have put the country (1) The Secretary of State must by regulations made by in a particular situation, and there could be no better statutory instrument provide that companies operating opportunity or more pressing time to consider all the in the financial services sector who use artificial intelligence underpins and accelerators that exist across the fintech (“AI”) must have a designated AI officer. landscape. Fintech is the future, but it is the future (2) The AI officer under subsection (1) has responsibility for now. There is no greater example than the fintech ensuring the— strategic review, to which I will come in more detail. (a) safe, Before I move to the amendments, I have one final (b) fair, point to really drive home. The start-ups, scale-ups and (c) unbiased, and sales of fintechs are going to be not just an element of (d) non-discriminatory, financial services—they will be our financial services use of AI. sector, and it is a competition. China understands that (3) The AI officer under subsection (1) also has responsibility and has a particular approach, and the EU understands to ensure that data used in any AI technology is unbiased.” it and has one; we also need to understand it. In many ways, the debate gets somewhat caricatured by people who potentially see our approach being “Singapore- Lord Holmes of Richmond (Con) [V]: My Lords, in on-Thames”. Personally, I think that is extraordinarily moving Amendment 112 I shall speak also to the disingenuous and disrespectful to Singapore, which following 10 amendments in the group, through to operates an incredibly impressive financial services Amendment 136E, which is also in my name. I declare market. If correctly deployed and understood, fintech my interests as set out in the register and thank other will transform financial services in the UK and will noble Lords who have signed up to speak. have standards and rules shot right through, not holding There are 11 amendments in the group and I should back but enabling and drawing into investments like to begin by making some broad comments about international interests and companies. the overall theme. The group’s headline is fintech, financial technology, which covers a number of areas On the crypto element of this, we see Facebook’s in and around that subject and demonstrates the Libra, now Diem, and we see the activities of the connectivity between all the elements of 4IR, the fourth People’s Bank of China. What is the Government’s industrial revolution, including new technologies, and view on these two approaches? Do we want to find how they interact with one another in the context of ourselves as crypto takers or, potentially, collaborative financial services.They include AI—artificial intelligence crypto makers—makers of the standards and, through —DLTor distributed ledger technology and blockchain, that, makers of the markets? just to mention some that I will be coming on to discuss I shall take the amendments in logical rather than as we reach the amendments. numeric order and begin with Amendment 112. In it, I The Government have had a good story to tell on seek to probe the potential utility of having an AI fintech since 2010—and indeed before: the Blair officer in financial services businesses that use and Administration were very positive around the UK’s deploy AI. We have seen the well-established concept opportunity and the potential that we have in this area of the anti-money laundering officer, or AMLO, and of fintech. Perhaps the best example to date is the quite right too. We similarly see chief data, digital and FCA’s sandbox, the measure of its success being its information officers coming on to the scene. Considering replication in more than 50 jurisdictions around the the pervasive nature of AI and the fact that it could be world. It was ground-breaking in its time; certainly, we extraordinarily positive or,potentially,precarious, would find ourselves now, if not at a crossroads, certainly at a the Government consider looking into the AIO role point where we need to consider everything across the within FS organisations? fintech landscape and truly reflect on whether we are doing enough, or anywhere near enough, to ensure AI is already deeply embedded in FS. The whole of that the benefits are maximised for individuals,companies, our financial selves could very soon be at the will of all corporate entities and the UK as a whole. AI. We need to ensure that it is safe, unbiased and non-discriminatory. One example—not from FS, but to make the point—is an AI soap dispenser in the 5.30 pm United States that was trained just using data from Fintech is pervasive; it cuts across all sectors. In Caucasian hands.The soap dispenser then would dispense previous debates in Committee we ran through several soap only to hands which fitted the data on which it incredibly important groups around financial inclusion. had been trained: horrific, extraordinary, shocking—but To flip that coin, financial exclusion has dogged the it happened. That is dispensing soap; what about when UK for decades, blighting lives, ruining opportunities we are talking about people’s livelihoods or the financial and putting potential down. Fintech has a new lens to selves of all of us? GC 707 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 708

[LORD HOLMES OF RICHMOND] My amendment suggests that the digital ID needs I move to Amendment 118, which builds on this and to be scalable; it needs to be flexible so that it can seeks to probe the whole nature of the deployment of evolve—when and if quantum computing comes in, ethical AI. I believe that in the UK we have a competitive there will be a need to rehash all the keys for identity advantage in such deployment which is tied to our through quantum rather than current means. Crucially, underpinning standards and the rule of law. This is set it needs to be inclusive, not just in respect of all the out in greater detail in the report of the Lords AI protected characteristics but inclusive in its broadest, Select Committee, which I was lucky enough to serve on. brightest, brilliant sense. Weset out five rules for the deployment and understanding Finally,the Government would be advised to undertake of ethical AI. Again, this would not hold business a large piece of public engagement around digital ID. back; it would actually be a competitive advantage. To For understandable reasons, there is extraordinary this end, I ask my noble friend whether the Government fear and uncertainty about the concept. That is not would consider changing, extending or expanding the unfounded; if it is got wrong, it goes badly wrong. We role of the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation. It is need to get the public engagement right, as was the case an excellent creation, and the fact that it combines with Lady Warnock’s commission on fertility treatment innovation and ethics in its title is quite right. But is —at first blush, nothing could be seen as more alien there a potential role where the CDEI takes on some than test-tube babies, but it became incredibly well regulatory functions rather than just advisory ones? understood and popular through that public engagement. Similarly, I ask my noble friend the Minister what the If we get that engagement right with distributed ID, I Government’s view is on XAI—explainable AI—and believe that there will be similar support for it across the pros and cons of having that concept deployed the nation. Does my noble friend the Minister agree? throughout our financial services sector. On Amendment 119, on digital operational resilience, Moving to Amendment 115 on distributed digital does my noble friend believe that the Government and ID, I have been in enough debates in your Lordships’ the regulators currently have the grip that they would House to understand all of the issues around ID, how want across the FS sector to understand what the it soon falls into potentially being seen as ID cards on consequences are without the level of digital operational one side and all of the issues around freedom, trust resilience which is required? Will she also comment on and privacy. But the reality is, we need to really potential standards that could be drawn out in this grapple with, deploy and deliver a distributed digital area of DOR? ID system, not just as individuals but as corporate On Amendment 128, on transaction reporting entities and as a nation. There have been what can requirements under MiFID and EMIR, will my noble probably be best described as a number of false starts friend comment on the existing operational burdens when it comes to digital ID, but this is such an currently evident as a result of these requirements and underpin to so much of the potential which fintech whether the Government would consider looking at can deliver, and it is vital that we start to move at pace transaction ledgers, potentially built on a blockchain, on it. It is as important to corporate entities as individuals to ease such burdens? As I have said since writing my and is not just about security—important though that 2017 report, Distributed Ledger Technologies for Public is—and privacy. It can and would be a driver of Good, I would never claim that DLT is the silver bullet; growth. It is critical that it is built on a distributed, not I would not even say that is necessarily a silver bullet, centralising, model. I ask my noble friend, in terms of but I would say that it is surely worth a shot. the work I think is going on within DCMS right now, On Amendment 130, mandating a regime for open what approach is being considered around this distributed finance, noble Lords will be aware of the large success model. that open banking has been. We need urgently to extend I have an example of how digital ID—and, indeed, this into open finance. It could cover various areas, not ID—right now is sub-optimal. The first question should least mortgages and insurance, across the whole FS sector. always be, “What do you want? You asked for my date Currently, we have what I can best describe as PSD 2 of birth, but do you want my date of birth, do you suboptimalities. What is the plan to amend PSD 2, not need my date of birth, or do you just need to know least in relation to an open finance regime? If the plan that I am over 18? Do you just need to know that I am is not to use this current Financial Services Bill, then over 18 in a certain circumstance for a certain period?” which Bill? If we truly had an open finance regime, we Similarly, asking for an address or a utility bill is as individuals could have our data in our hands—we almost quaint in its antiquity, as if somehow to gain a decide, we choose. If we do it, it will be a boon for utility service you have gone through some sophisticated fintech, a boon for individuals and a boon for the UK. KYC process. Just this morning, while I was preparing for this 5.45 pm debate, I received an email saying that there had been Amendment 133 looks at financial market a problem with the renewal of my driving licence, and infrastructure and the potential use of distributed ledger I needed to give various credentials that were set out. technology—DLT. Again, would my noble friend the Noble Lords who know me will know,for obvious reasons, Minister agree that there is a real opportunity to that this was clearly a scam. They will be delighted to experiment and to play, to see what can be achieved know that I do not have a driving licence, nor do I through having DLT-enabled FMI? Would she further drive, but, in so many ways, this simple, single example agree that a potential sandbox at the Bank of England demonstrates many of the shortcomings and difficulties could be of use in this area, as well as potentially with that we currently face without having a distributed the work on central bank digital currency and other digital ID. elements which come under the Bank of England’sremit? GC 709 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 710

Amendment 136B is on the report on the fintech private sector solutions and academia. In an environment strategic review. Ron Kalifa’s review is a fine piece of away from other approaches, verticals and silos, we work. It had excellent chapter heads, and hundreds could come up with solutions. Will the Minister comment across the sector helped. It is packed full of detail and on whether a report to Parliament on such a centre realistic, achievable and doable recommendations. Many would be a good idea at this time? I believe that we of the recommendations do not require primary legislation need such a centre to drive across government if we or regulation. Does my noble friend the Minister agree are to achieve not only all the elements in the FSR, but that the Government should crack on with delivering all the potential benefits from fintech and all the new those that do not? For those that do, I ask her: what is technologies from the fourth industrial revolution. the plan? In many ways, this goes to a number of I have been involved on two occasions when cross- issues that have been discussed in previous groups. An Whitehall working has truly come to life, and the results elephant has been wandering around our Grand were sensational. The first was the 2012 Olympic and Committee, and it is the question: if not this Financial Paralympic Games. We were able to get 18 government Services Bill, then which financial services Bill? If not departments to work together on a horizontal to deliver now, when? a pretty sensational summer of sport and a legacy which still beats, not just in the heart of east London On Amendment 136D, on a scale-up review, does but right across the country, as a result of staging those my noble friend the Minister agree that this is an Games. It happened because the departments wanted opportune moment to look at this area? It has been a to be involved. Similarly, over the last year, we have problem in the UK for decades. It should have been seen a fabulous cross-Whitehall effort on the Covid addressed decades ago and now, with Covid and Brexit, crisis. We had to, but we absolutely did. We need to the time must be right to bring a report to Parliament reimagine the whole timetable for policy and consultation which sets out the barriers, looks at all the issues and an approach—which the centre would lead on—which around patient capital, and identifies all the gaps and put much more data and insight into decisions. the issues to scale up. There are some good examples to look at from other jurisdictions, not least the approach If we do not look at such a centre, and if we do not use in Germany, and to consider all the issues around the Bill to put into practice many of the recommendations place-based growth. Does my noble friend the Minister from the fintech strategic review, when will we bring agree that the comments in the fintech strategic review them into play? At the beginning of the Covid crisis, on scale-up and the need for a scale box to build on the fintechs—often at weekends and in a short number of sandbox also make sense, also tied to the fintech hours—came up with potential solutions for the effective, clusters around the country? Would she further agree efficient and largely fraud-free distribution of CLBILS, that this ties into what was mentioned in the previous CBILS, BBLS and self-employment payments. HMRC group of amendments: building back better and the was unable to engage with them or port them into whole levelling-up agenda? their systems. We now have an extraordinary toxic tail of fraud which will run long into the years ahead. We Amendment 136E is on the modernisation of UK still have fintechs which, right now, could look back law to allow FMI to process digital instruments. Again, over time and solve those issues. Will the Minister it would seem opportune to look at how we can comment on what the Government’s approach will be, transform our markets and bring in all the powers, across all departments, to engage with fintechs better? with many of which we have a competitive advantage This is really a larger question: how can the Government within the UK. In the previous group I mentioned the engage with firms of all shapes and sizes, with SMEs big bang in the City in the mid-1980s. If we get all obviously being critical to that? these fintech changes right, we truly could have big I have spoken at length; I hope I have brought a bang 2—I do not even need to mention that it will be picture of how these individual amendments add up 2.0—for the benefit of the entire UK, not just the to a potential transformation that we could have if we square mile. truly embraced the opportunity that fintech presents. We have the talent; we have the technology. Does the Will the Minister comment on the dematerialisation Minister agree that the time is now, and that we must of securities? Does she agree that we need to move at act? I beg to move Amendment 112. least at the same pace as the EU? Similar to my earlier comments, whether we like it or not this is a race, and we have the opportunity to compete and be successful Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP) [V]: My in that race. Similarly, will she comment on digital Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord opportunities with the settlement finality directive and Holmes of Richmond. He is, without a doubt, the how we could transform our approach there, and House’s expert, and indeed enthusiast, on all these indeed the trading of tokenised securities—again, looking issues. In this large group of amendments, he has at how blockchain could underpin that? Lastly, what covered a broad range of issues of what is a huge area could be done in terms of post-trade processes? of the future of finance. He and I might differ somewhat in our balance between enthusiasm and concern about Finally—I put it in this order for a reason—I come the risks, but it is really important that we are able to to Amendment 125 on a UK centre for applied innovation debate this. It is disappointing, however, to see the in financial services. I propose a centre at the centre, to very small number of participants on this group, make all this whole. I have been pushing this idea since which brings up an issue that I will raise later, about 2015 and it is great to see that the concept of a centre the capacity of this Committee of your Lordships’ is also in Ron Kalifa’s fintech strategic review. I envisage House to fulfil the role laid on us to scrutinise such that, in such a centre, public policy issues could meet large, complex, new and fast-moving areas. GC 711 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 712

[BARONESS BENNETT OF MANOR CASTLE] A single bitcoin transaction uses 707 kilowatt hours of Given the pressure of time, I will restrict myself to electricity, which is the equivalent of 24 days of use by commenting on three amendments in this group. I a single average US household. On an annual basis, start with Amendment 112, to which the noble Baroness, were bitcoin alone to be a country, it would be 39th in Lady McIntosh of Pickering, has also added her name. the world in its energy consumption. These are massive It calls for an artificial intelligence officer in companies— changes that need to be considered in the round—the someone such as, I should imagine, a chief financial kind of triple accounting that the noble Baroness, officer.I did a master’sthesis partly on artificial intelligence Lady Kramer, talked about before. They are issues 20 years ago; I was then and remain an AI sceptic. that deserve far more time and focus than we can give After 20 years, we seem to be at the same point that we them today, but they really do need to be tackled. were then, which is “We are about to get to AI really soon, now, yes, it’s going to work”. In those 20 years, 6 pm however, there has been massive progress in what is Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con) [V]: I am known in shorthand as “big data”, or the ability to delighted to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, crunch truly astonishing quantities of data and to and find myself in agreement with much of what she manipulate and use it. So I suggest to the noble Lord, said, especially on finding a balance between regulations Lord Holmes, that perhaps what is needed is some and introducing more fintech into financial services. I kind of title or combination of roles that takes in both am delighted to speak to this group of amendments data and AI together. and must apologise from dropping out of the previous On Amendment 118, the ethical use of artificial group, which goes to the question that the noble intelligence, the noble Lord has already covered this Baroness raised about the number of participants. I quite well, but it is important to stress that, in recent was participating in the Domestic Abuse Bill in the years, we have seen huge exposure of the difficulties of Chamber; I am sure many will be in that position, a sector that is profoundly unrepresentative of people because we cannot be in two places at once, unfortunately. whose lives it increasingly impacts. The noble Lord I say at the outset that I yield to no one in my gave the example of soap dispensers which, in these admiration for my noble friend Lord Holmes’sknowledge, days of Covid-19, is a potential matter of life and expertise, passion and commitment in the area of death; but we also need to think about access to your artificial intelligence and fintech. I pay tribute to the finances and being able to manage your finances, and work he has done in bringing forward this wide-ranging even simply being able to manage them without having group of amendments. I am delighted to have co-signed to take vastly more time and effort than some other and to support Amendments 112 and 115 and, rather person just because the AI mechanisms are discriminatory. than go through all the points that my noble friend These are all issues that need to be engaged with. I raised, I shall just put a question to the Minister, when note, for example, that some of the events that have she comes to wind up this small debate. If we accept been happening recently at Google do not fill one with that there is a role for fintech and artificial intelligence confidence about the ways in which the culture of the in financial services, and accepting the competitive entire artificial intelligence community is moving— market, the nature of which my noble friend Lord Holmes certainly in some areas. explained, will the Minister support the amendments, I will comment finally on Amendment 119, about or will she be able to set out today in what regard she digital resilience. This is one of the most important accepts that we would like to promote the wider use of factors of all. We increasingly hear talk of the internet technology and artificial intelligence in the financial of things, and of tying together the internet of things services sector? Given that, as my noble friend said, we and fintech. I think particularly of the recent opening have a good story to tell and do not wish to fall of a store in which there are no checkout people and behind, does the Minister accept that, given the increasing no scanning and where lots of cameras watch and monitor number of graduates in the field of artificial intelligence, everything that happens in that store and then a bill we owe it to them and to the universities that set them appears in your email later. This relates to an earlier on this path to ensure that they have opportunities in group and our discussion on the nature of work and this country to put their academic knowledge to good good work, but it also relates very much to the issues use? Are we not missing a trick in this regard by not of discrimination and resilience. ensuring that we enhance those opportunities? With those few comments, I shall be delighted to hear the I was in Lancaster a few years ago, after it had Minister’sresponse to the amendments when she sums up. suffered an enormous flood. For several days, the city was without power and it was clear that things very The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Faulkner nearly fell apart, due in large part to our reliance already of Worcester) (Lab): My Lords, the noble Baroness, on technology and fintech—that was how people paid Lady Neville-Rolfe, was inadvertently left off the list for things. We need to think hard about issues of of speakers, and I call her now. resilience in our age of shocks and how we build systems that will not be at risk of profoundly falling Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Con): My Lords, I thank apart—not just the cash machines falling apart, but an my noble friends Lord Holmes of Richmond and inability to even obtain food. Lady McIntosh of Pickering for tabling these amendments I also need to mention the issues around bitcoin and I very much agree with my noble friend Lord Holmes and other digital currencies. There are huge and growing on the scale of the transformation that will be driven concerns about their environmental impacts and indeed by fintech. It is more important to the sector, in my the sustainability of those impacts. Bitcoin and other view, than Brexit, and my noble friend Lady McIntosh’s such currencies are extremely energy-hungry by design. question is therefore a good one. GC 713 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 714

I rise to speak on Amendment 115 on digital know that it has been important for recruitment, which identification. I have taken a substantial interest in raises many issues around visas.A single person is perhaps facilitating the provision of digital ID for several not so hard to attract but someone whose wife or husband years. It is the sort of thing where the UK, with its is unable to work may not be so cheered in taking up a early digital adoption and its skill in matters of security, visa to come to the UK. That is an underlying problem should be ahead of the curve. Some good systems exist that we face for entrepreneurs and skills. and have been rolled out in other European countries, Many issues have been raised in this debate, including but not here. This is probably because we have been AIandfintech:thetwomergeoversomesignificantterritory. waiting for the banking sector to make a decisive move. The issues raised by the noble Lord, Lord Holmes, are I tabled amendments on digital identification during important and will, I hope, be a prod to make sure that the passage of the Covid legislation, with support we continue to deal with them at pace and to understand from some noble Lords here today. I did not press the that there is no easy time. Berlin has, frankly, become a matter because I was promised progress, and I had centre for tech within Europe and it would not be so very good meetings with my noble friend Lady Williams difficult to swivel that around and begin to absorb fintech. and the Digital Minister, Matt Warman MP, who We do not want to put ourselves into that situation. published proposals for the UK digital identity and I wanted quickly to make two other points, picking attributes trust framework on 11 February,with comments up on points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Holmes. on it due from us all by tomorrow. Digital fiat currency is now the issue of the moment. I thought that I would get another chance to press We have a relatively small window in which to decide my case when our Covid laws were renewed but there whether we want to play in that area in such a way as is no sign of any such opportunity. I noted, however, to make us a significant player. One could say that that on 4 March my noble friend Lord Bethell, the sterling is not a natural global currency and we therefore Health Minister, told us that digital certificates, not need to be first mover. Picking up on the noble Lord’s physical ones, are being used for vaccines to avoid point, I hope that we will look more at that area. fraud, underlining the need to make progress in the AI obviously brings with it extraordinary complexities financial area. The fraudulent attempt to trick my and question marks but they are issues that can all be noble friend Lord Holmes in relation to his driving worked through if we focus on them. They will not licence underlines exactly the scale of fraud in everyday become easier over time; they are just as difficult now life, an issue that is calling for digital ID. as in the future, so one might as well deal with them as I am disappointed about the pace of change on is. The issues raised by the noble Lord, Lord Holmes, digital ID and although I support Amendment 115, it deserve a proper debate on the Floor of the House needs to be stronger. Waiting yet another six months and I am sure will draw in many more people than for a plan is too slow. Why can we not get a grip of this those who focus on financial services issues alone. I important area, as we have done in the much greater very much look forward to that opportunity as well as challenge of vaccines? Give the job to Matt Warman listening to the Minister’s response. with a remit to bring in digital ID for those who need it by 1 September. That would be novel provision but Lord Tunnicliffe (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I am grateful we need to accelerate this change. to the noble Lord, Lord Holmes of Richmond, for tabling this group of amendments, which deal with Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, after all those various aspects of fintech. His contributions on this excellent speeches, I shall try to be brief but I need to Bill have been thoughtful, and nobody should be declare my interests in the register because they apply surprised by him pushing this agenda today, given his to this group of amendments. role as co-chair of the relevant APPG. As other noble Fintech is an extraordinary success story in the Lords have mentioned, this debate is a topical one, UK. In 2011, shortly after having the privilege of being following the publication of the Kalifa review on appointed to this House, I sought out and invited the fintech last month. We welcome that review and hope chief executive of every fintech in the UK that I could that the Government will support our world-leading find to come to a meeting. We needed only a small fintech sector to continue innovating and do so in a conference room over in Millbank House. Today, the way that spreads opportunity to all parts of the country. QEII Centre would not be adequate. That alone speaks When we refer to things being life changing, we often to the extraordinary success of the industry, much do so in a hyperbolic manner. However, it is no helped by an enlightened view from the Financial Conduct exaggeration to say that technological innovation in Authority,which had to be dragged kicking and screaming the financial services sector has fundamentally altered into looking benevolently upon the industry and our understanding of and everyday experiences with understanding that it required appropriate regulation money.The pace and scope of change has been incredible; to grow. However, once it got there, the FCA has been the journey from cheques to mobile phone payments, incredibly positive and powerful. for example, has been a swift one. Many young people I want to plead against complacency, which is a conduct virtually all their banking activity online through rather British weakness. In the days before Brexit, the apps of high-street banks or using entirely digital many of our fintechs chose to expand into continental services such as Monzo. Elsewhere, terms such as Europe, using passporting and the e-commerce directive. crowdfunding and crypto currency have become They also attempted to go into the United States but common parlance, with the emergence and increasing few have been successful, partly because of the competition use of new technologies, including artificial intelligence there and the difference in structure. The European and blockchain. The possibilities are almost beyond market is incredibly important for expansion. We also comprehension. GC 715 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 716

[LORD TUNNICLIFFE] Amendment 112 seeks to require financial services Taken collectively, the noble Lord’s amendments firms that use AI technology to appoint a designated point to the crux of the issue: how can we maximise the AI officer to have oversight of their use of that technology. opportunities that undoubtedly exist in the sector As I said, this question goes far beyond financial while guarding against the risk inherent in the use services firms, which is why the Government have of new technologies and working practices? Artificial established an Office for Artificial Intelligence. We intelligence is an interesting case in point. AI tools, which have also established the Centre for Data Ethics and are regularly deployed in a number of sectors, have the Innovation, to provide independent expert advice on potential to assist with a variety of issues which we the measures needed to enable and ensure safe, ethical have covered in previous debates, such as identifying and innovative uses of AI and data-driven technologies. fraudulent or otherwise suspicious transactions.However, Amendment 115 seeks to require the Government Amendments 112 and 118 refer to some of the ethical to publish their plans for digital identity in financial considerations that arise from automated decision-making. services. I reassure my noble friend Lady Neville-Rolfe In a recent piece for the House magazine, and again that the Government recognise the value of making it in his opening remarks, the noble Lord issued a challenge quicker and easier for people to verify their identity to the Government that they should take steps now to using modern technology. That is why, following a call foster the potential for our fintech sector or risk losing for evidence in 2019, the Government committed to talent to our competitors, falling behind in the global developing a legal framework to enable the adoption tech arms race and, ultimately, having to play catch-up. of secure digital identities that can be used in the I am not necessarily convinced of the case for legislative greatest number of circumstances. requirements for reports and reviews on these issues. The noble Lord is right to seek more information on As my noble friend has noted, as an important first the Government’s intentions. If London is to be the step, DCMS recently published the prototype of a world-leading financial centre that the Chancellor and trust framework for UK digital identity,for organisations many others would like it to be, how do the Government that want to provide or consume digital identity and plan to strike the balance that I spoke of previously? attribute products and services.The Treasury will continue In striking that balance, how do Ministers plan to to work with industry and DCMS to ensure that the ensure that consumers and citizens are placed at the Government’s approach to digital identity reflects the heart of a digital finance package? With technology needs of financial services businesses and customers. touching all our lives, it is only right that we should all Amendment 118 would introduce an obligation on reap the benefits of change. However, as I mentioned the financial services sector to follow guidelines published previously, we must also take steps to identify and by the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation, a body mitigate the risks. that I have already mentioned. This is an independent There is probably far more that could be said than body made up of industry experts in data and technology. time allows. I look forward to seeing how much ground It draws on evidence and insights from regulators, the Minister is able to cover. academia, the public and business. The CDEI does not, however, act as a regulatory body, but instead acts Baroness Penn (Con): My Lords, I am grateful for to provide independent expert advice on the measures this opportunity to discuss the important issue of the needed to enable and ensure safe, ethical and innovative use of technology in financial services and how uses of AI and data-driven technologies. It is therefore technological developments will continue to impact not within its remit to mandate industry, including the the sector. The UK has been independently ranked as financial services sector, to abide by any guidance it one of the best places in the world to start and grow a may publish. However, its future role is being consulted financial technology, or fintech, firm. I reassure my on as part of the Government’s national data strategy. noble friend Lady McIntosh of Pickering that, as the Amendment 119 calls for a review of the digital Chancellor set out in his November speech on the operational resilience of the financial sector. I reassure future of financial services, we are not complacent. We the Committee that there are already robust obligations want to build on this strength and use technology to on firms and regulators to ensure their digital operational deliver better outcomes for consumers and businesses resilience. This issue is at the forefront of the regulators’ and make the most of the job opportunities that this minds in the Bank of England, the PRA and the FCA. sector presents. For example, threat-led penetration testing—CBEST—is Many of the questions raised by the adoption of regularly used to identify vulnerabilities and strengthen cutting-edge technology apply across the whole economy, finance firms’ cyber defences. not just to financial services, so although I am sympathetic to the purpose behind a number of the amendments— Amendment 125 seeks to require a detailed plan to ensuring that the UK embraces the opportunities that establish a UK centre for applied innovation that new technology can bring—I am not convinced that would have responsibility for developing standards for they are the best route forward at this time. data sharing. Amendment 130 would require the laying of draft regulations requiring financial services data 6.15 pm providers to make data available to third-party providers. The Government and the financial services regulators Data sharing in the financial services sector is a key are taking a number of actions in this area, including priority for the Government, as is demonstrated by the ongoing development of open banking and open our progress in developing the use of open banking finance, and a significant piece of work on crypto and open finance. The UK’s open banking standard assets and distributed ledger technologies. I shall speak has been widely recognised as world-leading in enabling about those when considering the amendments. consumers to share their data with third-party providers GC 717 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 718 to increase access to products and services that better so we strongly welcome the review and are carefully suit their needs. There is an active programme of work considering its recommendations before setting out on open finance, which would extend the benefits of our next steps in due course. open banking to a wider range of financial products. I conclude by considering Amendment 136D, which However, the Government recognise that increased would require the Government to report on what data sharing must be balanced by the appropriate action they intend to take to reduce scale-up gaps in management of any associated risks. That is why the the UK financial services sector. The Government FCA recently published a call for input on open finance, already have an extensive programme of work to to understand what role regulation should play. It will tackle the scale-up gap across all sectors of the economy, respond by the end of this month to address next steps notjustfinancialservices.TheGovernmenthavesupported for the delivery of open finance. On Amendment 130 thousands of innovative businesses in their early stages in particular, BEIS has already announced plans to to scale and grow, through tax incentives, grants and bring forward legislation that will give the Government loans, as well as through support in accessing finance, powers to mandate data sharing across sectors. notably though the British Business Bank’s lending and equity programmes. Amendment 128 would require the Government to produce a report relating to the impact of transaction I applaud my noble friend Lord Holmes for bringing reporting requirements in the UK, and whether those this important topic to the attention of the Committee. impacts could be alleviated through the use of blockchain It is an area within which the Government, as well as technology. Amendment 133 would require the the financial regulators, are very active. We intend to Government to consider options for a pilot scheme for remain a world leader in this area. This has been a market infrastructures based on distributed ledger wide-ranging debate and I am conscious that we are technology.Amendment 136E calls for the Government limited in time. If there are any questions that I have to report on legislative and regulatory changes required failed to address in detail I will write to noble Lords. to enable the UK’s financial market infrastructure to In the meantime, I hope that the work I have described process digital instruments. will mean that my noble friend feels able to withdraw his amendment. The Government are keen to explore the application of distributed ledger technology in financial services. It is hugely important that the financial sector grasps Lord Holmes of Richmond (Con) [V]: My Lords, I the potential opportunities presented by new technologies. thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this This technology could have a transformative effect on debate. markets, fundamentally altering the current market I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, that her ecosystem and delivering more efficiency, improved point on bitcoin was well made but, for the record, it is liquidity, enhanced transparency and greater security. probably worth clarifying that that is a construction However, this is also a new and quickly developing only of that particular cryptocurrency rather than an area and it is important that innovation does not come inevitability of a blockchain-based system. at the cost of financial stability. I thank my noble friend Lady McIntosh of Pickering That is why, in January, the Treasury published a for her comments and for signing two of the amendments consultation on crypto assets and stablecoins and, as in the group. Similarly, I thank my noble friend Lady part of this, included a call for evidence on the use of Neville-Rolfe for her comments on digital ID. I very distributed ledger technology in financial market much take her putting some more lead in my pencil to infrastructures. The call for evidence asks for industry underscore the urgency of the issue; I am in complete views on what the Government should be doing, including lockstep with her on that point. I also thank the noble whether initiatives could be taken forward for trialling Baroness, Lady Kramer, and the noble Lord, Lord or testing this proposal—for example, by making use Tunnicliffe, for their constructive and positive comments, of existing schemes such as the FCA sandbox. The and indeed the Minister for her response. With that, I consultation closes this month and the Government beg leave to withdraw Amendment 112. are committed to exploring how best to proceed on this important agenda. Amendment 112 withdrawn. Amendment 136B would require a report on the implications of the financial technology strategic review Amendments 113 to 119 not moved. on financial services regulation. The Kalifa review was published last month. It set out key actions to ensure Amendment 120 that the UK’s world-leading fintech sector continues to go from strength to strength, and makes Moved by Lord Sikka recommendations across a number of priority areas, 120: After Clause 40, insert the following new Clause— of which regulation is one. The UK has long been a “Supervisory Board global leader in fintech, thanks in no small part to our (1) There is to be a Supervisory Board to perform the forward-leaning approach to regulation. For example, function of monitoring the FCA and PRA. the FCA was the first regulator to globally implement (2) The Supervisory Board must consist entirely of stakeholders. a regulatory sandbox, which has been key to fostering (3) Recruitment for the membership of the Supervisory innovation, by providing a safe space for firms to test Board is to be conducted through open competition and new ideas. This approach has been emulated by many the appointments are to be confirmed by the House of of our international competitors. As I have said, the Commons Treasury Committee, or another relevant House Government are committed to maintaining our lead, of Commons Select Committee. GC 719 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 720

(4) The Chancellor of the Exchequer may nominate individuals Regulatory bodies such as the FCA and the PRA to the Supervisory Board. are too close to the interests of the finance industry, (5) The following are ineligible for appointment to the often at the expense of broader social interests. The Supervisory Board— revolving doors swing both ways as regulators come (a) current and past employees of the FCA and the from the industry and, after a stint, they return to the PRA, and industry. The regulatory capture has inflicted misery (b) current employees of organisations supervised by on millions, as shown by numerous scandals. There is the FCA and the PRA. no resolution of the HBOS and RBS frauds, there is (6) A member’s membership of the Supervisory Board cannot dithering on mini-bonds, the London Capital & Finance exceed a period of five years beginning with the day the and Connaught scandals testify to regulatory failures, member’s appointment is confirmed under subsection the FCA was absent in the Carillion scandal, puny (3). sanctions for mis-selling numerous financial products (7) The Supervisory Board has no responsibility for— have not really changed corporate culture, and there (a) the day-to-day operations of the FCA or the PRA, has been little success in curbing tax avoidance, money and laundering, and interest rate and exchange rate rigging. (b) investigations and enforcement of the rules devised Indeed, there is a long history of regulators doing the by the FCA and the PRA. bidding of the industry; my earlier interventions referred (8) The Supervisory Board’s functions are to— to the regulatory sympathies for HSBC, Standard (a) provide strategic oversight of the Executive Boards Chartered bank and BCCI even though they were of the FCA and PRA responsible for day-to-day involved in anti-social and criminal activities. operations; Regulatory capture is built into the system as (b) inquire into the adequacy of resources used and available to the FCA and the PRA; individuals close to the industry occupy senior decision- making positions as executive and non-executive directors. (c) seek explanations from the Executive Board for reasons for the delay in launching and completing Ministers and others often argue that individuals of investigations; and particular experience are needed. The focus on technical (d) seek explanations from the Executive Board in relation expertise inevitably privileges industry insiders and to the efficiency and effectiveness of the FCA and marginalises the experience of the people who are the PRA in discharging their statutory duties. actually practised upon, who remain relatively invisible. (9) The Supervisory Board shall have powers to— These experienced people rarely blow the whistle on (a) demand explanations from the Executive Board on corrupt practices or check the groupthink that has any matter affecting the protection of consumers become all too prevalent in regulatory bodies. from harmful practices; In theory, non-executive directors are expected to (b) secure information from the Executive Board about provide some oversight of executives of regulatory their transparency and accountability to the public; and bodies, but they, too, have little independence from the (c) liaise with whistle-blowers and examine FCA and industry.The non-questioning of the regulatory practices PRA policies for protecting and rewarding whistle- inside the regulatory boards only deepens the crisis. blowers. Even when whistleblowers give executive and non- (10) The Supervisory Board must hold open meetings with executive directors hard evidence, their concerns are the Executive Boards of the FCA and the PRA at least often ignored. Who can forget the heroic efforts of the once every three months. late Paul Moore, who alerted regulators of problems (11) The working and background papers of the Supervisory at HBOS before the financial crash? But he was ignored. Board must be made publicly available. Corporate grandees at regulatory bodies all too often (12) The Supervisory Board must lay before each House of see the issues through the industry’s lenses. Regulatory Parliament an annual report highlighting matters of concern bodies have become echo chambers of the vested relating to the operation of the FCA and PRA which it has discovered in exercising its powers and functions. interests. We are talking here not just about simple regulatory capture but cognitive capture, which (13) The Supervisory Board must be consulted on appointment and reappointment of the Chief Executives standardises subjectivities and has naturalised the interests of the FCA and the PRA.” of the finance industry within the regulatory bodies. Member’s explanatory statement This new Clause would create a Supervisory Board to monitor the Executive Boards of the FCA and PRA and provide a 6.30 pm diversity of views on the conduct of the FCA and the PRA. In previous speeches, Ministers explained that press releases and annual reports hold the regulators to Lord Sikka (Lab) [V]: My Lords, Amendment 120 account. These documents are all too often sanitised seeks to strengthen regulation by empowering stakeholders and are simply full of self-congratulatory statements. to watch over the conduct of the executive boards of They rarely draw attention or refer to the dark side of the FCA and the PRA, so that stakeholder interests their practices. They rarely tackle issues about capture do not continue to be marginalised. and have not prevented the FCA, the PRA and their Throughout the passage of the Bill in this House predecessors being subservient to the interests of the and the other place, considerable concern has been finance industry. expressed about regulatory failures. In particular, the So far in your Lordships’ House, various proposals noble Baronesses, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle and have been advanced for external scrutiny of the FCA, Lady Bowles of Berkhamsted, and the noble Lord, such as through parliamentary committees, special Lord Davies of Brixton, drew attention to the well-known reviews, standing committees and a variety of other problem of regulatory capture. mechanisms. These can help, but regulators also need GC 721 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 722 to be invigilated from within. After all, the Nelsonian Lord Sikka (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I wanted to provide practices are incubated by organisational culture, and some examples of the kind of questions which the it is that culture that needs to be disrupted. supervisory board might raise. For example, it could About two years ago, I led a research team which ask the FCA/PRA executive board to explain the conducted a study of the UK’s regulatory architecture. delay in securing compensation for the victims of the I had meetings with many regulators, including financial HBOS and RBS frauds—that could be one question; I regulators. They were asked to explain what their main shall give a few more examples. It could ask why no purpose was. Without fail, they all claimed to be serving one at the board level of HBOS and RBS has so far the public interest but, when probed about how they been prosecuted or why HSBC took 20 hours to constructed and enacted a particular meaning of the respond to calls on its fraud helpline—which is of public interest, they had considerable difficulties. They concern to many people. It could ask whether it was were unable to provide evidence to show that the appropriate for the FCA to commission Section 166 public was privileged in their organisational architecture. reports from organisations involved in antisocial practices, I also remember the words of a former non-executive or what progress the FCA had made in dealing with director of a regulatory body, who said, “The the issues relating to banks forging customers’signatures. organisational culture makes it very difficult to raise It could ask what policies were being developed to questions about the conduct of senior colleagues. After deal with global warming—which, again, is of interest all, one has to face them again and again.” Again, that to many people. It could ask what the regulators ensures that the regulatory bodies are not that effective were doing to protect people from predatory lending in checking their capture. practices—payday lending problems have not gone My amendment calls for a two-tier board structure away,as we all know—or to protect businesses, especially for the FCA and the PRA. One tier, the executive board, small businesses, from excessive charges by credit is already in place and is responsible for the day-to-day card companies. It could ask what the PRA was operations of the regulatory bodies. The supervisory doing to address the shortcomings of the Basel III board will not interfere with that. The supervisory recommendations. Lastly, as we all know that a remit board will consist of stakeholders, and the amendment of the FCA is to promote competition in respect of provides some information about its composition, financial services, the supervisory board could ask appointment and role. Members of the supervisory how the FCA would do that given that many towns board can come from civil society organisations, NGOs now lack bank branches. or trade unions or can be individuals seeking to improve These kinds of probing questions do not interfere the effectiveness of regulation to ensure that it serves with the day-to-day running, but they provide oversight the interests of the people. These outsiders will offer and they push back against regulatory silence and alternative views on environmental development, and capture. A supervisory board will erode the space for thereby check the groupthink and temptation for the regulators to sweep things under their dusty carpets. It executive board to be subservient to the industry. can transform our country and ensure that regulators The independent stakeholders will exercise strategic work to protect the people and address their concerns. oversight of the FCA and the PRA. They can offer Ministers often say that regulators are there to their own evaluation of the effectiveness of the FCA serve the people, so what objections can there be to and PRA executive boards in meeting their statutory empowering people to sit on the supervisory boards objectives. These evaluations can have a bearing on and democratise the regulatory structures and our whether executives will retain their jobs or be reappointed. society? Empowering people has a much lower cost This will act as a disciplining mechanism and as a than that associated with scandals and financial crisis. bulwark against capture by the industry. I beg to move the amendment. The amendment that I have proposed recommends complete sunshine, with meetings of the supervisory Viscount Trenchard (Con): My Lords, I understand board and background papers being available to press that Amendment 120 in the name of the noble Lord, and the people. If a supervisory board existed, it could Lord Sikka, seeks to establish a supervisory board for have asked some very important questions. For example, the two regulators. My first thought was that the noble it could have asked— Lord intended that this board should function in the same way as a joint co-ordination committee, as proposed The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Faulkner in Amendment 86 in the name of my noble friend of Worcester) (Lab): I am sorry to interrupt. A Division Lord Blackwell, which we debated on Monday. The is taking place in the House. We will return in five explanatory statement, however, does not suggest that minutes and the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, will be able the board would co-ordinate the activities of the two to finish then. I do apologise to him. regulators; rather, it would simply monitor the executive 6.35 pm boards of the regulators and provide a diversity of views on their conduct. Sitting suspended for a Division in the House. From his opening remarks, I understand that the noble Lord’s intention is very different. While there 6.38 pm have inevitably been some mistakes, I do not recognise The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Faulkner the picture that he paints. The regulators have always of Worcester) (Lab): My Lords, I think all of us who been willing to learn from what has not gone as well as were going to vote have now done so, so I invite the it might have. As long as the PRA and FCA remain noble Lord, Lord Sikka, to finish his speech and move separate organisations with different functions and his amendment. objectives, it seems to me that this supervisory board GC 723 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 724

[VISCOUNT TRENCHARD] oversight that we have been probing. I am not sure would, in effect, have two separate personae or that we have found a perfect solution or combination incarnations. It would have to function separately as a of solutions yet, and I suspect that we will need more supervisory board of the FCA and as one of the PRA. than one stage to do that. However, having a mechanism I think it cannot be a part of the legal structure of to prevent regulatory capture and groupthink is either regulator or of both regulators. It would seem necessary—never mind the revolving door between to duplicate the arrangements for parliamentary oversight the regulators and industry and the representation of which we have discussed and on which I would ask my industries within the regulators’structure. The obligation noble friend the Minister to tell the Committee how to consult the public about rules is predominantly his thinking is developing. served through responses from industry. One thing The amendment refers to the executive board of the that we know about consultations is that, broadly, PRA, although the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, should be they run on the weighing of the responses. At least aware that the board of the PRA was replaced by the that is certainly the way when it comes to government. Prudential Regulation Committee of the Bank of England When you have the weight of responses from industry, in 2017. I do not think that such a supervisory board the relatively few that go in from public interest bodies would replace the need for parliamentary scrutiny of do not necessarily hold the weight that they should. the regulators, which will in itself provide appropriate The noble Lord, Lord Sikka, has brought forward transparency and accountability, rather than the some issues that we have to recognise and address. We completely crushing, destructive oversight that I believe need to put them into the pot of the matters that we the noble Lord’s new board would cause. It would be a think about as we move forward on accountability. I cumbersome, expensive and bureaucratic body that maintain my view that we probably will not achieve would have a negative effect on the future attractiveness what we want simply by saying “enhance Parliament”. and competitiveness of the City of London as a global We will find over time that we need something else as financial centre, so I cannot support his amendment. well.

6.45 pm Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, I very much Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) [V]: My Lords, agree with the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, that regulatory I thank the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, for introducing capture is a real risk. We certainly saw that prior to the this amendment. I will be brief, because it concerns 2008-09 crash, and many people would say that the accountability, which has already been much discussed; soft hand of the regulator has ever since reflected an and, like the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, I have ongoing degree of regulatory capture. I am less focused really only just found out the intentions of the noble on the revolving door issue but am much more concerned Lord, Lord Sikka, regarding the amendment—I was a that the regulator says, “Wait a minute. If we go hard little blindsided about the formal structure. The after whichever institution has done wrong, particularly accountability debate, as we have progressed through if it is a major one and would involve going after senior this Bill, has shown more appetite to enhance Parliament’s people, we will disrupt financial stability.For that greater oversight than to create other bodies. My personal good, we must go softly and gently”. That approach view is well known, that ultimately I think more than has not served the industry or the country well. Parliament will be needed, but if the route of just We have talked extensively about accountability. I Parliament is followed, at least to start, then it is true see this matter as an extension of that conversation. that some of the functions—or challenges—listed in We have talked about the importance of accountability this amendment for the supervisory board could be being extremely well informed in a way in which it is pursued that way. not today, and about the importance of transparency. However, the other intention of this amendment is Numerous ideas have come forward during the process to find a way to prevent regulatory capture from of this Grand Committee. This is another, different within, which I understand. The mechanism to ensure approach that essentially tries to get to the same place that the supervisory board itself is not captured includes —a regulator that has to be transparent and which having public meetings and public documents—bringing provides genuine, sufficient and high-quality information in the sunshine, as the noble Lord said. This has some that can be assessed by people of a relevant skills base, merit as a way to reflect the public interest that supervisors and that is accountable to Parliament. It should not be seemingly could not define and to democratise in a regulator that just meets with Parliament and gives it some way—although I am not sure whether it has an explanation once or twice a year but one that is been correctly formulated yet. I also share the noble actually accountable. Lord’s concern that press releases, annual reports and even appearances before Select Committees do not Lord Tunnicliffe (Lab) [V]: My Lords, the interesting give penetration beyond the regulators making assertions. amendment tabled by my noble friend Lord Sikka is That has to be so, because there is a mismatch between another demonstration of the considerable unease felt reports and assertions and then what we discover on all sides of the Grand Committee about the governance further down the track about what was actually going of the FCA and the PRA, and their relationship with on at the same time as we received those assertions. We one another. The amendments moved on Monday by have obtained penetration only through reports such the noble Lord, Lord Blackwell, addressed similar as the Gloucester review. concerns. The question still to be answered is: what Some stronger powers would be needed to compel would be the composition and terms of reference of better information than is currently provided by regulators such a supervisory board? Is the Treasury not deemed and made public. That will apply to all the ideas about to be performing that role? How can we be confident GC 725 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 726 that the supervisory board would have the authority Finally, let me say that the Government are not and expertise to perform a task that my noble friend closing down debate on these issues. As I have set out Lord Sikka rightly identified as being necessary? during other debates, the future regulatory framework I am sorry to sound like a broken record. Are not review is already exploring how our framework needs my noble friend Lord Sikka’s concerns another example to adapt to reflect our new position outside the EU. It of the lack of an effective mechanism of parliamentary would be premature to make changes to these scrutiny? Whether an effective parliamentary mechanism arrangements before we consider stakeholder responses can be created is a question that we do not hear or to the ongoing consultation. However, I have noted have the ability to address but it must be addressed. I the contributions from the Committee on what form am sure that the Minister will agree. that may take. Against that background, I ask that the amendment be withdrawn. Earl Howe (Con): My Lords, the Government agree that effective oversight of the FCA and PRA is a Lord Sikka (Lab) [V]: I am grateful to all noble Lords crucial component of our regulatory framework. Indeed, for their contributions to the debate, and it would be noble Lords will remember that in earlier debates we helpful if I could respond to a few points. First, under discussed the existing mechanisms to ensure effective my amendment both the FCA and the PRA would independent oversight of the regulators by a diverse need a supervisory board. Indeed, if I were redesigning range of stakeholders. For example, both the FCA the entire regulatory architecture in the UK, every and PRA are required under the Financial Services regulatory body would have a supervisory board, because and Markets Act 2000 to consult independent panels that is the only way of putting ordinary people, who on the impact of their work. are practised upon, inside the organisation, to check the conduct of executive boards and reshape the I should say that in general I do not recognise the organisational culture, which has given us such problems. picture of regulatory capture that the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, painted in relation to our two financial The amendment does not duplicate in anywaywhatever regulators, although I shall of course read his comments what any parliamentary committee or review board in Hansard and make sure that I understand all that he might do. The supervisory board would simply be said. engaged in day-to-day strategic oversight. Those people would be in the organisation on a permanent basis, For the PRA, this involves consulting an independent observing, requiring reports, making recommendations practitioner panel of industry representatives, while and in many ways hoping to prevent the major scandals the FCA must consult four different statutory panels, that we read about later—often some years later. It has representing consumers as well as the financial services been suggested that such regulatory architecture would industry.Furthermore, the regulators are already under be cumbersome and expensive. My response, as always, a statutory obligation to publish the results of their is, “What do you think the cost of the status quo is?” public consultations, including on proposed new rules. How many more banking crashes can we afford? How The amendment proposes that the FCA and PRA many more London Capital & Finances, how many should attend hearings in front of a supervisory board. more Connaughts, and other scandals, can we afford? I simply observe that both bodies must already attend We simply cannot afford them. such hearings before parliamentary committees, and those committees may also hear evidence from 7 pm stakeholders about the performance of the regulators. The Minister referred to how the FCA and the The FCA, for example,must attend general accountability PRA are summoned to appear in front of parliamentary hearings before the Treasury Select Committee twice a bodies—I am well aware of that. Of course, they are year, while the PRA must appear before that committee incredibly well coached by lawyers and PR people as after the publication of its annual report. Parliamentary to what words to say. Indeed, I have seen those things committees of both Houses are also able to summon in action, even right down to what colour of suit and the regulators to give evidence whenever they may tie to wear. That does not amount to a scrutiny of their choose. For example, the CEO and chairman of the daily conduct. Of course, regular reports are produced, FCA appeared before the Treasury Select Committee but we all know that reports are the outcome on 1 March to answer questions on their regulation of of a particular kind of politics. If we were to look at London Capital & Finance. many financial enterprises’ accounts, we would not The amendment proposes that a supervisory board find much by way of admission about, for example, should have the power to inquire into the adequacy of tax avoidance or money laundering, because those resources used and available to the FCA and the PRA. things are entirely filtered out. Many of those reports However, as we have discussed in previous debates, the are ritualistic. I suggest that we need to penetrate Treasury already has the capacity to order independent those rituals to change the culture. That is the main reviews into the regulators’ economy, efficiency and point of the amendment. effectiveness. Therefore, all told, the amendment would Nevertheless, I am encouraged by the Minister’s result in a duplication of existing opportunities for comment that the Government will possibly think about scrutiny and oversight of the regulators’ resourcing. the issues which have been raised today. My feeling is I realise that the noble Lord, Lord Sikka, has a that these problems will not go away and that we need close interest in the issue of supervision, but I hope I to insert ordinary people inside the organisations. I have convinced him that the PRA and FCA are already hope that will happen perhaps within my lifetime. For accountable in meaningful and tangible ways, and that the time being, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. a diverse range of stakeholders has opportunities to participate in scrutiny of their actions. Amendment 120 withdrawn. GC 727 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 728

In the event that the report, including analysis Amendment 121 based on actual data, identified significant effects, Moved by Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted then the provision of public disclosures could be deferred 121: After Clause 40, insert the following new Clause— or removed, but otherwise the provision would come “Country-by-country reporting requirements into force in 2015. Having sworn that the only nervousness (1) The PRA must include country-by-country reporting was about all these effects, they then had to concede requirements in reporting requirements for banks. that proposal. All that explains the content that you (2) The FCA must include country-by-country reporting can clearly see in article 89 and the report in its requirements in reporting requirements for investment paragraph 3. Of course, no damage was found, and firms.” the article is in force and transposed into UK law. I quote from a 2014 PWC document on compliance: Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) [V]: My Lords, “HMT sought to adopt a pragmatic approach to provide rules this amendment was not intended newly to introduce that are practical and which provide some options designed to country-by-country reporting but to maintain the ease the compliance burden faced by businesses. This optionality country-by-country reporting requirements that exist has allowed HMT to implement rules that comply with CRD IV, through CRD IV and retained EU law. In retrospect, but which, in line with broader Government policy, do not looking at my amendment now, perhaps that is not mandate reporting beyond the requirements of CRD IV.” quite clear. There are some activities that would trigger investment Once again, as the statutory instrument layer is firms falling within scope, so it therefore seems relevant removed, it is within the purview of our financial to raise this matter in the Bill, as the investment firm regulators to decide that some things are inconvenient provisions are about to be rewritten. Of course, small or not part of their main remit and to dispense with and UK-only investment firms may not fall within the them. Article 89 of CRD IV requires institutions to definitions, because I am proposing carry-over of the report annually, specifying by country in which they existing ones, but where they are larger organisations then have an establishment, information on a consolidated they should continue to comply.Against that background, basis including: name, nature of activity and geographical I hope that the Government will not say that they location; turnover; number of employees on a full-time want to allow closing down of transparency and that basis; profit or loss before tax; tax on profit or loss; the Minister will understand why I do not believe any and public subsidies received. Since then, there has of the scare stories about damage. I beg to move. been a little more general progress in country-by-country reporting, but I wanted to ensure there were no backward Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP) [V]: My steps as the PRA and FCA start to write the rules. Lords, it is a great pleasure to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles, not just because she highlighted the role There was much coverage at the time about the late of the Greens in pushing country-by-country reporting insertion by the European Parliament of country-by- at the European level, and the value of having a Green country reporting that nobody expected, but I can tell in the room. A great way of bringing people on board the story—which can actually be seen if we look at and into the debate is to ask them for help. I will whole article in the directive. As was the way in briefly quote the chair of European Parliament’s sub- trialogues that I chaired in the European Parliament, committee on taxation, MEP Paul Tang: we shared out speaking. I am sure that the noble “I think transparency is a powerful tool for change because Baroness, Lady Bennett, will be pleased to hear that many of the current tax policies can’t stand the light of day. Just the Greens were leading on country-by-country reporting, shine the light on it.” but all that had been conceded to the Parliament in the That was from an interview with Forbes, showing how trialogue was an assessment, maybe followed by legislation so many of the defenders of the status quo are increasingly if appropriate. isolated and clearly out of touch, not just with the I got a note from the Greens’ adviser saying that public but with much of the establishment who realise they were out of arguments and asking whether I that things cannot go on as they are. could help. Maybe I should have framed that, because I have been asked at public meetings over many a Green being out of arguments is quite an astonishing years how we get multinationals, rich individuals and thing. They knew that at that stage we had nothing to the financial sector to pay their taxes. My first answer trade in return to get country-by-country reporting in. is simple: you need a Government who want to make So I asked the Council and Commission to confirm them pay their taxes. My second, more detailed and that the only reason why they objected was that industry technical, answer is,simply,country-by-country reporting. was saying that economic damage would be caused by This is something that the UK can impose without country-by-country reporting. They both swore that needing international agreements. I back the noble that was the only reason why they were objecting to Baroness’s amendment to the hilt. the insertion of such a clause: that they were afraid of what might happen if these really rather mild provisions Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, I am going to be were introduced. very brief again on this issue, because I cannot pretend I then proposed that the information be submitted that it is my area of expertise. I remember the period in confidence to the Commission and that, in consultation when George Osborne was very proud of saying that with the regulators, there be then a general assessment not only would he make country-by-country a requirement of potential negative economic consequences of public but that it would be published. My understanding is disclosure, including the impact on competitiveness, that that was reversed in 2016. Perhaps the Minister will investment, credit availability and the stability of the correct me, but that information is no longer published financial system. It sounds incredible, but those were the at a national level and the UK has been fairly instrumental scare stories that the other institutions had bought into. in blocking the OECD from publishing the data at an GC 729 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 730 international level. I apologise if I have got that wrong: Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) [V]: I thank I am reading from a Tax Justice Network report. Its everybody who has spoken. The Minister has answered calculation is that, as a consequence of not publishing, the question and I do not need to make any comments and therefore not having the cleansing impact of so, in the interests of time, I beg leave to withdraw my transparency,the UK misses out on collecting something amendment. in the range of £2.5 billion in corporate taxes a year. Again, this is not my area of expertise, but I shall Amendment 121 withdrawn. wish to hear from the Minister. We as a country have always said the answer is transparency.We have insisted Amendment 122 not moved. that publication is the mechanism for cleaning up abuse. I would be extremely troubled if the regulators The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Faulkner felt they were now in a position to weaken in any way of Worcester) (Lab): We now come to the final group, country-by-country reporting requirements. beginning with Amendment 123.

Lord Tunnicliffe (Lab) [V]: My Lords, the provision of country-by-country data by banks and investment Amendment 123 firms will be an important step forward both in combating Moved by Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle financial crime and in addressing the vexed question of the fair taxation of international entities. These 123: After Clause 40, insert the following new Clause— problems will be solved only by international negotiation “Regular impact assessments on the UK financial services and agreement. It is important that we are seen as an sector exemplar,and satisfactory country-by-country reporting (1) Within 12 months of the passing of this Act, and every is surely part of that. subsequent five years, the responsible Treasury Minister, Chairs and Chief Executive Officers of the Prudential Regulation Authority and Financial Conduct Authority Earl Howe (Con): My Lords, Amendment 121 aims must each separately provide reports to relevant Committees to ensure that banks and investment firms engage in of the House of Commons and House of Lords. country-by-country reporting related to the provision (2) The reports under subsection (1) must include an assessment of tax information. I am happy to assure the noble and critical analysis of the following— Baroness that there is no need for this amendment, (a) the costs and benefits of the financial services sector because such requirements already exist for these firms in the United Kingdom; in legislation. (b) the impact of the financial services sector on Banks and most investment firms are already subject inequality and economic development; to country-by-country reporting requirements as a (c) the impact of capital allocation decisions on real result of the fourth capital requirements directive, or economic activity; CRD IV, which we implemented in the UK while we (d) net gains or losses to the real economy caused by were an EU member state. This was done through a mergers and acquisitions; statutory instrument in 2013, and it requires firms to (e) risks to the real economy of write downs in the report relevant information on tax and revenue in each value of financial assets; country where they have operations. This statutory (f) risks inherent in “shadow banking”; instrument remains in place today.In order to implement (g) the impacts of money and financial activities being the investment firms prudential regime, this Bill removes moved to offshore jurisdictions. investment firms from the prudential requirements for (3) In preparing the reports under subsection (1), the responsible banks in the capital requirements regulation—in order person must consult with, and publish any submissions to allow the FCA to implement the new regime. But from, the Financial Scrutiny and Oversight Network. Schedule 1 to the Bill ensures that country-by-country (4) In this section— reporting requirements will continue to apply to FCA “shadow banking” means financial services which are not investment firms. subject to regulatory oversight, including but not limited There is an exception for small and non-interconnected to unregulated activities by regulated entities; investment firms. This is because this new regime aims “real economy” means the production, distribution and to ensure proportional requirements for investment consumption of goods and services.” firms consistent with their size and activities. These firms are, by definition, small and non-interconnected Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP) [V]: My with the wider financial system, and it would be Lords, I beg to move my Amendment 123 and speak disproportionate for these requirements to apply to also to Amendment 124. They are quite large amendments, them. This is the same approach that the EU took in and I would say significant proposals, and I have cut the investment firms directive. down what I shall say given the time. This is based in Amendment 121 would have the effect of preventing large part on the work of the Sheffield Political Economy small and non-interconnected firms from being carved Research Institute, known as SPERI, and particularly out in this way. For the reasons just mentioned, I do Professor Andrew Baker there, and the Tax Justice not think that this is appropriate. Therefore, when it Network, particularly Nicholas Shaxson. comes to banks and investment firms, I am confident I begin with Amendment 123, as it flows on from that the existing country-by-country reporting an earlier exchange between the noble Earl and me, requirements for these firms are appropriate, and I ask which he kindly continued by letter, confirming my the noble Baroness, Lady Bowles, to withdraw the assumption that the source of his claim for the annual amendment. tax revenue for the financial sector of £76 billion came GC 731 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 732

[BARONESS BENNETT OF MANOR CASTLE] finance serve society, it was established in 2010 by a from a PricewaterhouseCoopers report. That is, of course, group of MEPs including Greens, with a grant, tasked a gross figure, one that reflects income but not costs. It with providing advice and counter-submissions to is in no way an impact assessment. It is a pity that the parliamentarians on financial regulatory legislation. noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, is not with us now. In particular, it was given the job of identifying, This amendment proposes that within 12 months of amending and removing clauses that placed excessive the passing of this Bill and every subsequent five years costs and risks on the wider public. I have shared with the responsible bodies must separately provide reports many noble Lords an account of its successes. to the relevant committee of the Commons and Lords I commented earlier on the sparseness of much of and consult the financial scrutiny and oversight network, the debate on this Bill and, indeed, the speed at which which I shall get to shortly. Behind this is the fact that we are operating now. The contrast with the Domestic there is now a large body of academic literature, Abuse Bill, on which the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh known as the “too much finance” literature, which of Pickering, and I are operating, is clear. We are supports the idea that some countries, including most struggling to manage to deal with this Bill. We have a certainly the United Kingdom, suffer from the finance tiny, sparse crew—and that is no insult to anyone here, curse: too much finance makes us poorer. It seems that particularly when contrasting it with the Domestic the City of London passed the point of optimal Abuse Bill. Everyone here is working very hard but, finance sometime in the 1980s and has grown massively with the best will in the world, we cannot match the since then, harming the UK economy. The only study kind of scrutiny and outcomes that Finance Watch of which I am aware that has attempted to quantify has regularly delivered for the EU and that we urgently the damage, from SPERI, estimated in 2019 that excess need in the UK. finance reduced economic growth by a cumulative We have talked a lot about regulatory and policy £4.5 trillion from 1995 to 2015. That is the finance curse. capture; it has been well documented. Lawyers talk about the need for equality of arms in court cases. In oversight 7.15 pm of the financial sector and its regulation, there is One of the easiest ways in which to think about this extreme inequality of arms. FSON would not be a is in terms of its consumption of human resources. magic wand, but it would be a start. I beg to move. The example I will use demonstrates the reasons for the inclusion of many elements of the suggested report. Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, I think I understand A bright young woman from Newcastle finishes a where the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, is coming PhD in mathematics. She might go into academic from. I am not sure that I personally would want to let research, advancing human knowledge; she might go the Treasury get its hands on an assessment of the UK into manufacturing, refining or advancing practices financial services sector, because it seems that so much and approaches to improve productivity and create depends on the lens through which you look. But what new products—or there is the lure of the City, of huge I would like to be sure of is that the relevant information salaries and bonuses and glossy excitement. She may and statistics—those kinds of metrics that would enable well go on to invent the next fancy financial instrument you to assess impacts on the real economy—would be that brings down a bank or two, after it has made a lot available, because we have quite a number of institutions, of money for a few people along the way. She will be including think tanks and academic institutions, that based in London of course, where all that money is could do really good work on all these areas which sucked to, including money from privatised local services, would then inform Parliament. I would very much like care homes, PFI schools, hospitals and roads and that to happen. outsourced contracts for security and social care, from Perhaps this all feeds back into the issue that we up and down the country—for the concentration of have looked at over and over again, which is that, money in a small part of the country is another part of absent some significant change, the necessary information the finance curse, a major contributor to the UK’s is just not available, whether one is trying to look at world-leading levels of regional inequality. the macro level or the micro level. That information In contemplating how to approach the finance curse has to be available, or else accountability in any proper in legislation, I might have taken a Goldilocks approach, sense just cannot exist. calling for the Government to work out what is a “just right”size of financial sector for the UK, and to develop Lord Tunnicliffe (Lab) [V]: My Lords, I think the policies to deliver it. But we have referred much to whole subject of supervision and the presentation of another impact of the financial sector—its lobbying information for decision-making is very important. I power, and not just with the Conservative Party that do not think that it could be shoehorned into this Bill. forms our current Government. So the amendment I hope that the Government will note the concerns takes a softer approach. All that it asks for is accurate, about this and meet it where we can in parts of the independent information and transparency, something Bill, but perhaps there has to be an ongoing debate, which, as the noble Earl’s reliance on figures from which will hopefully come to some consensus about PricewaterhouseCoopers demonstrates, is clearly lacking. how we improve the supervision and accountability of I referred to the financial scrutiny and oversight the financial services sector. network—the acronym FSON perhaps needs some work. In essence, it is a UK equivalent to the EU’s Earl Howe (Con): My Lords, I listened carefully to Finance Watch. I am sure that expert noble Lords will the noble Baroness,Lady Bennett, in her clear introduction be aware of Finance Watch, how it came into being to these amendments, and I thank her for the background and subsequently acted. With the mandate of making briefing papers that she kindly sent me this morning. GC 733 Financial Services Bill [10 MARCH 2021] Financial Services Bill GC 734

Having said that, I hope she will forgive me if I do not Of course, as I said, one key role of the financial turn the end of these Committee proceedings into an services sector is to provide funding to the so-called off-the-cuff economics seminar. Indeed, she will not real economy. The Government have recognised that, be surprised if, on behalf of the Government, I adopt in this Bill, the provisions on the implementation of an orthodox stance on the role of our financial services Basel require the PRA to have regard to the likely sector. effect of its rules on the ability of the firms affected to It is the Government’s firm contention that the continue to provide finance to businesses and consumers financial services sector is a vital part of our economy. in the UK, on a sustainable basis in the medium and It employs more than a million people, and two-thirds long term. of the people employed in financial and professional The amendment refers to inequality. On that issue, services work outside London. It has been a critical I can reassure the Committee that the Treasury, the source of tax revenue, whatever the exact figure, especially FCA and the PRA are all bound by the public sector in these difficult times. equality duty. As part of that duty, all three are The IMF has described the UK’s financial system required by the Equality Act 2010 to have due regard as a global public good, so the Treasury is not persuaded to the need to eliminate discrimination and to promote by the arguments of the Tax Justice Network around equality of opportunity in carrying out their policies, “too much finance” or that finance is inherently a bad services and functions. The FCA publishes a diversity thing for the real economy. The financial services annual report to set specific measurable equality objectives sector supports British businesses to expand, manage and publish relevant, proportionate information cash flow, invest in themselves and create jobs. The demonstrating its compliance with the public sector sector is also one of our leading industries in its own equality duty. right, driven by a concentration of international, and Amendment 124 mentions the impact of the financial therefore internationally mobile, firms. services sector on climate change and biodiversity. The Committee will I hope forgive me if I do not repeat Amendment 123 would require regular reports on what I said in earlier debates on that topic, as I have the impact of the financial services sector on a range already set out the actions that the regulators are of topics including growth, inequality and risk. taking in that space. Amendment 124 would establish a new oversight body which would consider the impact of this sector on the I turn briefly to the composition of the oversight “real economy”. network that the noble Baroness proposes.I am completely with her in believing that the regulators should take on I have already set out some of the positive impacts board a variety of different views; it is important that that the sector has in its own right on growth, jobs and they do so. In fact, the FCA already has a statutory tax revenue in the UK. But let us not forget that it is requirement to consult independent panels representing also a sector on which all other parts of our economy consumers and practitioners, and the Bank of England rely. This means that the sector is a vital source of has strong links with many academics. Of course, all funding and services for other sectors of the economy. the groups mentioned are able to respond to consultations, But, of course, it can also mean that if there are which the regulators are required to undertake, and problems in the financial services sector, they can where their responses must be considered. affect other parts of our economy. That is why the As a general comment, I just say that the topics sector is so vital, and it is why I am able to assure noble raised by the noble Baroness are those which the Lords that the Government are absolutely committed Treasury and the regulators consider every day when to transparency around financial risks and welcome making financial services policy. I assure her that the independent scrutiny of risk exposure. Government are committed to ensuring that the sector The Bank of England’s Financial Policy Committee has a positive impact for consumers and for the economy also has a responsibility to identify, monitor and take as a whole. No Government could do otherwise. action to remove or reduce systemic risks. The committee Given all that I have said, which I hope has provided was established under the Financial Services Act 2012 some useful perspectives on this topic, I hope that the and must publish and lay before Parliament a financial noble Baroness will feel comfortable in withdrawing stability report twice a year. As part of its assessment her amendment. of financial stability risks, the Financial Policy Committee already considers and reports on risks arising from shadow banking, also referred to as “non-banks”. Given the The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Faulkner rapid growth of non-banks, the Treasury has asked of Worcester) (Lab): My Lords, I have had a request to the Financial Policy Committee to publish a detailed speak after the Minister from the noble Lord, Lord assessment of the risk oversight and mitigation systems Sikka. I point out to him that we are almost out of in place for non-banks. That is expected in the first time for this Committee tonight, and I ask him please half of this year. to be as brief as possible. The Office for Budget Responsibility produces and presents a fiscal risks report to Parliament every two Lord Sikka (Lab) [V]: My Lords, as we are pressed years, and it has previously explored risks posed by for time, I withdraw my intervention. I hope that I will and to the financial sector. More generally, the FCA make it another day. and PRA are required to prepare and lay annual reports before Parliament, assessing how effectively their objectives have been advanced. These objectives The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Faulkner are set by Parliament, as noble Lords are well aware. of Worcester) (Lab): We are grateful to you, Lord Sikka. GC 735 Financial Services Bill [LORDS] Financial Services Bill GC 736

[LORD FAULKNER OF WORCESTER] about the problems that the financial sector presents. Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP) [V]: My We cannot have business as usual. As the noble Lord, Lords, I thank the Minister for his answer. He focused Lord Sikka, said earlier, the cost of doing nothing is on the positive impacts of the financial sector and, enormous. However, given where we are and the time when he came to addressing negative impacts, he of the evening—I have cut short my planned remarks talked a lot about risk. There is of course a lot of focus significantly—I beg leave to withdraw my amendment, on risk at the moment with what is happening with though I suspect I will bring this back on Report. Greensill and the shadow banking sector, but I do not believe that he really addressed the other negative Amendment 123 withdrawn. impacts such as the diversion of human resources and capital. Indeed, when he was talking about the tax Amendments 124 to 131 not moved. revenue, I thought that my PhD graduate from Newcastle would surely be working in some sector contributing Amendment 132 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled in different ways. List. The Minister perhaps misunderstood the issue of Amendments 133 to 136F not moved. equality, so maybe I need to look at redrafting that. I referred to regional inequality and looked at Clause 41 agreed. socioeconomic and other areas of inequality. I will speak briefly on the responses from others. Clause 42: Regulations The noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, pretty well said that she thought we should have exactly what I was proposing. Amendment 137 not moved. She said that there were a great deal of resources in think tanks, academics and NGOs and that we needed Clause 42 agreed. to bring them together. That is exactly what is proposed in FSON—a network, not reinventing the wheel, not Clauses 43 to 46 agreed. creating a whole new institution, but just making sure that those things are joined up and have a structure to Bill reported without amendment. work together to identify the crucial points. The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Faulkner The noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, said that there of Worcester) (Lab): My Lords, that concludes the were consultations on the way so we would have to Committee’s proceedings on the Bill. I remind Members wait but, with the risks—as the Minister acknowledged— to sanitise their desks and chairs before leaving the and the costs of the financial sector, we really cannot Room. wait. We have to act now. I have cited some very traditional, mainstream sources expressing great concern Committee adjourned at 7.32 pm.