Key Facts

• Amendment 60 proposes that the Secretary of State must lay an annual report before Parliament.
• The report will provide information on the use of the powers introduced by clause 21.
• Clause 21 grants police access to driver licence records.
• The clause expands the current manual process for accessing DVLA driving licence data to an automated system.
• Automatic access currently applies only to road traffic matters but will be extended to other types of crime.
• Government amendment 33 ensures that regulations can amend the list of law enforcement bodies with access to the database.
• The clause could allow police access to 41.2 million driver photos.
• Existing DVLA data can already be searched by the police under schedule 2 to the Data Protection Act 2018.
• Concerns exist about mission creep and proportionality in the use of this data.
• The use of live facial recognition technology by South Wales police has generated significant public interest and controversy.
• A Beyoncé concert event saw the use of live facial recognition technology with a defined watch list for known terrorists and paedophiles.
• Vicky Ford mentioned that in her constituency, individuals were arrested using this technology, including someone wanted for a high-profile sexual offense.
• Live facial recognition technology was used in Croydon, Southend, Chelmsford, and during the coronation.
• In Croydon, over a couple of afternoons, there were 17 alerts out of several thousand people scanned, all accurate.
• The false positive rate for the algorithm is one in 6,000 according to National Physical Laboratory testing.
• The use of live facial recognition technology in places like Wales, Croydon, Southend, Chelmsford, Soho and elsewhere has been discussed.
• A framework was set out by the case of Bridges v. South Wales Police for the current deployments of live facial recognition.
• In a recent deployment in Croydon, there were 12,000 photographs of people who were wanted for different offences.
• The system works by identifying individuals from images where their face is visible but they are unknown to police.
• Examples include a murder case solved through facial recognition of someone recorded on CCTV, leading to an arrest and conviction for the crime.
• The technology can also be used to find missing persons.
• Clause 22 inserts new sections 41A and 41B into the sentencing code.
• New section 41A applies to adults and children convicted of sentences with a potential maximum penalty of life, imposing penalties for non-attendance.
• New section 41B clarifies that prison staff may use reasonable force to produce adult offenders to court.
• Prison officers understand the use of reasonable force.
• Courts will consult young offending teams before deciding on a child offender's attendance.
• Judges may decide not to order an individual to attend court if it causes significant disruption or further distress.
• The Crown court can directly order individuals to attend their sentencing hearing.
• Adults refusing attendance without a reasonable excuse face up to an additional 24-month custodial sentence; children face a £2,500 penalty.
• Prison officers may use reasonable force to produce adults for court hearings but not for children due to the Taylor review and UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
• Cases like Zahid Younis, Koci Selamaj, Jordan McSweeney, Thomas Cashman, and Lucy Letby highlight the need for this measure.
• Judges currently have discretion but it is not evenly applied.
• Proposed new section 41B would give judges statutory power to compel attendance for any serious offence with a life sentence maximum.
• The case of Lucy Letby highlights the issue as she was not compelled to attend her sentencing hearing.
• Hannah Bardell reminded Members to speak through the Chair rather than addressing each other directly.
• She emphasized the seriousness of discussing high-profile criminal cases and child sex offences.
• The discussion includes new clauses related to grooming as an aggravating factor in both adult and child victim cases.
• The Government introduced a new statutory aggravating factor last April.
• Clause 23 creates an obligation to consider grooming as an aggravating factor for specified child sex offences including rape and sexual assault.
• This measure captures cases where an offender assaults someone who has been previously groomed by another member of the same gang.
• New clause 25 aims to include adult grooming victims on the same footing as children in legislation.
• The 2018 Spicer report acknowledged that women over 18 are being groomed and sexually exploited.
• STAGE, a partnership against adult sexual exploitation, has supported over 700 adult women who have experienced grooming just in the north-east and Yorkshire since 2019.
• Clause 23 creates an aggravating factor for child sex offences facilitated by grooming.
• The clause requires judges to state in open court if grooming was involved during sentencing.
• Dame Vera Baird questioned the impact of the clause, noting it broadens the consideration of grooming as an aggravating factor.
• Clare Wade KC pointed out that there is no legal definition of grooming in the Bill.
• Government's impact assessment acknowledges limited data on prevalence and costs but mentions potential additional investigative work and evidential gathering by police and CPS.
• The prison population is at breaking point, with levels of offending returning to pre-pandemic levels.
• There is no legal definition of grooming due to its broad range of behaviour.
• A recent case involved tens of defendants and victims where some defendants had never met each other.
• The amendment aims to cover members of a grooming gang who may not have directly groomed the victim but still could be subject to aggravation at sentencing.
• The clause captures the wider membership of grooming gangs.
• The CPS will decide how widely to prosecute cases.
• Jess Phillips highlights 700 cases of adult sexual exploitation in Yorkshire and Newcastle.
• New clause 27 aims to recognise honour-based violence as an aggravating factor for murder.
• New clause 28 proposes to make strangulation an aggravating factor in murder cases.
• New clause 29 prohibits the use of victim's infidelity as a defence in murder trials.
• The new clauses address minor changes to cases of domestic homicide.
• Schedule 21, which is nearly 21 years old, needs a complete review according to the MP.
• The view for a comprehensive review is shared by Clare Wade, the Centre for Women’s Justice, and affected families.
• Banaz Mahmod was killed in an honour-based killing in 2006.
• New clause 27 would introduce honour-based abuse as an aggravating factor in murder cases.
• Strangulation is a common method used to kill women, and new clause 28 aims to classify it as an aggravating factor.
• Section 55(6)(c) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 prevents sexual infidelity from being relied upon in a defence of loss of control but does not prevent it from being a mitigating factor in sentencing.
• Clause 24 would apply to offences committed after its implementation.
• Around a quarter of all homicides in England and Wales are classified as domestic, averaging nearly 160 per year over the last decade.
• Clare Wade KC's independent review on domestic homicide sentencing was published on 17 March 2023.
• The clause may require an additional 42 prison places by 2065 at a cost of £19.2 million.
• Ben Kinsella's sister campaigned for a 25-year starting point for anyone who takes a weapon to the scene of a crime.
• Clare Wade’s report criticizes current sentencing starting points.
• The Government are conducting a murder sentencing consultation until March this year.
• Karma Nirvana runs a national honour-based abuse phone helpline, funded by the Home Office, which has helped over 2,500 people in the past year.
• The Coroners and Justice Act 2009 repealed the defence of provocation and replaced it with the partial defence of loss of control.
• Clare Wade recommended prohibiting sexual infidelity as a mitigating factor in sentencing.
• The government published its response to Clare Wade's review last July.
• No evidence was provided that sexual infidelity was being taken into account improperly in sentencing.