Serious Violence Reduction Bill - Clause(s) dealing with police powers, child sexual abuse, and collaborative violence reduction strategies

Nigel Evans Con

Chorley

Warned the House about the sub judice rule in the context of the Sarah Everard case. Mentioned selecting a reasoned amendment from the Official Opposition and set rules for contributions, including time limits.

Clive Lewis Lab

Norwich South

Critiques English exceptionalism and warns of authoritarian tendencies in the Bill. Argues that the bill strips people of liberty and democratic rights. Highlights concerns about the government's track record on human rights, judicial review, and voter suppression.

Sajid Javid Con

Taqaddad

Supports the Bill, highlighting it fulfills promises made in previous roles. Discusses child sexual abuse, new criminal offences for those in positions of trust with minors, and improvements to sentencing guidelines for serious offenders.

Allan Dorans SNP

Ochil

Supports the collaborative approach outlined in Part 2 chapter 1. Emphasises the importance of including violence against women and girls in prevention strategies, citing success from the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit.

Tracey Crouch Con

Bekesbourne

She supports the Bill, which aims to protect women and girls by equipping police with necessary powers and strengthening sentencing laws for serious offenders. She highlights her support for the police and their work during the pandemic, advocating for measures that better protect them and other emergency workers. Tracey also welcomes provisions that extend positions of trust to include those who coach or supervise in sport or religion, acknowledging the importance of these changes due to past abuse cases.

Jon Trickett Lab

Normanton and Hemsworth

He criticises clause 59 for proposing a 10-year jail sentence for causing the risk of 'serious annoyance', arguing it is authoritarian and akin to practices in dictatorships or repressive regimes. Jon expresses concern over the Government's impact on freedoms, particularly those related to dissent, assembly, and free speech. He mentions that police officers themselves are not enthusiastic about this power.

Alex Sobel Lab Co-op

Leeds Central

He intervenes to express concern that peaceful protests would be at risk under clause 59, drawing parallels with incidents on Clapham common where activists were arrested. Alex emphasises the regressive nature of the Bill and its potential threat to legitimate forms of protest.

Caroline Johnson Con

Sleaford and North Hykeham

She supports clause 59, praising it for providing necessary protection to emergency workers and police officers. Caroline highlights measures that increase penalties for assaults on emergency workers and for those who use their cars as weapons. She also welcomes stronger sentences for serious offenders and measures aimed at preventing reoffending.

Rupa Huq Lab

Ealing Central and Acton

Proposes an amendment to prohibit harassment at abortion facilities. Argues that harassment is gendered, impacting women disproportionately and undermining their access to legal medical services. Highlights the need for statutory protection against intimidation, emphasising cross-party support for similar measures previously.

Pauline Latham

Supports certain provisions in the Bill but calls for an additional clause criminalising child marriage. Argues that allowing 16 or 17-year-olds to marry under parental consent is inconsistent with protecting children from abuse and exploitation, citing statistics on forced marriages involving minors.

Nigel Evans

A procedural announcement reminding members to contact the Speaker's Office if unable to participate in the debate.

Diana R. Johnson Lab

Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham

Raises concerns about the Bill’s restrictions on peaceful assembly and inadequate measures for tackling violence against women. Criticises the lack of new provisions to address prostitution as a form of violence, the need for stricter online pimping laws, and early intervention in low-level sexual offences that escalate into serious crimes.

Craig Mackinlay

Defends the Bill’s provisions on whole-life orders, early release of dangerous offenders, assaulting emergency workers, protection for victims and witnesses, protest regulations, unauthorised encampments, and police officer recruitment. Emphasises that it does not restrict protests but tackles significant disruption to public life.

Gavin Robinson DUP

Belfast East

Supports provisions that apply directly to Northern Ireland, such as access to information from encrypted devices and changes to the Sexual Offences Act. He raises concerns about unexplained wealth orders not commencing in Northern Ireland despite requests for a commencement order.

Angela Eagle Lab

Wallasey

Critiques clauses 54 to 60 as an attack on the right to assemble and protest, arguing they are too restrictive. She also criticises clause 46 for prioritising protection of statues over living people.

Gagan Mohindra Con

South West Hertfordshire

Supports the bill, highlighting clauses that tackle crime and support law-abiding citizens. He emphasises clause 61 for criminalising unauthorised encampments and notes its importance in discouraging poor behaviour by targeting bad apples.

Martin Docherty SNP

West Dunbartonshire

The speaker opposes the Bill, viewing it as a criminalisation of Gypsy and Traveller children for living their traditional lifestyle. He argues that it will entrench inequalities and racial prejudice against these communities, contrary to the advice from police forces in England.

Simon Clarke Con

Newton Abbot

Clarke supports the Bill as a means of delivering on Conservative promises to cut crime and ensure tougher sentencing for violent criminals. He criticises the Labour party's stance on protest tactics by groups like Extinction Rebellion, arguing that these actions go too far and undermine public confidence.

Stella Creasy Lab Co-op

Walthamstow

Creasy criticises the Bill for undermining trust between communities and the police, especially in London. She highlights concerns about provisions that could be unworkable or lead to demonisation of minority groups like Gypsy and Traveller communities.

Cherilyn Mackrory Con

Truro and Falmouth

Mackrory supports the Bill, praising measures to impose conditions on protests causing alarm or distress and introducing maximum life sentences for dangerous driving. She also appreciates provisions aimed at protecting women from violence.

Maria Eagle Lab

Liverpool Garston

The Bill contains authoritarian measures allowing the Government to ban demonstrations or vigils if they are too noisy. It includes convictions for breach of conditions without knowledge, increasing punishments from 12 weeks to 51 weeks in prison.

Laura Trott Con

Sevenoaks

The Bill takes a stride forward in protecting women and girls by ending automatic halfway release for those convicted of offences such as rape, extending the law on abusing positions of trust to better protect children, better protecting victims of domestic violence and introducing tougher sentences for sex offenders.

Richard Burgon Lab

Leeds East

The Bill aims at suppressing political opposition and dissent by making it harder to protest if they cause a nuisance, noise or are too near Parliament. This is aimed at stopping people from organising protests against injustice.

Edward Timpson Con

Eddisbury

The provisions in parts 3 and 4 of the Bill address issues such as protecting war memorials, securing schools, preventing knife crime and promoting youth rehabilitation orders. The Bill supports measures against pet theft and raising the retirement age for magistrates.

Marie Rimmer Lab

St Helens South and Whiston

Concerned that the Bill infringes on freedom and democratic rights, particularly in relation to protests. Argues that causing death by dangerous driving should warrant a life sentence but disagrees with extending harsher sentences due to 'serious annoyance' caused by protest activities.

Virginia Crosbie Con

Anglesey

Supports the Bill, highlighting increased assaults on emergency workers including police officers. Mentions a recent incident in her constituency where a new officer was assaulted during her second shift due to spitting and coughing incidents. Argues for stronger sentences as a deterrent.

Bell Ribeiro-Addy Lab

Clapham

Considers the Bill an infringement on civil liberties, stating it prioritises protection for property over people and exacerbates existing crises in policing without addressing them. Questions the effectiveness of tougher sentences if conviction rates remain low.

Ruth Edwards Con

Nottingham East

Shares specific incidents from her constituency where emergency workers were assaulted, including physical and verbal attacks. Emphasises the need for stronger sentences to address the growing issue of assaults on emergency services.

Geraint Davies Lab

Swansea West

He is against the Bill, arguing that it curtails rights to peaceful protest and assembly. He cites a 35% increase in rape cases and notes that 99% of recorded rapes never go to court. Davies calls for investment in Nightingale courts equipped with forensic technology to improve prosecution rates. He warns that curtailing freedoms will drive protest underground, undermining democracy.

James Wild Con

North West Norfolk

Wild supports the Bill, highlighting its provisions for protection of emergency workers and increasing sentences for assaults on them. He also endorses extending protections to faith leaders and sports coaches regarding sexual activity with young people and closing gaps in criminal law related to child sex crimes. Wild expresses concerns over Facebook's plans for encryption but welcomes independent reviews into policing practices.

Jeff Smith Lab

Manchester Withington

Smith criticises the Bill for its divisive nature, focusing on authoritarian measures against protest rights. He advocates for better protection of shop workers and more effective measures to combat violence against women and girls. Smith argues that the right to protest is crucial for upholding other fundamental rights.

Nadia Whittome Lab

Nottingham East

Whittome opposes the Bill, describing it as an assault on protest rights and freedoms. She highlights its authoritarian nature and criticises the Home Secretary's stance against Extinction Rebellion and Black Lives Matter. Whittome calls for better protection of women and criticism of police actions that harm protesters.

Matt Vickers Con

Stockton West

Supports the Bill, arguing it will deliver real justice for victims and protect emergency service workers. Highlights increased assaults on emergency services during the pandemic in Cleveland and supports tougher sentences and improved support for police officers.

Clive Efford Lab

Eltham and Chislehurst

Argues that the Bill undermines democracy by giving the police more powers to determine which protests are acceptable, leading to political pressure. Criticises the Government for closing Parliament and awarding contracts without proper disclosure.

Rob Roberts Con

Delyn

Supports the Bill as a commitment from the government to tackle serious crime, protect emergency workers, and strengthen the justice system. Emphasises the need for appropriate powers and sentencing to support police forces.

Carla Lockhart DUP

Upper Bann

Supports parts of the Bill, particularly in relation to penalties for dangerous driving and assault on emergency workers. Expresses concerns about provisions affecting protest rights and calls for careful consideration.

Anthony Mangnall Con

Fylde

Mr. Mangnall supports the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, highlighting its positive aspects such as ending unauthorised encampments, updating sentencing laws for minors and dangerous driving, and protecting monuments and frontline workers. He emphasises that the bill does not restrict freedom of speech or protest rights and aligns with recommendations from the Law Commission. He believes in thorough scrutiny during Committee stage.

Sarah Owen Lab

Luton North

Ms. Owen criticises the bill for its divisive nature and lack of focus on making people safer, particularly women. She mentions that while there are some positive elements like protection for emergency workers, there are also discriminatory measures against Traveller communities and restrictions on protest rights. She argues that the Bill fails to address issues such as sexual harassment and violence against women effectively.

Danny Kruger Reform

East Wiltshire

Mr. Kruger supports the bill, praising its balanced approach in sentencing for serious offenders and community punishments for young offenders based on his experience working with prisoners and young offenders. He criticises Labour's stance as opportunistic and weak on law and order. Mr. Kruger also discusses the cultural aspects of violence against women and the need for societal moral frameworks.

Tonia Antoniazzi Lab

Gower

The amendment could pit the public against the police and is a reaction to Extinction Rebellion protests. It limits peaceful protest and undermines free speech, potentially worsening the conviction rate for rape cases due to resource constraints on the police.

Nickie Aiken Con

Cannock Chase

Welcomes tougher sentences in the Bill but raises concerns about protests that cause disruption and distress to local residents. Argues that peaceful protest is protected, while criminal behaviour should be addressed.

Ian Byrne Lab

Liverpool West Derby

Claims the Bill attacks civil liberties, threatens rights to protest, and risks worsening racial and gender disparities in the criminal justice system. It could disproportionately impact Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities and represents a danger to those speaking out about injustices.

Sally-Ann Hart Con

Eastbourne

Supports the Bill as it maintains a right to peaceful protest while addressing criminal behaviour. Highlights the costs and disruption caused by extreme tactics in protests, emphasising that justice should be maintained.

Lilian Greenwood Lab

Nottingham South

Concerned about disproportionate restrictions on protest and missed opportunity to protect women. Questions clause 164's narrow drafting regarding BSL interpreters for deaf jurors, suggesting flexibility for other communication needs. Calls for reform of dangerous driving laws.

James Murray Lab Co-op

Ealing North

Emphasises need to protect women and girls from violence but criticises bill's focus on limiting protest rights. Argues that protest is fundamental to democracy and objects to proposed restrictions, particularly regarding noise levels generated by protests.

David Amess Con

Southend West

Supports measures against crime but expresses disappointment that 'released under investigation' issue is not included. Criticises excessive demonstrations around Parliament Square for noise and costs, supports amendment making deliberate trespass a criminal offence.

Mick Whitley Lab

Bridgend

Opposes Bill for over-restricting protest rights and concerns about impact on Gypsy, Roma, Traveller communities. Urges against exclusion zones around Parliament and calls for adequate site provision instead of criminalizing trespass.

Jerome Mayhew Con

Broadland and Fakenham

Welcomes provisions for longer sentences for serious offenders, emphasises that early releases undermine public trust in criminal justice. Supports police powers to manage disruptive protests while maintaining balance with civil liberties.

Joanna Cherry independent

Argues against curtailment of protest rights, citing misuse of police powers during the pandemic. Raises concerns that provisions will stifle dissent and impact freedom of speech.

Jo Gideon Con

Stoke-on-Trent Central

Welcomes tougher sentences for assaulting emergency workers, prevention measures against radicalisation and violent crime. Supports provisions for rehabilitation of ex-offenders who have corrected their behaviour.

Kerry McCarthy Lab

Bristol East

Critiques Bill's prioritisation, highlighting disparity in sentences for statue damage versus rape. Advocates for stronger measures to protect women and girls against violence.

Stephen Farry SDLP

Down South

The Bill undermines human rights and civil liberties, marking a slide towards authoritarianism. It should be rejected outright due to its dangers, including an attack on the right to protest—a cornerstone of democracy. Protests are critical for holding power to account and securing rights for minorities. The Bill’s proposed powers are not what the police themselves are seeking and will put them in a challenging position.

Jacob Young Con

Heywood and Middleton

The Bill delivers justice for victims, with tougher sentences for assaulting emergency workers, stricter bail conditions, increased jail time for sex offenders and child abusers, and extra funding for violence reduction. It introduces new measures to crack down on repeat offenders and enables resources to help combat antisocial behaviour in areas like TS6. The speaker also supports the recruitment of additional police officers for Cleveland.

Rebecca Long-Bailey Lab

Salford

The Bill erodes fundamental rights, enabling restrictions on freedom of assembly and association, allowing the Home Secretary to define what constitutes a serious disruption in protests. It introduces vague terms such as 'serious annoyance' that could lead to jail sentences for protesters. The speaker also criticises the bias within the justice system and the discrimination against Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller communities.

Kieran Mullan Con

Bexhill and Battle

Welcomes measures in the Bill that reflect public expectations for justice, particularly regarding sentences for serious crimes. Argues against intellectual snobbery around law and order and supports the Justice Secretary's efforts to address issues related to sentencing and rehabilitation of offenders. Criticises Keir Starmer’s approach on social media as beneath his office standards.

Beth Winter

Opposes the Bill, stating it introduces restrictions on protests that limit fundamental democratic rights and risks making Parliament more detached from societal concerns. Expresses concern over criminalising the Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller community, as well as disproportionately targeting young black men with stop and search measures. Calls for proactive solutions addressing social inequalities.

Richard Graham

Supports the Bill's provisions, emphasising its aim to provide safety and protection. Highlights the importance of changes in position of trust clauses regarding driving instructors and sports coaches for protecting children from sex offenders. Stresses that most beneficiaries of these protections are women and girls.

Caroline Lucas Green

Brighton, Pavilion

The Bill is dangerous and undemocratic as it undermines fundamental rights like freedom of assembly and expression. It silences criticism and disproportionately empowers police with new powers. She cites her arrest during a peaceful protest and argues that the legislation will perpetuate systemic risks in the criminal justice system, including stop and search and creating a trespass offence for Gypsy and Traveller communities.

Huw Merriman Con

Bexhill and Battle

The Bill is beneficial as it supports victims of violence, provides more powers to police, and includes measures such as serious violence reduction orders for knife crime offenders. He criticises Opposition members who oppose legislation but do not object when police use these powers under existing law.

John Martin McDonnell Lab

Hayes and Harlington

The Bill undermines civil liberties and threatens basic human freedom of assembly. It targets young people who reject societal racism, sexism, and misogyny by participating in protests like Black Lives Matter and Extinction Rebellion. He warns that the Government risks provoking division and conflict if they persist with such measures.

Ben Everitt Con

North East Cambridgeshire

The Labour party's decision to oppose the Bill is seen as a knee-jerk reaction and potentially regrettable. He argues that voting against the Bill would mean opposing measures to protect women and children from sexual abuse, tougher punishments for serious crimes, community sentences, police powers against unauthorised encampments, and life sentences for killers.

Catherine West Lab

Hornsey and Friern Barnet

West argues that the Bill undermines women's rights to protest and freedom of speech. She cites statistics showing that most women in prison are there for non-violent offences, often due to abuse or trauma, and criticises the lack of focus on protecting women from violence and abuse. She proposes a victims' Bill and survivor’s support plan focused on addressing issues affecting women.

Stephen Doughty Lab Co-op

Cardiff South and Penarth

Doughty expresses concerns about the lack of measures to protect women from violence and abuse in the Bill. He mentions that despite its length, the word 'woman' does not appear once. Doughty criticises specific clauses related to protest as draconian and detrimental to democratic rights. He also raises issues regarding policing cuts and disparities faced by black and minority ethnic communities.

David Simmonds Con

Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner

Simmonds supports the Bill for its improvements in handling sexual abuse cases, addressing illegal encampments, and facilitating lawful processes without disrupting daily life. He acknowledges the challenges faced by his constituents due to disruptive protests and supports measures that ensure effective prosecution of offenders.

Wes Streeting Lab

Ilford North

The Bill does not address crimes against women or children. It fails to provide new sentences for serious offences and undermines public trust in the criminal justice system by offering derisory sentences for those involved in trafficking children.

John Hayes Con

South Holland and The Deepings

The Bill strengthens law and order, addressing increasing demands on police forces by reducing leniency towards criminals. It aims to regain public faith in justice by tackling issues such as early release of killers.

Olivia Blake Lab

Sheffield Hallam

The Bill undermines the rights to protest and fails to address real problems in the criminal justice system, such as the backlog of cases. It will lead to the criminalisation of the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community.

James Daly Lab

The Bill provides reasonable powers for police to improve protest policing while respecting human rights. It supports tougher sentences for child murderers and sex offenders and ensures longer imprisonment for rapists.

Christian Wakeford Lab

Bury South

Supports the Bill, citing distress to residents caused by unauthorised Traveller encampments. Mentions extreme antisocial behaviour such as vandalism and theft. Advocates for stronger sentencing measures against serious crimes and introduces Kay’s law for better protection of victims. Disapproves of opposition's stance on the bill.

Emma Hardy Lab

Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice

Critiques clauses 54 to 60 as damaging freedom of speech and protest. Emphasises importance of free speech for all, not just those the Government supports. Concerned about lack of specific reference to retail staff in the Bill despite previous declarations by Lord Chancellor.

David Johnston

Acknowledges high frequency of unauthorised Traveller encampments in his constituency. Describes typical issues faced by constituents such as abuse, mess, noise and vandalism. Supports lowering threshold for police action against these camps.

Shaun Bailey

Asked David Lammy if Labour's opposition to the Bill tonight means they are weak on crime and the causes of crime.

Richard Graham

Noted that stalking was not a criminal offence when Labour was in power but became one in 2012, and the maximum sentence for stalking was doubled under this Government.

David Lammy Lab

Tottenham

Mr Lammy repeatedly requested to intervene but was denied by the Secretary of State. The interventions suggested that he disagrees with the Bill and its implications, particularly regarding sentences for criminal damage.

Nick Thomas-Symonds Lab

Torfaen

Mr Thomas-Symonds questioned the government's approach to memorial protection laws, stating that they are too broad and include memorials of slave traders. He highlighted a lack of willingness from the Government to engage constructively.

Peter Kyle Lab

Hove and Portslade

Mr Kyle requested an intervention but was not given the opportunity to speak, indicating disagreement with parts of the Bill regarding encampments or memorial protection laws.

Wes Streeting Lab

Ilford North

Mr Streeting asked about sentencing discrepancies in cases involving care home managers who exploit children, questioning the government's stance on justice for victims and perpetrators.

Commons Sense

Serious Violence Reduction Bill - Clause(s) dealing with police powers, child sexual abuse, and collaborative violence reduction strategies

Lead MP

Debate Type

Tags

At a Glance

How the Debate Unfolded

Contributors (77)

About House of Commons Debates