← Back to House of Commons Debates
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - Opening debate on the Second Reading of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill
15 March 2021
Lead MP
Priti Patel
Debate Type
Bill Debate
Tags
Crime & Law EnforcementJustice & Courts
Other Contributors: 79
At a Glance
Priti Patel raised concerns about police, crime, sentencing and courts bill - opening debate on the second reading of the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
The Home Secretary moved that the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill be read a second time. She emphasised her support for police officers and outlined several key features of the bill, including doubling the maximum penalty for assaults on emergency workers from 12 months to two years imprisonment, introducing a serious violence duty to bring public bodies together to tackle violent crime, and implementing reforms to protect victims during pre-charge bail investigations. The Bill also includes provisions on stop and search powers, extending legislation against sexual activity with children under 18, seizing evidence in missing persons cases, and improving access for deaf individuals to serve as jurors.
Gareth Johnson
Con
Dartford
Expressed astonishment at Labour's opposition to doubling the maximum sentence for assault on emergency workers, which he sees as a key feature of the Bill.
Chris Bryant
Lab
Rhondda and Ogmore
Called out the Home Secretary not to play party politics with this amendment. He pointed out that his own private Member’s Bill introduced legislation for two-year sentences but was dissuaded by then colleagues including current Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab and former Home Secretary Theresa May.
Toby Perkins
Lab
Chesterfield
Suggested that courts are reluctant to jail people who should be jailed due to prison overcrowding, undermining the effectiveness of sentencing reforms proposed in the Bill.
Edward Leigh
Con
Gainsborough
Asked the Home Secretary for assurance that clause 59 would not have a chilling effect on the right to debate and cause offence, as enshrined in previous anti-social behaviour legislation.
Peter Kyle
Lab
Hove and Portslade
Criticised the bill for being insufficiently focused on women and children victims. He questioned its effectiveness given that there have been 1 million sexual offences and 350,000 rapes since promises were made to improve victims' rights.
Barnsley Central
Asked the Home Secretary about considerations given to generations of Travellers and Gypsies who might want to pull up on a roadside for a night, and whether their rights had been considered in the Bill.
Aaron Bell
Con
Walsall North
Welcomed provisions in the bill aimed at addressing unauthorised encampments that cause misery to local communities, as part of his constituency's manifesto pledges.
Torfaen
He argues that rushing through restrictions on protests would damage democracy. He supports cross-party discussions to improve protections for victims of crime, better domestic abuse services, and recognising misogyny as a hate crime. The Bill fails to address the need for change in tackling violence against women and girls.
Jacob Young
Lab
Barnsley Central
Intervenes to ask if blocking ambulances or printing presses should be allowed, suggesting that the Bill addresses such issues. He implies that parts of the Bill are necessary for protecting essential services.
Barnsley Central
Argues that parts 3 and 4 of the Bill undermine victims, the police force, and the criminal justice system. He suggests the Government should withdraw these parts to focus on effective reform.
James Grey
Con
North Warwickshire
Argues that voting against the Bill in its entirety because of concerns about free speech would be impractical. He suggests supporting good parts of the legislation while addressing specific issues.
Peter Kyle
Lab
Hove and Portslade
Campaigns for protection against sex-for-rent practices, highlighting that such protections have been promised but not delivered. He seeks cross-party support to address this issue.
Priti Patel
Con
Witham
Offers to follow up on the alleged cancellation of a workstream addressing sex-for-rent practices, indicating willingness to engage with opposition concerns.
Chris Bryant
Lab
Rhondda and Ogmore
Supports protection for emergency workers but raises the issue of similar assaults faced by women working in shops. He seeks broader protections for all workers, especially women.
Chris Philp
Con
Croydon South
Challenges Thomas-Symonds on the maximum sentence for rape, asserting that it is life imprisonment.
Stuart Anderson
Con
South Shropshire
Asks why Labour would vote against the Bill given its support for many of its provisions. He implies inconsistency in their stance.
Eleanor Laing
Con
Uxbridge and South Ruislip
Called the right hon. Gentleman to order for addressing another Member as 'you' instead of their name or title.
Toby Perkins
Lab
Chesterfield
Suggested that if divisive elements of the Bill were removed, the House could support measures to help police. Interjected on other speakers' speeches about emergency workers legislation and sentencing issues.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Suggested that the Opposition should abstain today, debate the amendments, and decide on Third Reading whether to support the Bill based on Government concessions.
Chris Bryant
Lab
Rhondda and Ogmore
Interjected about the difficulties of emergency workers legislation and the need for longer sentences in certain circumstances.
Requested an intervention from Toby Perkins.
Announced that his hon. Friend was on her way to a full recovery after successful treatment.
Andrew Griffith
Con
Arundel and South Downs
Noted that the Government have listened and added the requirement for entering with a vehicle for unauthorised encampments.
Anne McLaughlin
SNP
Galloway and West Dumfries
The Scottish National Party opposes the Bill, arguing that it fails to address serious crime effectively. The MP cites Scotland's success in reducing reoffending rates through community justice approaches as evidence against the Government’s tougher sentencing policy. She highlights concerns about the bill criminalising Gypsy/Traveller communities and disproportionately affecting ethnic minority groups and women. McLaughlin also criticises the Bill for undermining the right to protest, emphasising the importance of democratic freedoms. Additionally, she raises issues regarding stop-and-search powers and data extraction from mobile devices.
Yvette Cooper
Lab
Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley
Cooper criticises the Government for a near-collapse of parts of the criminal justice system, with prosecution rates falling. She supports stronger sentences for serious crimes but argues that current measures in the Bill are insufficient to turn around these figures. Cooper is concerned about some measures in the Bill going against British traditions of free speech and peaceful protest, citing specific powers as too broad.
James Grey
Con
North Wiltshire
Supports the Bill's amendments on sentencing minors but argues that a sliding scale should be introduced to treat a 17-year-old almost like an adult, which would increase Thomas Griffiths’ sentence from 12 and a half years to 14. Calls for differentiation between cases where a knife is brought to the scene versus picked up at the crime site.
Harriet Harman
Lab
Camden North
Agrees with James Grey and argues that the Bill should curb curbing the right to demonstrate. Suggests making it a criminal offence for men to follow women, film them, or not take no for an answer, which would be punishable by taking away their driving licence. Also proposes amending sexual history being dragged up in court.
Philip Davies
Con
Shipley
Agrees with increasing sentences for assaults on emergency workers to two years and supports ending automatic early release for prisoners. Proposes a sentencing escalator, increasing magistrates' sentencing power to 12 months, removing the word 'insulting' from Public Order Act sections.
Andrew Slaughter
Lab
Hammersmith and Chiswick
Part 4 is a sustained attack on civil liberties, free expression, and movement. The amendment criminalises trespass, potentially leading to imprisonment or heavy fines for communities already facing discrimination. It also allows seizure of vehicles used as homes, which disproportionately impacts nomadic people. Only 3% of Gypsy and Traveller caravans are on unauthorised sites, and police oppose the creation of a new criminal offence.
Alberto Costa
Con
South Leicestershire
The proposals address problems caused by unauthorised encampments in rural areas. The amendment does not discriminate against law-abiding Gypsy and Traveller communities but aims to tackle the issue of those who set up camps without permission, causing disruption and damage to local communities.
Barnsley South
While supportive of provisions for dangerous driving, the bill fails to address violence against women. The proposed amendments threaten peaceful protest and public order rights, causing alarm among those who experienced abuse from police during protests like the 1984 miners' strike.
Chingford and Woodford Green
He emphasises the need for tougher sentences for pet theft due to the rising cases of violent dog theft. He cites a 250% increase in dog theft crimes and mentions that the Metropolitan police report the highest number of stolen dogs in his area. Duncan Smith argues that the current classification under HOC49 diminishes the seriousness of these offences, leading to poor sentencing.
Debbie Abrahams
Lab
Oldham East and Saddleworth
While supporting some measures in the Bill, she raises concerns about missed opportunities for protecting women from violence. She mentions that the absence of measures to repeal the Bail Act 1976 is a matter of deep regret, highlighting the potential abuse and lack of data collection on its use.
Andrew Selous
Con
Dover
He strongly supports the points about pet theft made by Iain Duncan Smith. He also discusses incidents of sexual harassment faced by young women, advocating for a cultural change that upholds respect and values decency.
Florence Eshalomi
Lab Co-op
Vauxhall and Camberwell Green
She opposes parts of the Bill that seek to control protest expression. She highlights her constituency’s experience with Sarah Everard's case and expresses concern over racial disproportionality in criminal justice. Florence advocates for listening to women's voices, particularly black women and trans women.
Eleanor Laing
Con
Nottingham North
Order the hon. Lady to adhere to her time limit, but does not provide a specific stance on the amendment or Bill.
Laura Farris
Con
Bury St Edmunds
Welcomes parts of the Bill concerning child sexual abuse, extending definitions for positions of trust, and managing terrorist risk offenders. Laura also emphasises the need to address online harms related to violence against women.
Wera Hobhouse
Lib Dem
Bath
Supports parts of the Bill that strengthen rehabilitation and trauma-informed services but strongly opposes clauses on policing protests, viewing them as an assault on civil liberties. She argues for recognising misogyny as a hate crime.
Supports Part 4 of the Bill as it addresses unauthorised encampments in Poole, highlighting examples of these issues and advocating for increased law enforcement powers. Acknowledges previous lack of action by local authorities and police but welcomes the Government’s initiative to tackle this issue.
Sarah Champion
Lab
Rotherham
Welcomes parts of the Bill but criticises it for not addressing violence against women and children adequately. Advocates for stronger provisions regarding pre-charge bail conditions, 'positions of trust', online sexual exploitation, high-risk countries, and support for victims and witnesses in courts.
Bridgend
Mr Russell-Moyle criticises the Bill for its broad scope, suggesting it is a 'Trojan horse' with both good and bad elements. He expresses serious concerns about specific clauses that could criminalise peaceful protests based on noise levels and raises issues regarding the treatment of Traveller communities.
Eleanor Laing
Con
West Suffolk
Mrs Laing interjected to correct an oversight in allowing Mr Russell-Moyle to exceed his speaking time limit without interruption.
Gareth Johnson
Con
Dartford
Mr Johnson supports the Bill, highlighting provisions such as protection for war memorials and enhanced sentencing for death by dangerous driving. He also advocates for measures to tackle knife crime and calls on Labour Members not to vote against these provisions.
Pontypridd
The Bill does nothing substantial for women's safety. It curtails protest rights while offering little protection against rape and sexual assault, with prosecution rates being scandalously low. I welcome clause 45’s extension of existing positions of trust offences but am concerned it will not cover all situations, particularly in the wrestling industry where abuse is prevalent.
Lee Anderson
Reform
Ashfield
This Bill prioritises law-abiding citizens and offers tougher sentences for serious crimes such as child murder, sex offences, and dangerous driving. It will recruit more prison officers and police, build more prisons, and curb illegal camps that cause misery to residents by increasing crime rates and intimidation.
Toby Perkins
Lab
Chesterfield
The Bill contains positive measures such as protecting police from abuse but lacks significant provisions for violence against women and victim support. The government's focus on statues over rape victims is concerning, especially given recent protests that were peaceful despite claims otherwise.
Tim Loughton
Con
East Worthing and Shoreham
Supports measures such as putting the police covenant into law, increasing penalties for assaults on emergency workers, toughening provisions on criminal damage to memorials, extending definitions in relation to abuse of positions of trust by engaging in sexual activity with minors, and clamping down on sex tourism. Welcomes the Bill's aim to extend police powers against unauthorised encampments.
Apsana Begum
Lab
Poplar and Limehouse
Expresses concern that the measures will expose marginalised communities to profiling and disproportionate police powers, impacting freedom of speech and protest. Criticises the Home Secretary's characterization of anti-racist protesters as 'thugs', raising concerns about the erosion of democratic rights.
Supports the provisions to strengthen police powers against unauthorised encampments, including criminalising trespass and seizing vehicles. Welcomes the doubling of maximum sentences for assaulting emergency workers from 12 months to two years.
Chris Bryant
Lab
Rhondda and Ogmore
Bryant supports changing legislation on emergency workers but criticises the lack of implementation since 2018. He emphasises that changing laws is not enough; enforcement by police, prosecution by CPS, and sentencing by magistrates must be prioritised.
Sunderland supports the Bill for its pro-law and order measures. He highlights the increased penalties for assaults on emergency workers, strengthened management of sex offenders, enhanced police powers, and protection of war memorials.
Warrington North
Nichols criticises the Bill as a distraction from Government failings. She argues that it prioritises protecting monuments over women's safety and does not address issues like sexual harassment, rape prosecution rates, or stalking.
Gullis supports the Bill for its delivery of manifesto commitments. He emphasises protection of war memorials and criticises Labour's stance as deriding important work, while highlighting lawful protest clarification.
Dwyfor Meirionnydd
The Bill infringes on Welsh rights to protest, worsens inequality and leads to an unjust society. Wales needs control over justice due to its unique challenges. The Bill will entrench a punitive system rather than address root causes of crime. It disproportionately affects black people and criminalises young individuals and vulnerable women.
Kate Osborne
Lab
Jarrow and Gateshead East
The Bill's approach to policing is an overreach, endangering public trust. It disproportionately impacts Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, increases inequalities and criminalises rough sleepers. The Bill sends a message that violence against women is less important than protecting statues. Voting against the Bill as it threatens civil liberties.
Nigel Evans
20:50:00
Noted for strict adherence to time limits, did not provide specific arguments on the bill or amendment.
Emphasises support for police officers and their mental health. Supports the Bill as it aims to protect victims of crime, including those affected by one-punch assaults. Criticises turning against police based on actions of a minority.
Rachael Maskell
Lab Co-op
York Central
Expresses concerns about part 3 and part 4, criticising institutional discrimination against women in the justice system. Highlights clause 45’s inadequacies regarding safeguarding private tuition settings and accommodations for international students.
Rachel Hopkins
Lab
Luton South
The amendment restricts freedom of assembly and association, contradicting article 11 of the Human Rights Act. It undermines rights to protest for social justice causes such as gender equality and workers' rights. The speaker calls for community consent and transparency in policing rather than more restrictive powers.
Stuart Anderson
Con
South Shropshire
Supports tougher measures on crime, especially knife crime and violence against emergency workers. Argues for extra powers to tackle unauthorised encampments which impact local communities negatively. Seeks a halt in building transit sites until legislation is passed.
Kim Johnson
Lab
Liverpool Riverside
Critiques provisions for serious violence reduction orders and stop-and-search powers, which disproportionately affect black people. Expresses concern over criminalising unauthorised encampments and their potential unlawfulness against GRT communities.
Jane Hunt
Con
Loughborough
Welcomes measures to protect victims, remove presumption of release pending investigation, and reduce reoffending. Supports changes in bail conditions to safeguard victims and believes sentences should be more severe for serious crimes.
Wendy Chamberlain
Lib Dem
North East Fife
Chamberlain criticises the Government's response to protests and the Met's handling of a peaceful vigil in memory of Sarah Everard. She supports enshrining the police covenant report, but is critical of parts of the Bill that restrict protest rights and increase sentences for assaulting emergency workers without addressing community culture.
Saqib Bhatti
Con
Meriden and Solihull East
Bhatti supports the Bill's provisions, highlighting its role in making society safer for women. He commends the Government for delivering on manifesto commitments and welcomes measures such as removing automatic halfway release and focusing on rehabilitation through better support for the probation service.
Jack Brereton
Stoke-on-Trent North
Brereton supports the Bill, praising its provisions to protect emergency workers and introduce a new police covenant. He highlights local concerns about serious crime and welcomes measures targeting persistent offenders and improving household security.
Sara Britcliffe
Con
Hyndburn
The speaker supports the Bill and argues that it balances the right to protest with measures addressing disruptive protests. She emphasises the need for tougher sentences against serious crimes such as child killers, dangerous criminals, assaults on emergency workers, illegal Traveller sites, and desecration of war memorials. Sara stresses her support for law enforcement tools, highlighting the Bill's alignment with public sentiment in her constituency.
Mark Fletcher
Con
Bolsover
Fletcher supports the Bill and mentions its provisions that address manifesto commitments. He discusses measures such as enshrining the police covenant in law, doubling sentences for assaults on emergency workers, introducing criminal penalties for unauthorised Traveller encampments, and whole-life orders for premeditated murders of children. Fletcher also highlights specific concerns within his constituency.
Elliot Colburn
Con
Carshalton and Wallington
Colburn supports the Bill, emphasising measures to toughen sentences for dangerous criminals, introduce life sentences for killer drivers, double sentences for assaults on emergency workers, and protect victims of violent and sexual offences. He also mentions local issues such as unauthorised encampments causing harm in his constituency.
Miriam Cates
Con
Thirsk and Malton
Cates supports the Bill, highlighting its potential to discourage crime, improve detection and prosecution, make punishments effective, and reduce reoffending. She mentions local examples of delays in justice for both accused and victims. Cates also emphasises the role of education institutions like Northern College in rehabilitating ex-offenders.
Stephen Hammond
Con
Wimbledon
Supports the Bill's reforms to rehabilitation and virtual juries. Notes successful trials of virtual juries in Wimbledon with academic research backing their effectiveness. Suggests clearer definitions are needed for terms like 'serious annoyance' and 'serious inconvenience'. Supports investigation into policing at Clapham vigil.
Rob Butler
Con
North West Bedfordshire
Welcomes the Bill's promises on law and order. Endorses moves to extend custodial sentences for serious offences, making community orders more robust, piloting problem-solving courts for young adults, reducing remand in custody for children, and changes to youth justice system. Supports enshrining police covenant in law.
Tom Randall
Con
Tynemouth
Supports stronger sentences for various offenders including child murderers, rapists, violent offenders, and drug dealers. Notes that the Bill will update public order legislation and strengthen support for police officers. Supports seizing vehicles from unauthorised encampments.
Fiona Bruce
Con
Congleton
Raises concerns over clauses 54-56, 59-60 regarding police powers to respond to protest. Expresses worry that lowering legal test for police conditions could capture peaceful protests. Criticises term 'serious unease' and impact on pro-life vigils outside abortion centres. Questions clear definitions of terms like 'serious annoyance', 'serious inconvenience'. Concerned about chilling effect on free speech.
Burnley
Supports the Bill for its toughening sentences on serious crimes, protecting war memorials and implementing a smarter sentencing system. Highlights the importance of desecration provisions in respect to local war memorials in Burnley.
Rugby
Stresses the need for measures against illegal encampments and extremist protests, asserting that the Bill protects fundamental rights while balancing them with responsibilities. Argues it does not impinge on legitimate protest rights.
Richard Drax
Con
South Dorset
Supports the Bill for toughening penalties against assaults on emergency workers and desecration of war memorials. Emphasises the importance of proportionate public order laws following events such as the Sarah Everard vigil.
Suzanne Webb
Con
Stourbridge
Supports the Bill as it prioritises women's safety and delivers on manifesto commitments such as longer jail terms for violent crimes. It strengthens police powers to tackle unauthorised encampments, which is particularly welcome in her constituency.
Bob Stewart
Con
Beckenham
Proposes an amendment to award the Elizabeth Cross to police, fire officers and ambulance service members who have been killed in action. Argues that this would provide solace to families of those who lost their lives protecting others.
Richard Fuller
Con
North Bedfordshire
Welcomes the Bill, particularly clauses on ending automatic early release and recognising deaf people's access to British Sign Language interpreters. Considers Labour Members' opposition as a mistake that neither his nor their constituents will understand.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.