Wedding Law Reform: England and Wales
David Lammy Excerpts(1 week, 5 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
Marriage is one of our most enduring and important institutions. For many couples, their wedding day is one of the most significant moments of their lives: a public expression of enduring love and commitment, through which two people enter into a legal relationship with the expectation that it will last a lifetime. The Government are committed to supporting and protecting marriage.
The current law governing weddings in England and Wales is rooted in legislation from the 18th and 19th centuries. It has not kept pace with the social and cultural changes that have shaped modern Britain. The result is a framework that is complex, inconsistent and restrictive, limiting where and how some couples can marry. As a result, many couples are unable to marry in a way which reflects their beliefs or are unable to afford the ceremony they want.
In response to the Law Commission’s report on marriage reform, the Government announced their intention to modernise weddings law in England and Wales. I am today publishing the consultation “Tying the Knot: Reforming weddings law in England and Wales” which seeks views on how these reforms should operate in practice.
The Government proposals are guided by four principles.
First, reforms will introduce a simple, fair and inclusive framework for all weddings. The consultation seeks views on a clearer and more consistent legal structure, with common rules applying to different types of ceremony. The proposals would also enable non-religious belief organisations, including humanists, to conduct legally binding weddings.
Second, the reforms will expand choice about how and where couples may marry. The consultation proposes moving away from a system based primarily on the building in which a wedding takes place, towards one focused on the officiant responsible for the ceremony. This would allow greater flexibility both over the location and the form of weddings, so that ceremonies can better reflect the couple’s beliefs and backgrounds, allowing them to marry in settings that are more meaningful to them. For instance, couples will be able to marry in areas of natural beauty such as forests or beaches.
The third principle is the importance of upholding the dignity and significance of marriage. As greater freedoms are introduced, the Government are clear that a wedding day must always reflect the serious and lifelong commitment that is marriage. The consultation therefore proposes a “dignity framework” which would set clear and consistent standards both for wedding ceremonies and locations and place a legal duty on officiants to ensure that weddings meet these standards.
The fourth and final principle is that reforms will strengthen the protections against forced, predatory and sham marriages. The consultation proposes modernising the preliminaries process that takes place before the wedding day, by introducing a digital system with more effective checks and greater visibility and transparency. These proposals seek to ensure that marriages are always entered into freely, with informed consent, and are not used to exploit vulnerable people or gain unfair advantage.
The consultation also seeks views on the role and regulation of officiants, including nominated officiants from religious and non-religious belief organisations, independent officiants and maritime officiants. It asks how officiants should be authorised, trained, monitored and held accountable and what role should be played by a central regulator.
Together, these proposals will make weddings cheaper, more inclusive and more accessible. This will allow more people who want to get married to do so in a way that is meaningful to them.
Next steps
The consultation will be open for 10 weeks and will close on 24 September. We welcome views from parliamentarians, religious and non-religious belief organisations, academics, charities, interest groups, independent celebrants, support organisations, local registration services and members of the public with an interest in the weddings law of England and Wales.
The Government will consider the findings of the consultation carefully before finalising our policy positions. Any finalised reforms would then be brought forward when parliamentary time allows.
Copies of the consultation will be available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/tying-the-knot-reforming-weddings-law-in-england-and-wales. A Welsh language version and accessible versions will also be made available.
[HCWS280]
Prison System: Independent Review
David Lammy Excerpts(3 weeks, 6 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
This Government inherited a prison system in crisis, with prisons on the verge of collapse. Dame Anne Owers’s independent review of prison capacity has set out that, shortly after the announcement of the 2024 general election, at one point there were fewer than 100 places available in adult male prisons, and that the system had been in crisis for over 18 months.
The immediate action had to be to stabilise the system to ensure sufficient prison places to hold offenders sentenced to custody. Considerable work has already been undertaken to this effect, including through implementation of the Sentencing Act. While the last Government added fewer than 500 net places overall to the prison estate in 14 years, we have already delivered c3,100 places and aim to deliver 14,000 additional prison places by 2031.
We have seen some early signs of progress made possible by that stabilisation: in the 12 months to December 2025, rates of assaults on staff and self-harm in custody decreased by 4.5% and 8% respectively. But we must be clear that the challenges facing the prison system are not only immediate but structural, evolving and long term in nature.
We are continuing to build on the progress made: we are investing a further £35 million this year in improving security across 17 of our most challenging establishments. This covers the installation of up to 13,000 new heavy duty steel grilles by spring 2027, preventing contraband—such as drugs and weapons—from being delivered into cells by drones. This builds on more than £40 million already invested in physical security improvements.
Prisons are facing significant and complex pressures. Technological change, serious and organised crime, and the demands of managing high-risk offenders are reshaping what is required to hold people safely, securely and decently in custody. Recent serious incidents, such as the horrific incident at HMP Frankland in spring 2025, underline the importance of ensuring that our prisons are safe, secure and capable of reducing reoffending.
We must ensure that our approach to the prison system keeps pace with these developments. The action this Government have already taken has provided an opportunity to look strategically at how we meet these challenges and the long-term future of prisons.
That is why I am today announcing the launch of the independent review of the prison system.
The purpose of the review is twofold.
First, it will provide a strategic, risk-based assessment of the key challenges facing the prison system, including security threats, maintaining safety and decency in the face of a long-term trend of a rising prison population, and of how our approach to managing risk needs to evolve over time.
Secondly, it will identify practical and deliverable options for reform to improve the resilience, performance and effectiveness of our prisons, ultimately focusing on how we can best protect the public. The review will build a robust evidence base to support long-term decision making and inform our future strategy for prisons, ensuring that we are equipped to meet both current and emerging challenges. The review will also consider the opportunities available to strengthen the system, including those arising from recent reforms and investment. It will ensure that we are making best use of the levers available to improve outcomes, deliver value for money, and support a more effective and sustainable prison system over the long term.
Today I am launching this review and it is anticipated to conclude by the end of the year. I will provide the House with a further update once the review has concluded and I have had opportunity to consider the findings. I will deposit a copy of the terms of reference for the review in the Library of the House, and they have also been published on gov.uk.
Given the need for a review that commands confidence across Parliament and supports delivery over the long term, it is important that the chair brings cross-party credibility and experience at the highest levels of Government. For that reason, I have chosen to appoint the right hon. Amber Rudd as the chair.
The pressures facing the prison system form part of a wider set of challenges across public services. As Deputy Prime Minister, I am determined that we take a whole-system approach—one that looks across Government, aligns policy with operational reality, and ensures that long-term decisions are grounded in evidence and deliver value for money.
That means improving not just prisons but the wider criminal justice system. We are increasing investment in probation and community services by a further £700 million by 2028-29 and onboarding at least 1,300 new trainee probation officers in 2026-27—on top of more than 2,300 new trainees already onboarded since 2024-25. We are also taking targeted action following the independent review of the criminal courts to reduce court backlogs, deliver swifter justice, and modernise our courts to improve efficiency and resilience across the criminal justice system.
This review will play a central role in our approach, providing a clear and independent assessment of the challenges we face, alongside credible and deliverable options for reform over the coming decade and beyond.
The review will not make recommendations on sentencing policy, as this has already been subject to thorough consideration as part of the independent sentencing review.
In the last 18 months we have taken decisive action to stabilise a system in crisis, and we are continuing to make immediate improvements. This review will provide a clear and independent assessment of the challenges we face, alongside credible and deliverable options for reform over the coming decade and beyond. It will help us chart the path to a prison system that works for the future—one that makes prisons and the public safer.
I am grateful to the dedicated work of our brilliant staff working across our prisons and the wider criminal justice system, who continue to deliver vital public services in challenging circumstances. Through this review, we will ensure that our approach is not only responsive to immediate pressures, but is designed to deliver a more sustainable, effective and resilient prison system for the future.
[HCWS167]
Oral Answers to Questions
David Lammy Excerpts(4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
Magistrates play a vital role in delivering local justice, and we value their contribution as volunteers. Up to 2029, we are increasing the number of magistrates to 21,000, which is a 50% rise. We have quadrupled investment in magistrate recruitment with a new national campaign, which I hope hon. Members have seen—it launched in the autumn—and we will have more frequent regional campaigns going forward.
Warinder Juss
Although I support the Government’s reform of the justice system to tackle the courts backlog, it is clear that more cases will be going to the magistrates court. Estimates suggest that will require the recruitment of an additional 6,000 to 7,000 magistrates by 2029, but previous attempts to increase their numbers have been unsuccessful. Will the Secretary of State please tell me what the Government are doing differently this time around? What practical steps is his Department taking to recruit and retain magistrates? Finally, what contingency plans are in place if the recruitment target is not met?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. It is true that our target is ambitious, but it is achievable. We are recruiting the same number of magistrates into the system as was the case back in 2014, so we have done it before and we can get there. What has changed this time is that there is a national taskforce to fast-track the process and halve recruitment times, and we are working with the judiciary to ensure that magistrates feel more appreciated. It is also important to say that I will provide an update on the numbers, which will be published on 9 July, and while I do not want to pre-empt that publication, it is good news that we are already seeing progress.
Mr Joshua Reynolds (Maidenhead) (LD)
Magistrates are a humongous volunteer force, which the Magistrates’ Association says are close to breaking point. With the Government aiming to increase the number of magistrates to almost 21,000, what will the Secretary of State do to attract more young people and working-age people in full-time roles to that challenging volunteer role, for which they might have to give up some of their paid employment?
Mr Lammy
The hon. Member makes a good point. The reform of expenses in this area is important. We are seeing more self-employed people come forward for the magistracy, and we are seeing good numbers in relation to ethnic minorities and diversity right across the country. It is important that younger people feel able to volunteer in this way.
Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)
I wish the Lord Chancellor luck with the recruitment campaign—I wish him luck generally—but even if he is successful, those magistrates will be newly recruited, and he is also asking magistrates to try much longer and more complex cases by increasing their sentencing powers. Those two things do not really square up. Is his solution to recruit a lot more district judges and therefore have a lot more judge-only courts in the magistrates court as well as the Crown court?
Mr Lammy
My hon. Friend’s point is apposite and on the money. Alongside this recruitment, we are appointing more judges to the magistrates court. We are recruiting up to 30 new district judges to start sitting in the second half of 2027 in addition to the latest round of recruitment, which should result in more than 100 new judges sitting from December 2026 onwards.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
Yesterday I joined members of the Justice Committee, including the Chair, on a trip to Nottingham as part of our review into youth justice. I want to press the Secretary of State a little further on the age of magistrates, because we were told that there is a real concern about recruiting people who have only a few years of work to go, as that is not a sustainable way forward. There was also a concern about the lack of legal advisers, which, although more are being recruited, is still causing a problem. Will he comment on the relationship between legal advisers and magistrates?
Mr Lammy
The hon. Lady makes a good point. We are reforming legal advisers’ pay and career progression. She is right that our magistrates courts need those legal advisers—they have to be in place across the country. We are funding more legal advisers and recruiting 100 new trainee legal advisers each year for the next three years.
Mr Speaker
You could always reopen the court in Chorley—plenty of magistrates.
Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
I recognise the profound financial and psychological impact of so-called SLAPPs and the threat that they represent to democracy and free speech. Last year we implemented new laws to tackle SLAPPs relating to economic crime and to stop wealthy elites from effectively silencing critics, journalists and activists. I have confirmed that we intend, when parliamentary time allows, to introduce legislation that comprehensively tackles all SLAPPs.
Dr Huq
Within our ancient, unwritten constitutional democracy, e-petitions have quickly established themselves as a way for the public to have their voices heard. So imagine the shock of my constituent Jason when he was served with a scary legal notice to desist by one of the world’s largest law firms, instructed by a megabucks developer, for collecting signatures on Change.org against a local planning application. Will my right hon. Friend tell me when the legislation will be introduced? I know that the Prime Minister wrote in The Guardian in October 2024 that the rich and powerful should not intimidate the little guy through such legal processes. Right now, this feels for Jason like a bit of a slap in the face.
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for continuing to champion this issue. She is right that SLAPPs go well beyond journalism and issues of free speech; we have heard harrowing stories of SLAPPs being used to silence sexual abuse survivors, cosmetic surgery patients unhappy with the quality of their treatment, and even tenants who have complained to landlords. The economically related SLAPP measures represent a positive step forward, but there is more to do. We will bring forward legislation, and we are also working across the House to see what more we can do over this next period. We are determined to move in this area before the next general election.
Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)
Self-swab rape kits are not admissible in court, yet the company Enough is using SLAPPs to attack rape charities and survivors who dare to speak out against it. This is exactly why we need the sort of legislation that has been mentioned to come forward: to protect the victims and survivors of sexual violence who have been ruthlessly targeted. I implore the Government to please bring forward the legislation at the earliest possible opportunity and to ban Enough from having its illegal equipment in our country.
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising that very serious issue. We are aware of it, it is hugely concerning and it underlines why we have to legislate. I hope that, by working cross-party, we can move swiftly in this area.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
I am hugely concerned about the manner in which SLAPPs are being used to intimidate and harass individuals in public service. In my constituency alone, I have seen two separate instances of parish councillors being bullied out of public office. Both Hemingford and Ellington parish councils have been targeted due to planning concerns—one by a local company and one by a wealthy individual. Such an attempt to stifle democracy is unacceptable. Parish councils are the bedrock of democracy and the brazen attempt to railroad individual parish councillors is unacceptable. What are the Government doing to protect local councillors from being left exposed to SLAPPs, which deters people from participating in democratic representation?
Mr Lammy
The hon. Gentleman’s question shows the range of people we see being intimidated before the court. He will be aware of Catherine Belton and her book “Putin’s People”, Tom Burgis and his book “Kleptopia”, and Tom Latchem and his care home investigation. They have all been on the receiving end of a SLAPP. We have to act, as I have said. We will work cross-party. There are some vehicles by which we might well be able to see progress over the coming months and, on Second Reading, we will set out our position regarding some of the private Member’s Bills that the hon. Gentleman’s colleagues have tabled.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
Jack Rankin (Windsor) (Con)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
Official statistics for the year to March 2025 show 262 recorded releases in error, and the latest figure will be published next month. In April we also released ad hoc data from April 2025 to March 2026, which was published alongside Dame Lynne Owens’s independent review into releases in error.
Dr Johnson
I understand that the total is 441, which over a two-year period is the worst on record and means that, in less than 24 months, Labour has released more prisoners in error than were released in the previous six years combined. That is a disgrace. How many of those released in error early were convicted of rape?
Mr Lammy
The hon. Lady was not listening to the figures I gave. We are seeing a reduction in the numbers because of the review that I asked Dame Lynne Owens to lead. We are implementing the recommendations so that the numbers come down, but I have to ask the hon. Lady: who left us with the mess? Who saw 800 releases under their watch? When did they update Parliament? When did they set up a review? They did absolutely nothing. We have a paper-based system. That is why we are introducing digital ID.
Jack Rankin
It is a disgrace that hundreds of prisoners have been released in error under this Government, but more concerning are the thousands it will have been an error to release early. The Secretary of State did not answer the previous question, so let’s try another. As we heard in this House yesterday, child groomers and rapists are due to be let out years early, with their victims being informed by letter, so will he tell my constituents exactly why, under this Government, dangerous criminals will be in their communities rather than in prison?
Mr Lammy
Because you almost broke the prison system. You built just 500 places in 14 years, and we had to fix that system. You had 17 different forms of guidance on early release in the last year, all done in secret. That is why we introduced the Sentencing Act 2026, which got Royal Assent in January, and why we are doing everything we can to build more prison places—14,000 prison places by 2031.
Mr Speaker
Order. I gently say to the Justice Secretary, who was saying “you”, that I have no responsibility for any of this.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
One of the first things I announced when appointed as the Secretary of State for Justice was a £40 million extra investment to strengthen prison security, including £10 million for counter-drone measures such as netting and wire. I recently visited Woodhill prison to look at how we are tackling this growing threat and committed a further £35 million to install heavy-duty grilles on windows at 17 of our most high-risk prison sites.
Ms Minns
Will my right hon. Friend outline what learnings the Government have taken from international expertise to develop and shape counter-drone measures in UK prisons?
Mr Lammy
My hon. Friend knows that, because of the war in Ukraine, drone technology is moving at pace. That is why, when I was in Ukraine in January, we announced that we are working with the UK defence innovation fund—an innovative fund—to set up an international business competition to ensure that the Prison Service keeps up at pace with moving technology. We are also working with our French and Italian colleagues, who are experiencing the same threat. I have spoken to Justice Ministers about how we share best practice.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
The use of drones by criminal gangs to smuggle contraband into prisons is of particular concern, especially in open prisons such as Kirkham prison in my constituency, where there is a vast amount of open estate to be able to drop it off. While I was the police and crime commissioner for Lancashire, we invested in counter-drone units. The brilliant thing is that they use signals to jam the drones, which forces them to shut down and return to the point from which they were deployed, often leading the police to the place where the criminals are hiding. Will the Secretary of State consider working closely with police forces deploying this technology to use it more broadly in countering the drone threat in the UK?
Mr Lammy
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. The director-general of the National Crime Agency has directed police chiefs to work with the Prison Service to jointly tackle the threat from criminal drones. We saw that recently in a large-scale joint operation that resulted in more than 200 arrests. He is absolutely right; that blocking technology is available to the system. I was in Doncaster visiting our specialist unit that does this work, often at night, to ensure that we are bringing down those drones.
Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East) (Lab)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
One in five homicides are domestic homicides, with women and girls overwhelmingly the victims of these brutal crimes: mothers, sisters and daughters, such as Ellie Gould, Poppy Devey Waterhouse and Megan Newborough, who were cruelly murdered by their current or former partners. However, the gravity of these crimes is not always fully reflected. Under the current sentencing framework, higher starting points place particular weight on a weapon being taken to the scene with intent, whereas domestic homicides often happen in the home involving weapons already present. Today I can announce that we will introduce a 25-year starting point for domestic murders, a change made possible thanks to the Government’s grip on the prison population through the Sentencing Act 2026.
I pay tribute to the mothers of Ellie, Poppy and Megan—Carole, Julie and Elaine—and my hon. Friends the Members for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones) and for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips). They have all campaigned tirelessly for this change, which means that those who kill their partners or former partners will spend longer in prison.
Dr Evans
The Fuller inquiry called for a strengthening of the safeguards and the law in relation to looking after the deceased, but last week’s mortuary report on Nottingham hospital described some of the abuses and horrors that have taken place—bodies mislabelled, or even left decomposing. Does the Secretary of State share my fear that this could be a pattern across the system, and will he and the Health Secretary look into this to ensure that it certainly is not?
Mr Lammy
The hon. Gentleman is entirely right. What we have heard is devastating—absolutely horrific. I will discuss this issue with the Health Secretary. His Department obviously has responsibility for human tissue while we have responsibility for the coroner service and the law regarding death, and we will work together on this issue.
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)
The Government referred the sentences of the teenage gang rapists who attacked two schoolgirls to the Court of Appeal as unduly lenient, but the Government also say that they want to increase the age of criminal responsibility, and the Bar Council has said that age should be 14. That is one year older than the age of one of those rapists—proof that young criminals can commit terrible crimes. Will the Justice Secretary rule out increasing the age of criminal responsibility to 14?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question, but when the Bar Council do a detailed piece of work, it is the responsibility of the Secretary of State to look closely at what it has recommended. That is what I will do in the coming months, and I am sure that when that process has concluded, we can have this discussion in a serious way. I urge the hon. Gentleman to be serious. He often takes to Twitter on these issues, but I think we should take the Bar Council of England and Wales seriously.
Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (Tooting) (Lab)
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
The Guardian reported last week on the case of a US air force officer accused of drugging, strangling and raping a British woman in his apartment. Although the incident took place off duty, off base and on English soil, the case was removed from the jurisdiction of the English courts and was instead tried by US court martial at RAF Lakenheath, with an all-male panel who were all from his base. Does the Secretary of State agree that victims of crimes on English soil should see justice served in our justice system?
Mr Lammy
Halving violence against women and girls is a decade-long mission for this Government. That case is extremely concerning, and our thoughts are with the victim, Sarah. Given the cross-agency nature of this case, my officials are working across Government, and we are raising it with the US Government to establish the full facts.
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
Mr Lammy
I am very grateful to the Father of the House. He may not have noticed, but he made me blush. He knows that the right to a fair trial, and the component of it that requires a jury, is an important right, and we are not abolishing it, but we are seeking to bring down the backlog, so that people can get swift justice. We are making a decision that has been made previously by other Prime Ministers, including Margaret Thatcher, to change the threshold for jury trial, while ensuring that justice is done. I think it is also important to acknowledge the tremendous work done by our magistrates.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
I welcome the Government’s £500 million of investment in victims’ services, which is a serious investment after years of neglect. In my constituency, Staffordshire Women’s Aid has been supporting survivors of sexual violence and domestic violence for 50 years. For every £1 spent on victims’ support services, £10.80 is returned to the public purse. What steps are being taken to ensure that brilliant local organisations, such as Staffordshire Women’s Aid, can access this funding, so that no area falls into the gaps?
Jacob Collier (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)
Street Whyze was set up by Danny Mondesir after the tragic stabbing of Oliver Freckleton in 2021. It undertakes targeted work with young people to prevent knife crime, knife carrying and youth offending. In the light of the new cross-Government knife crime strategy, can the Minister say how such programmes will be used to cut youth knife crime?
Mr Lammy
Our plan to halve knife crime seeks to give young people the best start in life, to stop those who are at risk of turning to knife crime from doing so, and to ensure that perpetrators are caught and brought to justice. I have been out with a number of community groups over the last few weeks to see that work in action. My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It is good to see the numbers beginning to fall, but there is more work to do over the coming months and years.
Chris Coghlan (Dorking and Horley) (LD)
My constituent is here. Her ex-husband sexually assaulted her children, and attempted to murder them and her by removing the brake pads from her car, yet the court appeared to listen more to the abuser’s allegation of parental alienation syndrome, a concept discredited by the World Health Organisation, than her evidence. The abuser today has unsupervised access to the children. What steps will the Government take to prevent discredited concepts from obstructing criminal justice, leaving children at risk of rape and murder?
Alex Davies-Jones (Pontypridd) (Lab)
I welcome the announcement from the Deputy Prime Minister today about changing the disparity in sentences for domestic homicide. Carole, Julie and Elaine have campaigned tirelessly for this change, following the murder of their daughters, and it will make a huge difference to how violence against women and girls is treated in this country. The campaigners have met seven Lord Chancellors, and the Deputy Prime Minister is the first of them to commit to doing this. Can I implore him to do it as soon as possible? It is this Labour Government who are committed to tackling violence against women and girls.
Mr Lammy
I thank my hon. and dear Friend for her campaigning on this issue. We met the families and were hugely moved by their stories. There was a sense that they felt very let down by the previous Governments and Lord Chancellors whom they had met. For that reason, I think this move is the right thing to do, and I am very grateful to her and my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips) for continuing to press on this issue behind the scenes.
Stuart Anderson (South Shropshire) (Con)
A high-profile child sex offender was released into a village near a school in my constituency. I was told about this by local residents. Over three months ago, I wrote to the Deputy Prime Minister expressing huge concern. He refused to meet me and said that this was down to the Probation Service. Why is the safety of South Shropshire’s children not worth a meeting to discuss this issue? This is a huge issue for my constituents.
Mr Lammy
Of course, I recognise that this will be an issue for the hon. Gentleman’s constituents. It is right that these matters are dealt with by the Probation Service. We are investing a lot of money in the Probation Service over this period to make sure that we reduce caseloads, so that such cases can be managed properly, but I will investigate and get back to him as soon as possible.
Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)
One of my constituents experienced horrific abuse at the hands of her ex-husband. Deepfakes were put online on porn sites. This is something he did to other women as well. He is now in prison, but when my constituent tried to divorce him, she could not get access to legal aid for the arbitration service, or to further legal aid, because of his bail conditions. Will the Minister meet me to discuss access to legal aid for people who have suffered domestic abuse in such circumstances?
Edward Argar (Melton and Syston) (Con)
In their 2024 manifesto, the Government made a promise to set up specialist rape courts in every Crown court location. Two years on, how many have been set up?
Mr Lammy
We are two years in, and I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we will come forward with announcements in that area shortly.
Sarah Gibson (Chippenham) (LD)
Will the Minister join me in thanking and paying tribute to Carole Gould and Julie Devey from the action group Killed Women? They are constituents of mine and of my hon. Friend the Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine), who unfortunately cannot be here due to ill health. Will the Minister pay tribute to the enormous dedication, persistence and courage that they have shown in trying to get changes to sentencing for domestic abuse?
Mr Lammy
As the father of a daughter, I pay tribute to the constituents mentioned for their doughty campaign over many years, in which they have been fighting for this moment. There will be women out there now whose lives will be saved as a result of the sentence that perpetrators of this terrible crime face.
Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)
What work is the Department doing to learn from international best practice—for example, in Estonia—when it comes to using technology in the justice system to help deliver swifter justice for victims?
Mr Lammy
When I moved to this Department, I was pleased to see the work on digital and artificial intelligence. The Department is a Whitehall leader; for example, we are freeing up probation staff for the frontline, rather than them having to go through lots of bureaucracy. I am particularly excited by the work that is going on in our courts.
G7 Summit
David Lammy Excerpts(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr David Lammy)
I am making this statement on behalf of the Prime Minister. I spoke earlier today on the Prime Minister’s record across the country—stabilising the economy, driving down waiting lists in the national health service, and lifting half a million children out of poverty—but I want to start this statement by paying tribute to his record on foreign policy, which is second to none.
As Foreign Secretary when we entered government, I saw at first hand the Prime Minister rebuild our relationships across the world. The EU reset that we led put Britain at the heart of Europe once again. Embracing President Zelensky on the steps of Downing Street, on one of Ukraine’s darkest days, was symptomatic of the leadership that the Prime Minister has shown across Europe and in relation to the threats from Vladimir Putin—principled, courageous and on the right side of history. He drove investment for working people, with five trade deals in two years.
When it came to the most sober decision that a Prime Minister has to make—on a matter of life, death and war—and others were pushing for the UK to jump head first into another war in the middle east, Keir Starmer stood strong, stood firm and said, “No, this is not our war,” putting British soldiers and the national interest first. He made Britain safer, rebuilt Britain’s reputation around the world, and drove investment and growth that will support working families in Britain for decades to come. Regardless of their politics, everyone in this House owes a debt of gratitude to the Prime Minister on foreign affairs.
I turn now to the specifics of the G7 summit, and let me start with Ukraine. Once again, Russia chose to launch a huge attack on Ukraine on the eve of an international summit. In a show of its disdain for diplomacy, Russia killed innocent civilians in Kyiv and Kharkiv, and hit the 11th-century Pechersk Lavra, a sacred site at the very heart of Ukrainian culture. The G7 has a shared sense of outrage at Russia’s conduct, but we also have a shared sense that the situation is changing. Ukraine has a new-found momentum. It is increasingly able to push Russia back on the battlefield, and the mood in Moscow is turning against the war. Almost half a million Russians have now lost their lives. Each month Russia mobilises around 30,000 people, and each month it loses the same number on the battlefield, with no progress to show for it.
At the same time, the Russian economy is struggling and may already be in recession, so we will seize this moment by continuing our military support. We are providing more air defence missiles and our biggest package of drones to date, financed with the profits of seized Russian assets. We are providing vital export finance to help rebuild Ukraine’s energy system, and we are going further to increase the pressure on Russia’s economy, because we know the impact that this is having.
At the summit my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister announced 70 new sanctions, bringing the UK up to around 500 sanctions on Russia this year alone, aimed at breaking up its military procurement supply chains and the illicit finance networks it uses to circumvent sanctions and, of course, targeting the Russian shadow fleet. I am sure the whole House will pay tribute to the Royal Marines who interdicted a shadow fleet vessel in the channel last weekend alongside officers from the National Crime Agency.
This is the moment to ramp up the pressure, and President Zelensky is clear that he is ready to talk, but this must recognise the reality on the ground and Ukraine’s new-found momentum. Any negotiations would need to be on the basis of the current line of control, not on Putin’s unrealistic demand for territory that he has failed to win on the battlefield. Russia should note the level of unity shown on this point and the G7’s pledge of unwavering support for Ukraine that will continue until we reach a just and lasting peace.
Let me turn to the middle east. Getting to the deal between the United States and Iran has been bumpy, but it creates a moment of opportunity to bring down the cost of living for the British people and put the middle east on a better path, which is vital for global stability. We are now working to help implement this deal to ensure that the region does not go back to war and that the 60-day negotiation period ends in a longer-term settlement.
Negotiations are the best way to secure our aims: first, that Iran is never allowed to have a nuclear weapon; secondly, that it stops its attacks across the region; and, thirdly, that the strait of Hormuz is reopened to shipping, with no restrictions and no tolls. That is why, with President Macron, we have brought together an international coalition ready to help reassure shipping. We are in talks now about how to deploy this multilateral military mission in support of the deal and to explore immediate support for de-mining in the strait.
We should also place this in the broadest possible context, recognising the need to make progress across the region. The extremely fragile ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon must be implemented in full, and I call on the Israeli Government to show restraint to that end, including in their use of inflammatory language. The G7 agreed to work together in support of their process and to strengthen the Lebanese Government, so that they can regain the monopoly on the use of force in the country.
On Palestine, I want to speak very frankly. Israel must stop blocking aid into Gaza, stop settlement expansion in the E1 area of East Jerusalem, which threatens the viability of the two-state solution, and stop settler violence across the west bank. We have a precious opportunity now to move on from the violence of the last three years in the interests of innocent people across the region. This should be our aim, bringing all our partners together in that effort.
Significant progress was also made last week on migration, with a strong G7 statement outlining practical common steps on returns and sanctioning the criminal gangs. With President Macron, my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister took a big step in our bilateral co-operation by agreeing to extend the groundbreaking Sandhurst agreement, which has already prevented more than 40,000 migrant crossings into the UK. Under this deal, new police units and riot squads will be deployed to French beaches to stop migrant boats before they take to the water. This is vital and important work. It is because of steps like that and the approach of this Government that we have removed 67,000 people with no right to be in our country. We have removed 9,000 foreign national offenders, and we are closing asylum hotels. We are turning the tide on these issues after years of failure. Under the last Government, net migration reached almost 1 million. We have reduced it by 82% in two years. UK immigration figures are the lowest today since 2012. Where the last Government failed, we are delivering.
The same is true on growth and investment. On the eve of the summit, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister welcomed the Prime Minister of Japan to Downing Street, to deepen our strategic partnership after they met in Tokyo in January. They agreed more than £18 billion-worth of investment in this country, creating tens of thousands of new jobs in infrastructure, offshore wind and financial services. That shows the value of building such bonds. This was followed, at the summit, with deals for a further £1.3 billion of investment from France and India in clean energy and artificial intelligence, creating more than 1,300 new jobs in Manchester, Leeds and Birmingham. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister agreed with India’s Prime Minister Modi the entry into force of the UK-India free trade agreement. This is the UK’s quickest ever turnaround from signing to entry into force, and it is one of the biggest deals either country has ever done. It will boost British GDP by £4.8 billion and boost real wages for British workers by £2.2 billion.
Finally, the House will note that tomorrow marks the 10th anniversary of the Brexit referendum. We know the world has changed fundamentally since 2016. We know that Brexit has damaged the economy, so there is no doubt in our mind where the national interest lies today—in closer co-operation with Europe. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister agreed to intensify work to deepen our economic ties. We look forward to a forthcoming second UK-EU summit at the earliest opportunity.
Unity on Ukraine to protect our collective security; unity on the middle east to bring down the cost of living and bring back stability; progress on tackling illegal migration, driving down the numbers day after day; and huge new investments in the UK, creating new opportunities and changing people’s lives—real results for the British people. At the same time, the Government have brought down mortgage rates and inflation to help with the cost of living, and have held them flat to fight what is happening globally.
We are supporting families with the summer savings package, so that they can spend time together this August. We are banning social media for children to keep them safe, lifting half a million people out of poverty, boosting workers’ rights and renters’ rights, and bringing down NHS waiting lists at the highest rate for 17 years. This Government are focused on what really matters: serving the national interest and delivering for the British people. I commend this statement to the House.
Mr Speaker
Extra time was given because I thought we would have a lot more on the G7; I did not know the statement would be all policy. Not to worry. I call the Leader of the Opposition.
Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)
I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement. He is right when he says that everyone in this House owes a debt to the Prime Minister, but it is most certainly not a debt of gratitude; it is the other type of debt that we owe.
The right hon. Gentleman has come to the House to update us on a meeting that he did not attend. He stood in for the Prime Minister at Prime Minister’s questions during the G7; now he is standing in again to tell us what happened at the G7. Where is the Prime Minister? He says he needs to stay in post for three months, but then does not come to Parliament to do his job. He wants to go on a farewell tour, while the new right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) is asking for a summer holiday to work out what he thinks. In the meantime, no one is in charge, and Britain is not being governed.
The Prime Minister gave assurances at the G7 about military support to Ukraine. He gave those assurances after the Defence Secretary resigned because he was being forced to make decisions that would increase the risk to our armed forces. The Prime Minister gave assurances about sanctions on Russian oil and gas while, in this House, the Government were lifting those sanctions. The Prime Minister is saying one thing abroad but doing the opposite at home. Those are just some of the many reasons that he had to resign this morning, but apparently, for some mysterious reason, he must stick around until September. Given that he has resigned, why is he hanging around? The Deputy Prime Minister had to change his statement so that we all knew that the EU reset summit had been postponed. The summit is not happening any more, so what is the Prime Minister hanging around for? Why are we sending a non-Prime Minister to the most important NATO summit in a generation? It is because this psychodrama is about the Labour party, not the country.
Labour is still trying to tell us that everything is fine. That is what the Deputy Prime Minister was saying: “Everything is fine.” He has given us a statement about a G7 summit that he did not go to. The few Labour MPs who bothered to turn up to the Chamber were nodding along, pretending to be listening intently, but in a few minutes, they will all scurry back to their offices and focus on their real priority: lobbying for a job in the next Government. I take the opportunity to congratulate the right hon. Member for Makerfield on his election, but I point out that my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen South (Douglas Lumsden) is here; the right hon. Gentleman is not, because he is more interested in his leadership bid than Britain’s national security.
Two weeks ago, the Defence Secretary and the Armed Forces Minister quit the Government because Labour’s failure to fund defence is putting our national security at risk. That issue will not disappear from the right hon. Member for Makerfield’s in-tray just because he won a by-election. If he becomes Prime Minister, he will be briefed by the heads of our military about Britain’s reducing ability to defend herself, let alone Ukraine, which the Deputy Prime Minister mentioned. In order to fund defence, we need more money, not more speeches at summits. The right hon. Member for Makerfield will find that Britain is not able to borrow any more money, and that it has all been spent on welfare. He will realise that this Government are providing export finance to rebuild Ukraine’s energy system, while crippling our own, and are reducing sanctions on Russian oil, while sanctioning oil from Aberdeen.
Only one thing matters at the G7 and NATO summits, and that is our collective national security. [Interruption.] A Minister is chuntering. Can he say anything about why the Defence Secretary resigned? If Ministers are all living in la-la land, I am going to wake them up. They need to stop pretending that everything is fine, because it is not. Let me remind the Deputy Prime Minister that the Prime Minister is resigning because he failed on national security. He appointed a known security risk as our ambassador to Washington. He is destroying our energy security, which is national security, and he is refusing to fund the defence investment plan needed to keep our country safe.
The G7 summit reminds us that we are living in serious times, yet the Government are paralysed and our country is in limbo. It is time for Labour to start putting country before party, and to put Britain’s national interest first.
The Deputy Prime Minister
This is the first occasion that I have been opposite the Leader of the Opposition. We are actually friends, behind all of this. I thank her for her generosity and for her constructive suggestions on this occasion; it is always good to know that I can count on her support.
I remind the House that this is the same Leader of the Opposition who suggested that we should empty-chair the G20 and not bother turning up to the NATO summit. She wanted to jump into war with Iran without thinking through the consequences. I am proud to serve a Prime Minister whose hard work has made this country stronger and much fairer than the Britain we inherited from the Conservatives.
The Leader of the Opposition knows that the Prime Minister has rebuilt Britain’s international alliances. She cannot deny the five major trade deals struck under our watch—something that she failed to do. She knows that we have led the coalition of the willing in backing Ukraine, have renewed our partnership with Europe, and are delivering the biggest boost to defence spending since the cold war. I am proud of all that. She asks about defence. The work continues to finalise the defence investment plan. We are already investing £270 billion in defence over this Parliament, and the defence investment plan will deliver another unprecedented increase in defence spending. When it is published shortly, we will set out how every Department is contributing to defence.
The Leader of the Opposition talks about oil and gas; they will be part of our energy mix for many years to come. We are delivering enough clean energy products to power 23 million homes, led by Great British Energy—headquartered, of course, in Aberdeen. The PM secured £9 billion-worth of Japanese investment in offshore wind last weekend; of course, the Leader of the Opposition would rip all that up. She talks about Russian oil, but the Conservatives are wrong there: all sanctions on Russian oil remain in place, and we are imposing new sanctions that were resisted under the Conservatives.
I look forward to another opportunity to sit across from the Leader of the Opposition in the months ahead.
Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)
I echo the Deputy Prime Minister’s praise for the Prime Minister’s success in restoring the UK’s standing in the world, including with the EU.
My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister has welcomed the G7 commitment to accelerating humanitarian efforts for Gaza and ending violence on the west bank, and Putney residents and I will support his and the G7’s efforts on that. Will he agree that Israel must stop the E1 Jerusalem and west bank illegal expansion, and that the G7 must rebuild serious momentum behind the two-state solution?
The Deputy Prime Minister
Yes, yes and yes. My hon. Friend will be pleased that this issue was discussed at the G7 leaders’ summit. I encourage her to look at the statement that was put out, particularly as regards peace in the middle east.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
I start by recognising the courage it took for the Prime Minister to make his statement today. Politics can be brutal, but although we rightly debate issues robustly in this Chamber, we can recognise that we are all human beings here, and can take account of that. However, after years of this chaos—we had multiple psychodramas and short-lived Prime Ministers under the Conservatives, and then under Labour—the country is impatient for real change. This moment shows once again how broken our political system is. It is only by fixing that that we can finally end this chaos and instability. There will be another moment to reflect properly, but for now, I simply thank the Prime Minister for his service.
Turning to the statement, progress on providing more support for our brave Ukrainian allies is indeed welcome, and the Deputy Prime Minister knows that he has cross-party support on that. At the G7, did the Government raise the proposal of using frozen Russian assets around the world to support Ukraine, and if not, why not?
Meanwhile, Donald Trump is boasting about his ceasefire with Iran, but “The Art of the Deal” it is not. His and Netanyahu’s idiotic war, backed by the Conservatives and Reform, has achieved absolutely nothing; instead, it is wreaking havoc on the global economy and on our economy, as the Deputy Prime Minister said. The Prime Minister was right to keep us out of it. Given how determined Netanyahu seems to undermine any ceasefire, what discussions did the Prime Minister have with allies at the G7 to put real pressure on both Netanyahu and Hezbollah to end the fighting?
All this shows how important it is for Britain to strengthen our defences and deepen our partnership with dependable allies, especially our neighbours in Europe. Will the Prime Minister therefore confirm whether the defence investment plan will be published before the NATO summit? The Liberal Democrats think that is vital if we are to start to repair the damage done by Conservative defence cuts, and are to have real leverage and influence at the NATO summit. Will the defence investment plan go to the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) for his urgent sign-off?
Finally, the Prime Minister promised a crucial summit with the EU next month to start repairing the damage done by the Conservatives, but reports say that this summit has been postponed because of his resignation. Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that this is a disaster? Fixing our relationship with Europe is far too urgent for these discussions to be postponed yet again. I ask the Deputy Prime Minister to urge the right hon. Member for Makerfield to reject the Government’s current timid reset, and instead push for our growth and defence partnership, which would include single market membership, free from the out-of-date red lines that the Prime Minister imposed five years ago.
The Deputy Prime Minister
I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for the manner in which he put his remarks and for his tribute to the Prime Minister for his public service. I will relay that to the Prime Minister when I see him later.
On Ukraine, I am pleased to confirm that I hope to go to the Ukraine recovery conference later this week to continue to discuss these issues. The right hon. Gentleman is right to raise the issue of frozen Russian assets, which remain a long-standing item of discussion across G7 nations. He recognises that some European countries are more exposed than others, and I hope that we can break the deadlock soon.
The right hon. Gentleman also raises the deal in the strait of Hormuz. It is a fragile deal, and the continued bombardment of Lebanon, which is affecting the fragile ceasefire in relation to Lebanon that is holding as of this morning, particularly pertains to that. We call for restraint from Israel particularly. It is important that we maintain peace across the region at this time.
I can confirm that the defence investment plan will be published before the NATO summit. I think it is important that the Prime Minister is in post for that NATO summit. The right hon. Gentleman will recall that I was the first Foreign Secretary to return to the top table of Foreign Secretaries in Europe, and I hope that the EU summit takes place as soon as possible.
James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)
I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his update on a range of issues from the G7 summit. Could he set out how the Government’s work to de-escalate things in the middle east will help families in Britain and my constituency, specifically when it comes to protecting shipping routes, reducing energy pressures and keeping prices down?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I pay tribute to the Foreign Secretary, the Prime Minister and our National Security Adviser for their determination to keep the strait of Hormuz open and their work with partners to bring together a coalition to achieve that. We stand ready to help, particularly with de-mining. We all want to reassure industry and get back to freedom of travel down the strait of Hormuz. All of that will affect the cost of living in this country and stabilise our economy and the global economy.
Sir Oliver Dowden (Hertsmere) (Con)
Does the Deputy Prime Minister share my concern, and that of many of my constituents, about elements of the Iran deal, in particular that the early sanctions relief, access to frozen Iranian assets and $300 billion of economic reconstruction development aid could find its way back to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, further strengthening an organisation that has done so much damage to regional stability and global stability, both directly and through its proxies?
While I am at it, will the Deputy Prime Minister sit down with the police and find some way of stopping the ridiculous heckling and disruption of Prime Ministers on the steps of Downing Street when they are trying to make statements, which further adds to our considerable international embarrassment right now?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his question. We have sanctioned the entirety of the IRGC. Since coming into office, we have imposed 240 sanctions on Iran, and we will bring forward legislation to implement full and further sanctions and sectorial measures, including targeting finance, energy, software and other industries that are advancing Iranian nuclear escalation.
The right hon. Gentleman has stood in my shoes on the steps of Downing Street. There are moments where the country is watching, and people want to be able to hear Prime Ministers of the day speak, so I recognise his point.
Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
I am glad that the Deputy Prime Minister reiterated support for Ukraine, but for that we need the defence investment plan. Could he explain what conversations the Prime Minister had at the G7 about defence investment, particularly through the Defence, Security and Resilience Bank and the multilateral defence mechanism? Both could be important to Britain. Can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us what is happening?
The Deputy Prime Minister
My hon. Friend will be reassured that defence, and increased defence spending across the G7, was a topic of discussion. We support attempts by the European Union and by our Canadian friends to ensure that the funds and different mechanisms are available to increase that defence spending. As I have said, we will set out how we will do that before the NATO summit.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
The Deputy Prime Minister mentioned the meeting between the Prime Minister and Sanae Takaichi, the Prime Minister of Japan, with reference to £18 billion of investment coming into the country. Some of that will no doubt be for the global combat air programme, for which a funding deal needs to be in place by the end of this month—next week. Last week, the Minister for Defence Readiness and Procurement mentioned that that funding deal has been agreed. Can the Deputy Prime Minister confirm how much that deal is worth and whether it is a multi-year deal, or whether it is a three-month interim deal that runs out at the end of September?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I recall being in Japan as Foreign Secretary and discussing that deal, and I was pleased to see the signing of the £18 billion deal, which incidentally will create 11,000 jobs. I will ask the Defence Secretary to update the hon. Gentleman in the usual way.
Ms Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)
After decades of Conservative Governments who preached isolation on the international stage, the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister have shown through their work the value of being in the room to get agreements that make positive changes for our national interests. He will therefore understand the concern of many of us that the EU-UK summit planned for 22 July, to make progress on repairing the damage done by Brexit to our economy and agreeing sanitary and phytosanitary and youth mobility deals, has been delayed. Every month of delay in the summit is a month of delay in implementing any deal, so will he assure those of us who recognise the need for a salvage operation to address the damage that Brexit has done to our economy, that this is a pause, not a stop, in that process?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her leadership on these issues. I assure her that the summit will take place as soon as possible. We are having ongoing discussions with the European Union on SPS, youth mobility, steel and a range of issues on a day-to-day basis.
Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)
A week ago, the Prime Minister said that the UK would support the deal between the United States and Iran by standing up a “defensive, independent, multilateral mission”. At the planning stage, that was designed to restore freedom of navigation to the strait of Hormuz. In May, the UK was supposed to deploy drones, Typhoon fighter jets and HMS Dragon to such a future mission, whereas today the Deputy Prime Minister spoke of “immediate support for de-mining.” What will the deployment involve, and what might trigger it, please?
The Deputy Prime Minister
Of course, HMS Dragon should be ready for any mission to secure the strait of Hormuz, with the advanced British military mine clearance specialists I referred to, Typhoons ready to conduct air patrols over the strait, and the Royal Navy’s modular Beehive system, which can deliver high-speed autonomous Kraken drone boats to track and identify potential threats and defeat them.
Rushanara Ali (Bethnal Green and Stepney) (Lab)
May I also associate myself with my right hon. Friend’s remarks about the Prime Minister and his service to our country? Despite the agreement with Iran, as he highlighted, the attacks on Lebanon have continued. Can he say more about what will be done to ensure that the truce agreed is sustainable, and what action will be taken to support the more than 1 million people who have been displaced and for the reconstruction of that country?
The Deputy Prime Minister
We strongly welcome the ceasefire but recognise that it is fragile. It must be fully implemented, including withdrawal by the Israel Defence Forces from Lebanon and the deployment of the Lebanese armed forces from the south, and Hezbollah must end its indiscriminate rocket fire. We have announced an additional £20 million-worth of humanitarian funding, taking UK support up to £30 million, and Baroness Chapman, the Minister of State for International Development and Africa, was in Lebanon last week discussing these issues with our French counterparts and the Lebanese Government.
Sir Alec Shelbrooke (Wetherby and Easingwold) (Con)
I really am quite impressed that the Deputy Prime Minister knows more about defence spending than the former Secretary of State for Defence. He was able to stand in for the Prime Minister at questions and also know what was going on in the G7. And apparently the Prime Minister did such an amazing job that the way forward is to sack him.
May I ask the Deputy Prime Minister this question? If the demands to go into closer trading relationships with Europe by those who are pushing that in his party—including the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham), according to what he has said recently—are to be met, do those five trade deals that the Deputy Prime Minister has boasted about stand up?
The Deputy Prime Minister
We have been very clear about the red lines in our manifesto and about delivering on our promise to reset our relationship and put Britain at the heart of Europe. We absolutely stand by the ability to implement, enact and see our economy grow as a result of those five trade deals, all of which I have been involved in.
Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)
I, too, want to echo the tribute that my right hon. Friend has paid to the Prime Minister. There is much of which he can be proud, particularly on the international stage. I welcome the Deputy Prime Minister’s strong words about what is happening in Gaza and the west bank, but my constituents frequently write to me in despair that Israel seems to be able to act with impunity when it comes to illegal settlements, the blocking of aid and many other examples. What reassurance can he give them that there is some hope that Israel will be held to account, and that the people of Gaza and the west bank will be helped in the face of such oppression?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I am proud that we took historic steps to recognise the Palestinian state. We oppose settlements that undermine a two-state solution. Settlements are illegal under international law. We urge Israel—as I have continued to do—to take greater action to hold violent settlers to account and strongly condemn the massive increase that we are seeing in settler violence against Palestinian civilians. That is why we have announced further sanctions—the fourth package in recent times—against those who are sustaining that violence.
Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Reform)
The Deputy Prime Minister has just said that we are all in the Prime Minister’s debt. Well, that would be the £300 billion of debt that he has racked up. Of all the G7 countries, we now pay the highest borrowing costs. Given that Labour was elected on an express pledge not to raise taxes and not to borrow beyond our means, does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that if the right hon. Member for Makerfield wants to hike taxes even more and max out our national credit card, he should call a general election?
The Deputy Prime Minister
Reform is in no position to ask questions or make demands when its leader is refusing to own up about his £5 million donation and whether he lobbied the Bank of England about cryptocurrencies.
Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab)
I also echo the Deputy Prime Minister’s remarks about the Prime Minister and his service to our country. Does my right hon. Friend agree that Israel must allow aid into Gaza, stop settlement expansion in the E1 area of East Jerusalem and tackle settlement violence, and that the G7 must use this moment to ensure that Palestinian people have the resources they need to rebuild their country?
The Deputy Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We all want to see peace maintained in the middle east, and we look with horror at the settler violence in the west bank. I condemn the inflammatory language that we hear once again from members of the Israeli Government.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
The Deputy Prime Minister was right to say that Iran must never be allowed to get a nuclear weapon, but history teaches us that the Iranian regime ignored the deal that was in place—the joint comprehensive plan of action. Can he be clear with the House about what the Government are doing to make any future deal meaningful and prevent the Iranian regime from acquiring the level of enriched uranium that would make a nuclear weapon?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I have stood at this Dispatch Box and discussed these issues over several years. I remember negotiating with the Iranians in Geneva and hearing some of their mendacity regarding their nuclear ambitions. I was pleased to see the G7 statement on Iran, to which I would refer the hon. Gentleman if he has not already read it. As he would expect, the United Kingdom stands ready to support that deal and hold Iran to the obligations it must necessarily have in relation to its nuclear ambitions and uranium enrichment.
Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)
I join the Deputy Prime Minister in paying tribute to the exceptional work of the National Crime Agency and the Royal Marines—who have a special bond with Exeter, being housed just down the River Exe at Lympstone—in their action on the Russian shadow fleet. Will he commit to the Government and this country taking further action against the Russian shadow fleet and continuing to be at the forefront of enforcing the sanctions we put in place?
The Deputy Prime Minister
Let me thank again the Royal Marines and National Crime Agency officers for their bravery and professionalism. The vessel is now held off the south coast at a UK anchorage. A live criminal investigation is ongoing, so I cannot comment further, but my hon. Friend has heard us talk again and again about the Russian shadow fleet and seen us corral much of the international community into action.
Pete Wishart (Perth and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
About the only thing of note and real consequence in the statement was the Deputy Prime Minister’s reminding us that tomorrow it will be 10 years since the disastrous decision to leave the EU—a Brexit that Scotland overwhelmingly rejected but that has left us as the most impacted nation in the UK, with a bill of £30 billion. Does he agree that is it not just us, but the whole UK that has suffered from Brexit? It has made the UK virtually ungovernable, as we see now, as we are about to get our seventh Prime Minister in the 10-year Brexit era.
The Deputy Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman is right: the Leader of the Opposition and her party delivered a botched Brexit, and we must hold them to account for that. That is why we have sought, day after day, to reconnect with our European friends and partner with them where we can. We held the first summit, and I look forward to the next summit. We have made progress in repairing the damage that was done together with our European friends.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
Last week at Prime Minister’s questions, I raised the serious topic of the impact of steel tariffs on companies and jobs across the country. The Deputy Prime Minister gave me a rather evasive answer—I suspect because he did not expect to be addressing the House of Commons today. He did say that the Prime Minister would be raising the issue at the G7, so can he update the House on what was discussed with regard to steel tariffs? Will he take the opportunity once again to try to answer the question as to what steps the Government are taking to avoid this economic disaster, which will occur in less than two weeks?
The Deputy Prime Minister
Protecting primary steel production, which is critical to UK national infrastructure, is the No. 1 priority. From 1 July, overall quota levels for steel imports will be reduced by 60% compared with current arrangements, with steel coming into the UK above those levels subject to a 50% tariff. Measures are targeted at steel that could be made in the United Kingdom. We continue to engage with the industry and trading partners on our steel measures, and we will confirm final quotas shortly ahead of 1 July. We will monitor the impact closely, including through a review after 12 months.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Madam Dirprwy Lefarydd. Ten years on, Brexit has cost the Welsh economy £4 billion, raised the cost of living and narrowed the life chances of young people. If the next Labour Government are serious about change for the better, rebuilding relationships with European members of the G7 and with the EU must be front and centre. Given that the Brexit reset summit due to be held a month from now has been postponed, with no date, surely the definition of stability would be for the next Government to campaign to rejoin the single market and the customs union and to be up-front and forthright with the British people on the advantages of doing so.
The Deputy Prime Minister
The right hon. Lady and I have discussed these issues—indeed, we did so before we came into Government. There is no change to our manifesto red lines, and I will not pre-empt what our next manifesto might say, but I look forward to the next EU summit and am quite sure that it will take place as soon as is possible.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
Can I say to the Deputy Prime Minister that he is looking even more prime ministerial than he did on Wednesday? I wonder what has changed since then. This is the end of an era, because the love-in between the Deputy Prime Minister and myself could be coming to an end, as he may not be at the Dispatch Box much longer—I hope that is not the case.
Is it not clear that Paris is not a place for British Prime Ministers? When Margaret Thatcher went to Paris for a security conference in 1990, she was gone as Prime Minister within four days. The right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer) has gone as Prime Minister within five days of visiting Paris for a security conference. In the communiqué from the G7, there is a reference to Ukraine and energy. When will the UK end its temporary licences for the import of Russian diesel and jet fuel through third countries? It is scheduled to end in 2027. Could the Deputy Prime Minister bring that date forward?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his question—I expect to be here for a few days yet. We did publish a statement on that issue, and it will be 1 July.
Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)
We have been waiting for the UK-EU reset for two years, and today we have just more warm words after the UK-EU reset summit was postponed because the Labour party has decided to change its leader. On the anniversary of the Brexit referendum, when we are all poorer and our economy has taken a 6% to 8% hit because of it, what assurance can the Deputy Prime Minister give this House that the next Prime Minister will be bolder than this one and will actually positively reset the relationship with Europe, supporting our calls to join the customs union and the single market?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I am proud of the work we have done to reconnect with the European Union. Alongside the Minister for the Cabinet Office, my right hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds), and the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my dear hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty) who is on the Front Bench, we have put a lot of work into the run-up to that EU summit. I was pleased to sit around the table with Foreign Secretaries across Europe for the first time, and that momentum will continue not just for the next year, but right up to the general election many years ahead.
Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
The Deputy Prime Minister mentioned in his statement an £18 billion investment from Japan. What he did not mention was that earlier this year, the Government turned down a £17.5 billion investment from oil and gas companies when they decided not to end the energy profits levy. He also mentioned Russian sanctions, but did not mention that they have not sanctioned Russian-derived oil products nor Russian liquefied natural gas. Can he not see that this Government’s policies on the North sea oil and gas sector are bad for national security and that whoever is leading the Government next must end the ban on new licences, end the EPL and get Jackdaw and Rosebank permitted?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I just remind the hon. Lady that in the past decade, 70,000 jobs were lost in the North sea because of her party. We have headquartered Great British Energy in Aberdeen, we have established the Office for Clean Energy Jobs to help create jobs, and there are already 105,000 jobs in renewables in Scotland. We are committed to jobs and that is why we have provided an extra £1.2 billion in support of upskilling the workforce.
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
The G7 summit took place in a country in the grip of an extreme heatwave—a heatwave that is now hitting the UK this week—yet climate change was not on the agenda, despite the fact that the climate crisis has huge impacts on human health and economic security. Why are the G7 asleep at the wheel with their heads buried in the sand? Could it possibly be that they were appeasing one Donald J. Trump, and have we not already learned that appeasing Trump never works? Will the Deputy Prime Minister assure me that, whoever the next Prime Minister is, the UK will show the leadership needed here in the UK and on the global stage to tackle the climate crisis?
The Deputy Prime Minister
It is great to hear the Greens talking about climate again, frankly—more, more, more! I am very proud of our record on climate, on renewables and on nature. I was very pleased to deliver my Kew lecture on this subject, and the great work continues not just in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, but at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, to ensure that Britain once again is at the leadership table on climate and nature.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
This is a joke, right, Madam Deputy Speaker? We have got the Deputy Prime Minister here giving a statement on a G7 summit that he was not at. I am embarrassed to point that out in front of the Public Gallery and the world. Can the Deputy Prime Minister name a single Prime Minister who has gone to a G7, a G8 or a G20 and not come back personally to make a statement to this House?
The Deputy Prime Minister
Despite the repartee, the hon. Gentleman is well aware that in our constitutional system, just as I deputised for the Prime Minister at Prime Minister’s questions last week and answered questions on a range of issues on behalf of the Government, I deputise today to update the House on the G7.
The Deputy Prime Minister
Ben-Gvir’s words are reprehensible and of course I condemn them. I was very proud to sanction him for all that he continues to do to destabilise the middle east and undermine the prospect of a two-state solution.
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
The Government lauded the EU-UK reset deal as potentially delivering a modest yet none the less material 0.2% uplift to GDP per annum. That equates to about £6 billion per year, or £500 million per month. Given that the EU has announced a delay to that summit, does the Deputy Prime Minister consider £500 million to be a price too high, a price too low, or about right for the latest palace coup within the Labour party?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I have to say to the hon. Gentleman that I expect that the EU summit will happen as quickly as possible. He knows our constitutional arrangements. My right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) won a massive victory in Makerfield, and I look forward to working with him over the coming weeks and months.
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Your Party)
There are massive death tolls in the wars in Ukraine, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Lebanon, Palestine and Iran. Last year, global arms expenditure reached $2.7 trillion, a third of which came from the United States of America, and this year it will be well over $3 trillion. What consideration did the G7 give to the direction in which the world is going, with greater global poverty, greater inequality, greater climate injustice and greater danger for the whole world? Did the G7 have any thoughts about greater diplomacy, ending the wars and bringing about peace around the world, or was it all solely about spending more and more money on weapons?
The Deputy Prime Minister
The G7 was a great act of diplomacy and I commend President Macron for a successful G7 summit. In relation to the terrible geopolitical environment that the right hon. Gentleman describes, the summit was successful in part because President Macron chose to invite India, Kenya, partners in the Gulf and others to talk about the very same issues that I know have dominated much of the right hon. Gentleman’s career.
Danny Kruger (East Wiltshire) (Reform)
Some 10 years on from the Brexit referendum, the Government want to align more closely with the European Union, but does the Deputy Prime Minister recognise as a statement of fact that in the sectors from which the growth of the future is coming—life sciences, agritech, defence tech and, most of all, artificial intelligence—the UK far outstrips the EU, and it would not do so if we had spent the past five years in the EU’s regulation regime. Whenever the EU summit happens, does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that we need to maintain absolute sovereignty and regulatory divergence in those vital areas?
The Deputy Prime Minister
We must always do what is right for the country. I do not recognise the either/or that the hon. Gentleman is positing. Of course we are global leaders in areas such as AI, digital and tech, but with the EU as our biggest trading partner, it is vital that we continue to work in partnership with it, and I am proud of the Government’s record in that regard.
Oral Answers to Questions
David Lammy Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)
The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr David Lammy)
I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Prime Minister, who is attending the G7 summit in Evian.
May I first pay tribute to two giants of the Labour party. Roy Hattersley was a formidable deputy leader who never stopped fighting for a more equal and fair society. We also remember our beloved colleague Jo Cox and honour her memory in working to bring our communities together, celebrating the decency and compassion that defines this country. I also want to remember the 72 lives lost at Grenfell tower. The legacy of that appalling tragedy must be a safe, secure home for everyone in this country.
Finally, let me congratulate Scotland on their first win at the men’s world cup in 36 years—that, Mr Speaker, is what happens when your captain signs for Spurs. I wish England the best of luck for their first match this evening.
This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.
Dr Sullivan
I associate myself with the Deputy Prime Minister’s remarks and pay tribute to Jo Cox. I also wish the England men’s team all the best tonight—may they follow the winning example of the Lionesses and the Scotland men’s team.
Does my right hon. Friend agree that our town and local centres, particularly our independent small businesses, are the lifeblood of our economy, and will he confirm that this Labour Government will do what it takes to unlock the potential of our local economies? One such example would be supporting the campaign by me and my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) to restore the Gravesend-Tilbury ferry, which was cut by the Conservatives.
The Deputy Prime Minister
I congratulate my hon. Friend on her campaign to restore the Gravesend-Tilbury ferry. I agree that town centres are the heart of our communities, and we are determined to help them to thrive. Our high streets strategy, backed by more than £300 million of investment, will build on our work to rejuvenate high streets across the country. We are also putting power into the hands of local communities through our flagship Pride in Place programme, which includes £1.5 million for Gravesham. Her local council can make use of the integrated transport funding for local priorities, including ferry services, and I know that Ministers will be happy to help.
Mr Speaker
I call Claire Coutinho, shadow Secretary of State, acting for the official Opposition.
Claire Coutinho (East Surrey) (Con)
On behalf of the Conservatives, I extend our condolences to the families of Jo Cox and Roy Hattersley. I know how much pain we on the Conservatives Benches felt when we lost Sir David Amess, and so we share Labour’s pain today. I also pay tribute to those who lost their lives in the Grenfell tower fire. I would also like to congratulate Scotland on their stunning win and wish England the very best of luck for tonight.
It is a great privilege to be standing at the Dispatch Box across from one of the few survivors of Labour’s original Cabinet who has not resigned on principle or been sacked in disgrace—I feel honoured. Will the right hon. Gentleman start by telling me this: why are the Labour Government happy for Britain to get its oil and gas from Russia or Qatar but not from Aberdeen?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I welcome the shadow Energy Secretary to the Dispatch Box. It is always good to hear from someone who was at the heart of the Treasury during the biggest fall in living standards on record, who was the Children’s Minister in the Government who plunged hundreds of thousands of children into poverty, and who was the Energy Secretary who showed an unwavering commitment to the cause of net zero, even though she has now forgotten that.
The right hon. Lady should not believe everything she reads in the papers. The Prime Minister and the Energy Secretary have been discussing cutting bills by over £100. Our warm homes plan is lifting millions of families out of fuel poverty, and we are securing enough energy projects to power 23 million homes. The right hon. Lady was the Energy Secretary who left our country exposed to global fossil fuel markets. We are delivering clean energy security.
Claire Coutinho
Bills came down by £500 under me. They have gone up £300 under these guys.
This is nonsense. Labour is banning new oil and gas licences in the North sea, and the guys over there in the SNP are no better, because this is the same policy that the SNP championed for years. It is pointless virtue signalling, and it is destroying well-paid jobs. Will the Deputy Prime Minister tell the House how many jobs have been lost in Aberdeen since Labour came to power?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I remember when the right hon. Lady championed net zero as Energy Secretary. She said in 2023:
“We cannot prosper… Nor can our children flourish if we don’t decarbonise energy”.
The Tories used to believe this three years ago. The right hon. Lady has forgotten that, because the Tories are desperately chasing Reform and we know it.
Over 700 jobs were lost in the last 10 years that the Tories were in power, and production fell 75% over the last 25 years. We have secured over £900 billion of investment to support more jobs by taking control with renewables, and over 100,000 jobs in Scotland are supported by clean power. We are building on that, led by Great British Energy, which is headquartered in Aberdeen.
Claire Coutinho
Let me help the Deputy Prime Minister out. One thousand people are losing their jobs every month in places like Aberdeen South because of Labour’s policies. The Government say that those oil and gas workers can get new green jobs, but what they do not say is that those salaries pay half as much. Can he tell the House how he would feel if the Government forced him to take a 50% pay cut?
The Deputy Prime Minister
The right hon. Lady used to be an investment banker, and she has got her facts wrong. Oil and gas are coming out of the North sea 24/7. In the first three months of this year, 52 million barrels of oil came out, and the equivalent of 44 million barrels of gas came out. We are not turning off the taps. This will be part of a mixed economy that will support existing oil and gas fields throughout their lifespan, making changes to exploit neighbouring fields. We do want to create more jobs, which is why we will continue to invest in renewables. She knew this three years ago. She has changed her mind because she is chasing Reform.
Claire Coutinho
I asked the Deputy Prime Minister about pay cuts, which the Government should care about, because if the Mayor of Manchester gets his way, I am pretty sure that half of the Front Bench will be getting a pay cut pretty soon.
This is serious. The world is getting more dangerous, yet last week the Prime Minister asked the Energy Secretary to help fund the defence of our country and he ghosted him. Let me repeat that: the Energy Secretary refused to meet the Prime Minister on a matter of national security. Why has he not been sacked?
The Deputy Prime Minister
Stop reading the papers, is what I would say to the right hon. Lady—or certainly the right papers. When the defence investment plan is published, it will set out—[Interruption.] This is important. It will set out how every Government Department is contributing to defence, including the Energy Department. We will always put national security first. The Conservatives still do not get it. Families are worried about their bills going up because of a war in the middle east that the Leader of the Opposition said she would jump into feet first.
Claire Coutinho
If everything is so hunky-dory, why did half the Defence team quit last week? The Government will not find the money to keep our country safe, so let us go through some of the things they can find money for. They can find millions of pounds to build solar farms in the Congo, and tens of millions of pounds for an experiment to dim the sun, but they are turning down £25 billion in tax revenue from the North sea to please their out-of-control Energy Secretary. Does the Deputy Prime Minister really think that any of that is more important than defending our country?
The Deputy Prime Minister
We have said that more spending on defence is our No. 1 priority in this spending review and the next spending review. The right hon. Lady wants to talk about resignations. Let us remind ourselves of the Tory Defence Secretary in the last Government—the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson)—who was sacked for breaching national security; the Tory Defence Secretary Michael Fallon, who resigned over sexual harassment; and the Tory Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, who admitted hollowing out the armed forces for 14 years. We have a Prime Minister securing jobs and investment at the G7, we have a Chancellor raising the minimum wage, we have an Education Secretary cutting costs for childcare, and we have an Energy Secretary cutting energy bills by over £100. We are proud of that record.
Claire Coutinho
If everything is fine, why do we have a new Defence Secretary? [Interruption.] He was not here last week, was he? Let us face it: this is a Government on life support. What is their grand plan now? Let me get this straight: they want to make the job-destroying Energy Secretary Chancellor; they want to bring back the former Transport Secretary, who resigned for nicking phones; and they want to replace the Deputy Prime Minister with the former Deputy Prime Minister, who resigned for dodging taxes. Those are all pointless distractions. Here is a better idea: why do they not cut welfare, fund defence, make energy cheap and back the North sea?
The Deputy Prime Minister
It is very thin gruel. I am here, like the right hon. Lady, because I am standing in for the leader of my party. I am proud to serve the Prime Minister and proud of what the Labour Government are delivering: more rights for working people—the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation—the biggest boost to defence spending since the cold war, and lifting more children out of poverty in a single term than any British Government in history. [Interruption.] The Conservatives can make all the noise they want. They do not want to talk about the economy because it is growing, they do not want to talk about the NHS because waiting lists are falling, and they do not want to talk about immigration because they lost control of our borders and net migration is down under us by 82%. They had their chance and they blew it. We are building a stronger, fairer Britain.
Claire Hanna (Belfast South and Mid Down) (SDLP)
I, too, wish to pay tribute to Jo Cox and her family, and to the commitment in her name that we tackle division and extremism. We saw extremism play out on the streets of Belfast last week—a pogrom where families were burned out based on the colour of their skin; health workers were stopped and asked for ID by masked thugs; and small businesses were ordered to close. Many minorities are still living in fear after a list of their addresses was circulated widely online. They deserve more than sympathy and warm words; they deserve to know that Governments are serious about confronting hatred online and offline.
The UK Government and the Northern Ireland Executive spend millions each year on programmes intended to tackle paramilitarism, but, decades after the troubles, individuals linked to loyalist paramilitaries had a role in directing and fuelling the disorder last week, including menacing a senior journalist on tape. Will the UK Government commit to reviewing how the Northern Ireland Executive are gripping—or failing to grip—paramilitarism? Will they ensure that public money never reaches individuals or groups who fuel, orchestrate or benefit from intimidation and hate?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I join the hon. Lady in utterly condemning the violence. People are right to feel sickened by the sight of people being burned out of their homes because of the colour of their skin. That is racism, and those responsible will face the full force of the law. We must never go back to 1950s Britain, where my father arrived to signs saying, “No blacks, no dogs, no Irish.” We are focused on bringing people together, and that includes by providing a further £24 million to help to tackle paramilitarism and by acting to tackle those who incite hatred online; our social cohesion plan is about bringing our communities together. I am happy to work with all parties in that endeavour.
Daisy Cooper (St Albans) (LD)
May I associate myself and my party with the Deputy Prime Minister’s tribute to Jo Cox? We extend our condolences to her friends and family, and to those of Roy Hattersley as well. I also join the Deputy Prime Minister in remembering the horrific tragedy of Grenfell, and that the families still await justice. I congratulate all those named in the King’s birthday honours list, congratulate Scotland and wish good luck to England this evening.
The right hon. Member for Rawmarsh and Conisbrough (John Healey) is respected across the House. When he says that he was forced to make decisions that could make the country less safe, we should all take heed. It is now becoming clear that the Treasury’s refusal to consider new ways of funding defence is undermining our national security, so will the Deputy Prime Minister join with us to make the case in Government for new defence bonds, which could raise £20 billion over two years to defend our country?
The Deputy Prime Minister
We believe we should work with our allies to join up defence, procurement and funding. That is why we are exploring the most effective mechanisms for multilateral co-operation, which is of course a topic of discussion for the Prime Minister at the G7.
Daisy Cooper
We are pleased to hear that the Government are looking at that, but they need to act far quicker.
It is now more than five years since the Prime Minister originally set out his famous red lines on Europe when he was in opposition: no customs union and no single market. But since then, the world has changed. Putin has launched a war on our continent, an unreliable Donald Trump has returned to the White House and, here at home, the cost of living has got worse and worse, so does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that the Government should rip up those red lines now—or is that just another job to be left to the next Prime Minister?
The Deputy Prime Minister
I was proud to be the Labour Foreign Secretary who returned to the meeting of European Foreign Secretaries, and to work alongside my colleagues in the Cabinet Office to ensure that we were at last year’s summit and that it was successful. I can confirm that the next summit will take place on 22 July. Our red lines remain, but we are focused on a sanitary and phytosanitary deal to cut prices on the shelves, a youth experience scheme and cutting red tape for exporters.
Frank McNally (Coatbridge and Bellshill) (Lab)
The Deputy Prime Minister
I join my hon. Friend in congratulating Sir Kevin Sinfield. He is an inspirational fundraiser and a champion for his sport and, of course, for the MND community. I know that Mark Sommerville runs an excellent foundation that campaigns on MND in my hon. Friend’s constituency. We are committed to improving care for people with motor neurone disease. We are looking at the current system to ensure that care is truly focused on the needs of individuals, and we are investing in cutting-edge research, including a world-first clinical trial to test remotely monitored portable ventilators. I know that the Minister for Care would be happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss the matter further.
Matt Vickers (Stockton West) (Con)
The Deputy Prime Minister
We have the fastest growing economy in the G7, borrowing is down and we have just signed our fifth major trade deal. I must say this to the Tory deputy chairman: yesterday he was on television laughing and joking about the arson attack on the Prime Minister’s home, laughing about a firebomb targeting the Prime Minister and his family. Not only that, he joined with promoting conspiracies about the attack and laughed along to demeaning homophobic remarks. He should be ashamed of himself—absolutely ashamed. My advice to him is to grow up, apologise and do considerably better.
Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)
The Deputy Prime Minister
My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. The Prime Minister has rightly put tackling violence against women and girls at the heart of this Labour Government. By contrast, I have been utterly appalled by what we have heard from the Reform candidate in Makerfield—from the vile, sexist comments to saying that Putin was within his rights to invade Ukraine. When the Reform leader was asked about them, his answer was, “So what?” This speaks volumes about Reform. The only way to stop its politics of grievance is to vote Labour.
Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
The Deputy Prime Minister
I attended the AI summit in India, and right across the world all countries and many companies—certainly tech companies—are at the forefront of this opportunity. We have to get the governance right, and of course we have to test and re-test to ensure safety. Anything on our roads would of course be tested and licensed by the Department for Transport. I do not think we can stand in the face of innovation.
Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab)
The Deputy Prime Minister
I am so grateful to my hon. Friend. We all miss Jo—a dear friend and a valued colleague. Three years ago, I had the great privilege of opening the Jo Cox More in Common centre in Huddersfield alongside Jo’s sister, my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater), and her parents Jean and Gordon. It was one of the great honours of my life. We all have a duty to live up to the values that Jo stood for. She was a trailblazing campaigner against loneliness and inspired the Great Get Together taking place this weekend. In the words of the Jo Cox Foundation, holding or attending a Great Get Together
“in your local area is a simple but powerful way to honour Jo’s legacy”—
neighbours coming together, differences set aside and communities choosing unity over division, because that is what Jo stood for.
Mr Louie French (Old Bexley and Sidcup) (Con)
The Deputy Prime Minister
I am hugely grateful for the work of the Home Secretary and the previous Home Secretary in putting neighbourhood policing back at the heart of our communities and putting in extra policing across the country. We on the Labour side remember the decisions by Boris Johnson to cut policing across the country—I will take no lectures from the hon. Gentleman.
John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) (Lab)
The Deputy Prime Minister
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for campaigning on this issue. I am very proud of the fact that this Government have restored the UK’s position as a global leader on climate action. That includes ambitious targets to reduce climate emissions and restore nature, and seizing the opportunities of clean, renewable power.
“The net zero economy now supports 1.1m UK jobs and generates £105bn in economic value—proof that tackling climate change & growing the economy can go hand in hand.”
Those are not my words; they are from Baroness Theresa May in the past fortnight. The Tories used to believe in this agenda, but they have forgotten because they are chasing Reform Uk.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
The Deputy Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman raises a serious issue. He might have forgotten that this House legislated for emergency measures to save steel across our country. We will continue to do more—and, of course, this is on the agenda for the Prime Minister at the G7.
Dr Beccy Cooper (Worthing West) (Lab)
The Deputy Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue. She makes a powerful point, as someone who has worked in public health for many years. I have met Ella’s family, including her mother Rosamund. Her death was a tragedy, and this is an issue close to my heart. Through our environmental improvement plan, we are taking action to cut pollutants, including through new targets to cut exposure to harmful particles by a third, and by reforming industrial permitting to reduce emissions. A Minister will be happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss this further.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
The Deputy Prime Minister
I never thought I would get a request from the hon. Gentleman to look at his tattoos. I know that Eastbourne pier is a much-loved iconic local landmark. I believe he is meeting the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, the hon. Member for Barking (Nesil Caliskan), to discuss his campaign. I am pleased that we have allocated £20 million of Pride in Place funding to regenerating Eastbourne. It was one of the first seaside towns I visited as a young child. This summer, his constituents will be able to enjoy their day at the pier for less with our Great British summer savings, with free bus travel for kids, cheaper meals and cheaper tickets to amusement parks.
Yuan Yang (Earley and Woodley) (Lab)
The Deputy Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for her dedicated work on this. I am on the side of the people who elected us to clean up our rivers, our lakes and our seas. I and this Government are on the side of consumers, who are paying the price for years and years of failure by the Conservatives. We do not want Thames Water customers to have to pick up the bill for the company’s failures. We stand ready for all eventualities. The Labour Government have already blocked bonuses and introduced criminal sanctions for polluting water bosses, and we will go further by creating a new powerful regulator to hold all companies to account and clean up our waterways.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
May I say to the Deputy Prime Minister that he is looking very prime ministerial today? He certainly has my vote if he decides to run for Labour leader on Friday. [Interruption.] Trust me, it is a deliberate ploy. On a serious note, Stoke Heath is a small rural settlement in Shropshire, in my Wrekin constituency. Over the past few hours, I have been informed—at a very late point, I think, by the way—that 121 asylum seekers will be going into that settlement. That is a 35% increase in the population in a matter of weeks. It is equivalent to 44,000 asylum seekers coming into the Deputy Prime Minister’s constituency. While this is a tolerant, compassionate and understanding nation, does the Deputy Prime Minister agree with me that that level of dispersal into a small, isolated, rural community is just not fair?
The Deputy Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman and I have made common cause on a range of issues, cross-party, over the years. On the central issue, I am proud that we have seen a reduction in net migration of 82% over the 23 months that we have been in power. We cannot both grip this problem and say, when it comes to ensuring that people are detained—most often so that they can be removed—“Not in my patch.” I do not know the detail of his circumstances, and of course the immigration Minister will look at this matter, but we have to be honest about what the British public expect us to do on their behalf.
Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall) (Lab)
The Deputy Prime Minister
I agree 100% with my hon. Friend. I know that she has worked closely with families affected by harmful content in her constituency. Our decision to ban social media for under-16s is a landmark moment that will ensure that we better protect children and young people across our country. We will absolutely hold platforms to account for the harms that they can cause. That is why we have asked Ofcom to review their capability to enforce the social media ban and publish a clear enforcement strategy.
Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)
Earlier this week, in Westminster Hall, we had a debate on brain tumours, brain cancer, and the inequity of the service across the United Kingdom. The issue has been highlighted by my constituent Archie Goodburn, a Commonwealth swimmer who will compete in Glasgow next month. He got the treatment he needed only after I approached the Government and they supported him. Will the Government look at how we ensure that people in all parts of the United Kingdom, regardless of devolution, get the best possible treatment for cancers?
The Deputy Prime Minister
There is a new target that 75% of patients diagnosed from 2035 will be cancer-free or living well after five years. That means that 320,000 lives will be saved. The cancer plan will end the postcode lottery on cancer, introduce a new three-year neighbourhood early diagnosis fund, and cover the cost of travelling for cancer treatment. I know that Ministers are happy to meet the hon. Lady to discuss that further.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
The Deputy Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is a former schoolteacher, and I know how much he cares about this matter. I am delighted that we have announced the locations of 180 new youth hubs, which include Harlow; it means that more young people across the country will benefit from skills and training opportunities. This week, we have shown that this Labour Government are working to transform the lives of our young people. I thank my hon. Friend for all his campaigning on behalf of his constituency—and I know that a lot of the young people support Spurs.
James McMurdock (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Ind)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker.
High Court: Business and Property Division
David Lammy Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
The Government are pleased to support a judiciary-led initiative to modernise the structure of the High Court through the establishment of a new business and property division. This historic modernisation will ensure that the UK remains a global hub for corporate litigation.
It will bring together the current business and property courts into a single division, which will replace the chancery division.
The business and property courts are a collection of specialist civil courts that deal with high-value, complex disputes, including commercial, business, property, technology and intellectual property cases. These courts play a significant role in supporting the UK’s legal services sector and wider economy, with a substantial proportion of cases involving international parties.
At present, these courts are situated across both the chancery division and the King’s bench division. This arrangement can create challenges for users in navigating the system and leads to overlapping governance responsibilities.
Relevant business and property courts will be transferred into the Chancery division, which will be renamed the business and property division. Leadership of the new division will rest with the current chancellor of the High Court, who will assume the title of president of the business and property division.
The new business and property division will stand alongside the King’s bench and family divisions of the High Court. The individual courts and lists that make up the new division will continue their work as they do now, keeping their existing jurisdictions, identities and areas of expertise.
This reform is intended to deliver a number of benefits:
Supporting economic growth by strengthening the international profile and accessibility of these courts, thereby reinforcing the UK’s position as a leading global dispute resolution centre;
Improving access to justice through clearer structures and a more intuitive framework for domestic and international court users; and
Strengthening judicial governance by providing a single point of leadership.
Changes will be made through an Order in Council, which will be laid in Parliament in due course, alongside updates to the civil procedure rules, practice directions and associated court materials.
Further updates will be provided to the House as this work progresses.
[HCWS79]
Judicial Workforce
David Lammy Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
I am today announcing my decision on pay for the judiciary.
I value the Senior Salaries Review Body’s expertise and independent advice in recommending a judicial pay award which reflects the important role that the judiciary play across the justice system. When making my decision, I have carefully considered the SSRB’s advice alongside the financial implications for my Department.
The SSRB recommended a pay award of 3.8% for all judicial office holders within the remit group for 2026-27. I have decided to reject this recommendation, and instead a 3.5% judicial pay award will be applied equally to all judicial office holders for whom I have responsibility, from April 2026. I highly value the important work carried out by the judiciary in upholding the rule of law. I have therefore prioritised funding to provide an award 1.5% higher than the 2% affordability set out in published evidence, but this has required tough choices within the Department’s spending plans. This approach carefully weighs the SSRB’s recommendations against the affordability constraints of my Department, as well as the wider pressures on public finances.
The SSRB highlighted their concern over the persistent recruitment and retention issues affecting parts of the judiciary when making this recommendation. I share these concerns. The major review of the judicial salary structure is the right place to address these issues through targeted reform, and presents better value than the flat rate pay uplift of the annual pay review. I look forward to continuing to work with the SSRB on the major review and receiving its report later this year.
I am committed to strengthening our world-class judiciary. I have already announced in December a record investment in sitting days, court buildings, technology and legal professionals. I hope this increase reflects the high value I place on their independence and commitment to the delivery of justice and the rule of law.
The SSRB’s report will be presented to Parliament and published on gov.uk.
[HCWS53]
Oral Answers to Questions
David Lammy Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
The Government are reforming the family justice system to better support families and children. We are rolling out the child-focused model nationally, developing a cross-system family justice strategy and legislating for new child safety measures that ensure that child welfare continues to be prioritised.
Dr Pinkerton
I am grateful for that response. My constituent Olivia is an extraordinary survivor of sustained coercive control involving psychological, physical and financial abuse—a set of abuses that continued even after her separation from her partner, because of child contact arrangements, which left her in persistent fear for both her safety and that of her child. What steps are the Secretary of State and his Front Bench team taking to strengthen safeguarding in the family courts and to protect domestic abuse survivors from re-traumatisation, particularly when perpetrators use mechanisms such as child contact arrangements to continue their abuse?
Mr Lammy
The whole House will have sympathy for Olivia. The family courts must never be a place for perpetrators to continue their abuse. Repealing the presumption of parental involvement will ensure that children’s wellbeing continues to be the court’s primary focus when considering contact. Under the child-focused model, independent domestic violence advisers can provide victims with specialist family support.
Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)
One of the successes of the family justice system is the family mediation voucher scheme. Two thirds of families who use the scheme avoid going to court, which takes a lot of pressure off the family courts. It started in 2021 and gets renewed every year, often at the end of the year or even when the next year has started, which creates huge uncertainty. Will the Secretary of State just say that he will make the scheme permanent from now on?
Mr Lammy
I can confirm to the Chair of the Select Committee that the family mediation voucher scheme will be extended for another year, giving separating families £500 towards their mediation costs to help them solve issues with childcare and finances without going to court. I will look carefully at the permanency of those arrangements.
Tony Vaughan (Folkestone and Hythe) (Lab)
Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
We inherited a justice system in crisis, with a backlog of over 80,000 cases—double what it was in the pre-covid era—and with victims, witnesses and defendants waiting years for justice. That is what truly undermines confidence in our justice system. Justice delayed is justice denied. Only by pulling every lever—investment, efficiency and reform—can we turn the tide.
Gregory Stafford
On the Secretary of State’s watch, the courts backlog has reached record levels, yet his answer is to weaken one of the oldest rights in our justice system: trial by jury. The backlog was not caused by juries and it will not be solved by scrapping juries. The Bar Council says there is very little evidence for the Government’s approach, while the Institute for Government estimates that it would save at most about 2% of court time, and even that may be generous. Why will the Government not drop this ill-judged proposal and focus instead on the serious reforms needed to cut the backlog and speed up justice for victims?
Mr Lammy
If the hon. Gentleman were serious, he would get on top of the detail. We are not scrapping juries; juries remain a cornerstone of our system. Just as Margaret Thatcher made changes to the jury system, and just as the Blair Government made changes to the jury system, we are making changes to bring down the backlog.
Sarah Pochin
On Saturday, the Secretary of State promised extra court time for anyone arrested at the “Unite the Kingdom” march, yet there are grooming gang survivors who have waited more than 20 years for their cases to come to court. How is it that he is able to find court time to arrest protesters, yet some victims of vile sexual abuse are waiting decades to have their cases heard in court?
Mr Lammy
I would have thought that the hon. Lady, as a magistrate, would recognise that the right to protest exists in our country and we defend it, but that where people spew hate or incite violence and where anyone causes criminal damage or harm, of course the courts will bear down on them in the strongest possible way.
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)
Hon. Members fairly hold strong views on these reforms. It is notable that, in Scotland, the right to elect between solemn and summary procedure for certain offences does not sit with the accused but with the procurator fiscal, but the people of Scotland are listening to this salient debate. Does the Secretary of State agree that we must conduct the debate on the Government’s reforms without feeding the increasingly malignant narratives of certain groups who are seeking to undermine public confidence in prosecutions and convictions in every corner of the United Kingdom?
Mr Lammy
My hon. Friend makes a very good point. It is fundamental that people have confidence in our justice system, wherever they are across these isles. That is why this Government are seeking to do all they can to get both the court system and the prison system out of the crisis that we inherited.
Karl Turner (Kingston upon Hull East) (Ind)
It must be absolutely exhausting for the Justice Secretary to hold on to an idea that only he still pretends is a good one. The Mayor of London is opposed to these changes and has tried to persuade the Justice Secretary to bin them. The Mayor of Greater Manchester is opposed to this ludicrous idea. The leader of Scottish Labour was opposed to this idea—and it does not even involve Scotland. The former Welsh First Minister was apparently opposed to it. When is the Justice Secretary going to get his ego out the way and bin the ludicrous idea of curtailing jury trials?
Mr Lammy
The hon. Gentleman makes his point with real force. However, he never talks about victims, and has not explained how we should bring down the backlog. The truth is that we are determined to bring down the backlog, and that is why—[Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. Mr Turner, I took the question; I expect you to hear the answer as well.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
I come with good news: with increased funding from the Government, uncapped sitting days and improved disposal rates, backlogs in the Crown courts are falling. At the Old Bailey in 2025, the backlog fell by a quarter, in Chelmsford it fell by 10%, and Maidstone saw a 5% reduction. The truth is that proper funding for our courts and uncapped sitting days are bringing down the backlogs, but the Government are choosing to ignore that data and are persisting in taking a sledgehammer to jury trials, although that will not deliver shorter wait times for victims. Why will the Minister not trust those in the justice system who want to deliver for victims using the increased funding and resource that he has delivered for them?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for recognising that we have seen a small reduction because of the increased investment I have put in, and because of the extra sitting days; the modernisation that we have talked about, and enlisting artificial intelligence in particular, will also make a difference. However, given the size of the backlog, if we are serious about bringing it down over the next few years, we will need reform as well.
Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
I am delighted to be working with the Home Secretary and other Cabinet colleagues to deliver our ambitious goal of halving knife crime within a decade. In February, we published the youth knife possession guidance, which delivers tougher consequences for knife carriers. The youth justice White Paper published yesterday sets out how the Government will intervene earlier to stop children becoming involved in offending, and ensure that those who do are dealt with swiftly and effectively.
Laura Kyrke-Smith
I welcome the Government’s knife crime strategy, with its ambitious goal of halving knife crime in a decade, and its recognition that serious violence is both a criminal justice issue and a social failure. I commend Thames Valley police on their hard work to tackle knife crime in Aylesbury and the villages. We have seen some really good measures, such as the knife crime amnesty bins, which have had a positive effect. As the Secretary of State knows, the challenge of knife crime starts with its root causes, which include poverty and a lack of opportunity for young people. We still struggle with that in Aylesbury and the villages. What more is the Secretary of State doing across Government to address these two root causes?
Mr Lammy
I agree that poverty, exclusion and a lack of opportunity are all root causes of crime. Our youth justice White Paper focuses on intervening earlier to address risks before they escalate, working across Government to tackle the root causes of crime, and ensuring that every child has the support and opportunities that they need to thrive.
Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)
Has the Secretary of State established the success or otherwise of knife amnesties introduced by previous Administrations in reducing knife crime, given the prevalence—and increase—of knife crime in many large urban centres across the country?
Mr Lammy
The hon. Gentleman is right that there is a role for knife amnesties. As it happens, I was out last week in Deptford looking at a knife amnesty programme. If he looks at the first item on my Instagram, he will see me doing that.
Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)
Last year, 6,397 knife criminals were sent to prison, and the average sentence was just over eight months. As the Government scrapped almost all sentences of less than a year, will the Justice Secretary say very clearly whether he expects as many knife criminals to go to jail next year as did last year?
Mr Lammy
The outrage under the last Government was watching knife crime go up year on year, while the hon. Gentleman was sitting in the Home Office—
Mr Speaker
Order. Mr Timothy, you get two questions. Can you at least wait half a minute before you jump in?
Mr Lammy
It is a serious subject, and I am pleased that after 22 months in office, we have seen falls in knife crime in the last year. We will continue with our knife crime strategy.
Nick Timothy
What the Justice Secretary just said about the record of the last Government was factually untrue, and he should withdraw it. He does not want to admit it, but it is his policy to send fewer knife criminals to jail. That is why he just said what he did. His White Paper was announced yesterday, and buried in it, on page 46—he can read it again—is his plan to not just go soft on young criminals, but make others,
“including vulnerable adults and young adults…subject to a different process”.
That is wrong. Can the Justice Secretary rule out weaker sentences, and a target of reducing imprisonment rates for any adult criminals?
Mr Lammy
The hon. Gentleman left us with a prison capacity crisis. The last Government had success in reducing the number of young people in prison—he knows it, and the record is there—and I worked with Michael Gove and David Cameron as they set out on that mission. The strategy we published yesterday puts public protection first. There will always be young people who have to be in custody, but we are determined to reduce the number of young people on remand in particular by working with the most vulnerable.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
The Prime Minister asked me to lead work across Government to improve outcomes for boys and men. That includes a specific focus on convening and co-ordinating the brilliant work being done across Departments, including on health and wellbeing, education and employment, and masculinities and connection. Furthermore, yesterday we set out a plan for youth justice reform, which was the first in many years.
Alistair Strathern
The Anti-Slavery Commissioner recently called out the targeted online grooming of young men by county lines gangs. That is far from being an isolated case of such targeting. Young men growing up in Britain today are all too often targeted by those in the worst corners of the internet—from those in the manosphere to predatory gambling companies to get-rich-quick schemes. However, while Ofcom rightly has guidance for platforms about how to better protect women and girls from the specific harms that they can be exposed to, no such parallel guidance exists for young men and boys growing up in Britain. We are all worse off as a result. We recently convened over 60 MPs to write to Ofcom to urge it to put that right. Will the Deputy Prime Minister join us today in calling on Ofcom to step up? It is in its gift to do so. Let us get this done.
Mr Speaker
Order. I think the Secretary of State knows what the question is.
Mr Lammy
It is an excellent question. My hon. Friend is quite right; there are many concerns about the online space and what it means for men and boys in a modern society, and there is an important role for Ofcom. I encourage him to write to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, and I will take a close interest. I hope that he gets a meeting with a Minister.
Amanda Martin
As the founding member of the Labour group for men and boys, I welcome the Government’s focus on prevention opportunity, because supporting men and boys is not zero sum; it benefits women, girls, families and communities, too. In Portsmouth, too many boys and young men are struggling with education, mental health and pathways into work, while many older men tell me that they increasingly feel isolated, overlooked and mistrustful of institution and politics. What discussions is the Secretary of State having with Cabinet colleagues about rebuilding purpose, trust and opportunity for men and boys across our communities? Will he work with me to turn this ambition into meaningful action for men and boys in Portsmouth?
Mr Lammy
I am keen to work with my hon. Friend on this issue. I recognise that there are real issues in her constituency in this regard. She will be pleased to hear that last month I attended a roundtable with some of the leading figures in the men and boys sector to hear their concerns directly from them. I am also chairing the interministerial group on men and boys. There is real excitement, right across Whitehall, about the fact that we can do something about this over the next two years.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
An often under-appreciated element of the criminal justice system is the impact that it has on fathers’ ability to stay part of their family. My hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) shared research conducted by the University of Plymouth about fathers separated from their children, and the impact of that on family life. If we are to rehabilitate people in prison, we must help them maintain their family relationships. Will the Secretary of State take steps to tackle communication barriers for those with young children, and improve the way in which children can integrate with parents in prison?
Mr Lammy
A few years ago, I set up the all-party parliamentary group for fatherhood. The hon. Lady is right: the role of fathers in all children’s lives is vital. There is nothing more affecting than programmes in prison, for example, where fathers who are illiterate and unable to write are helped to do so in order to stay in communication with their children. I will look closely.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
I am sure that the House will join me in paying tribute to the former Minister for victims, the hon. Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones), for her amazing work. I wish the new Minister the best of luck in the role.
Some 90% of young men and boys incarcerated for violent offences have experienced or witnessed domestic abuse or another form of abuse at home. The Government are investing in increasing the number of independent domestic violence advisers available to adult survivors, but there is no like-for-like equivalent for children to access that kind of direct advocacy. Will the Justice Secretary consider that proposal, which a number of victims charities have advocated for, to ensure that young men and boys have the domestic abuse support that they need and deserve?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for allowing me to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones) for her tremendous work. I think the whole House will recognise that, as a Minister, she was entirely on top of her brief and she commanded the respect of victims groups right across our country. The hon. Gentleman makes an important point and I will look closely at what more we can do for young people who experience domestic violence.
Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)
Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
Since the last Justice questions, the Victims and Courts Act 2026 and the Crime and Policing Act 2026, which both put victims at the heart of the justice system, have received Royal Assent. In the Gracious Speech, His Majesty the King confirmed that we will proceed with the Courts and Tribunals Bill to turn the tide on the Crown court backlog and deliver swifter justice for victims, and that we remain committed to a Hillsborough law to bring in a duty of candour for public service and rebuild confidence in the justice system. Those are yet more examples of this Government getting on with delivering justice for the British people.
Ben Maguire
Cornwall continues to face some of the UK’s worst legal aid deserts, with rurality and lack of transport adding to the postcode lottery. According to the Law Society, a third of domestic abuse survivors were forced to represent themselves in court, as even when advice is available, eligibility criteria often stand in their way. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss raising the income threshold for the legal aid means test in line with inflation and removing the capital assets requirement altogether to ensure that victims of economic abuse can access justice?
Mr Lammy
It is of course important that those who need legal aid can access it, including those in rural communities and victims of domestic abuse. We work with the market to mitigate localised pressures where they exist, by supporting a mix of face-to-face, telephone and remote advice provision. I will ensure that the hon. Gentleman gets a meeting with the Minister.
Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this issue. Let me be absolutely clear: prisoners are not permitted to have access to social media in any circumstances and face punishment if they do so. All cases are investigated by His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service if they are discovered. A few weeks ago I visited our state-of-the-art digital forensics lab, which interrogates any phones found and provides evidence to bring successful prosecutions in court. I hope that reassures his constituent.
Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)
This weekend, two marches came to London: one was condemned by the Justice Secretary; about the other—yet another anti-Israel march—there was not a word. Once again we heard crowds of people demanding intifada revolution and other coded calls for attacks on British Jews. If the Crown Prosecution Service refuses to prosecute the thugs who chant “Globalise the intifada” and other calls for violence, why will the Justice Secretary not change the law so that these people get what they deserve?
Mr Lammy
I want to reassure the hon. Gentleman that everyone inciting violence against Jewish communities in our country must face the full force of the law. I know he will recognise that I represent the Stamford Hill area of London, with its significant Orthodox Jewish community, and I am grateful that he has raised this. Can I just remind him that the CPS updated its guidance on hate crimes on 5 May, to ensure that people face the law as they should?
Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)
Mr Lammy
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We cannot allow the rich and powerful to use their resources to stop proper investigation, and I will be bringing forward legislation as soon as time allows.
Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)
Michelle Scrogham (Barrow and Furness) (Lab)
Mr Lammy
There is nothing more tragic than seeing young people, often from deprived backgrounds, preyed on by adults to run drugs and all sorts of contraband across the country. We will be bringing that offence forward as soon as possible.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
Mr Lammy
The hon. Gentleman knows that the Government inherited a justice system in crisis, with a record and rising caseload. He also knows that the last Government closed courts right across the country. We are legislating for structural reform. We are investing £2.78 billion to bring down the backlog. We will continue to look closely at the needs in Kendal, but he recognises that it will take some time to address what we inherited.
Liz Twist (Blaydon and Consett) (Lab)
Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst (Solihull West and Shirley) (Con)
Mr Lammy
Magistrates play a hugely important role. I was sad that they were cut back under the previous Government. There used to be about 29,000. The hon. Gentleman will see the recruitment campaign right across the country. We need a new generation of magistrates, and I want them to come from all backgrounds.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
Half of all prisoners lack the basic literacy skills needed to navigate everyday life, only one in three secure employment within six months of release, and a third reoffend within a year. Rehabilitation, reducing reoffending, and improving public safety must be at the heart of our criminal justice system. Will the Secretary of State please commit to increasing funding for prison education, so that offenders can access the basic skills and support they need to rebuild their lives, reintegrate, and contribute positively to society when they leave prison?
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
I am sure it has not missed anybody’s radar that I recently launched a campaign for lifelong sex education, and last week I met some parish councillors, one of whom works in the Probation Service. She thanked me for the campaign because of the amount of re-education they have to do, particularly for young men, on what is acceptable within sexual relationships. Will the Secretary of State, or a relevant Minister, meet me to talk about the importance of lifelong sex education in re-educating potential reoffenders?
Mr Lammy
I thank my hon. Friend for her campaign and work in this area. It is important that prisoners and those on probation are re-educated about codes of conduct, and I am happy for her to arrange a meeting with the Prisons Minister.
Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)
Will the Secretary of State outline what steps he is taking through the criminal justice system to support victims of violence against women, particularly those who report historical cases of sexual violence? Several of my young constituents have faced terrible communication, years of delay, and ultimately the Crown Prosecution Service not progressing with prosecution.
Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)
My constituent Tam is a mental health legal aid lawyer who has seen demand in the sector rise while fees fail to keep up. As a result, many have left that line of work, despite the Government’s Mental Health Act 2025 increasing the workload. This is unacceptable when people’s liberty is at stake, so what specific assessments has the Department made of the current sustainability of the mental health legal aid sector, and what concrete steps is it taking to ensure the financial viability of that sector?
Mr Lammy
We have announced additional funding of up to £34 million a year for criminal legal aid advocates, and an additional £92 million beyond that for criminal legal aid solicitors. The hon. Lady has mentioned the important issue of legal aid in relation to mental health cases, which we will look closely at in the next funding period.
Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) on her first outing at the Dispatch Box. On Friday, I met Jimmy, an imprisonment for public protection prisoner whose case I have previously raised with the Prime Minister, the Justice Secretary and the Prisons Minister. Despite good progress, he still does not have a firm release date after more than 20 years in prison and over a decade since IPP sentences were abolished. Will the Justice Secretary urge his Department to do all it can to expedite Jimmy’s release and that of the estimated other 2,800 people who remain in prison on IPP sentences?
Mr Lammy
I recognise the real issues that exist for IPP prisoners—we have discussed those issues at length, and will continue to do so. The Prisons Minister has done a lot of work in this area, engaging with all of those who raise these issues on an almost weekly basis, including in another place. Of course, we want to do more and see those prisoners who are not going to cause public harm released.
Youth Justice
David Lammy Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the youth justice system in England and Wales. I am today publishing a White Paper, with a once-in-a-generation set of reforms to build a youth justice system that intervenes early, responds more effectively and does more to turn young lives around, so that we can better protect the public. I am very grateful to the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards), and, before him, my hon. Friend the Member for Scunthorpe (Sir Nicholas Dakin), for all their hard work in getting us to this point.
Over the past two decades, the number of children entering the youth justice system and being detained in custody has fallen dramatically. This progress is the result of real cross-party consensus, with a modern youth justice system that began under Tony Blair’s Government and was continued, during his time as Prime Minister, by Lord Cameron—he famously said he would “hug a hoodie”—who, with Lord Gove, asked me to carry out the Lammy review.
But this success has brought a new challenge. Our youth justice system is now working with significantly fewer young people, but they are significantly more vulnerable and at significantly higher risk. Most begin their journey into crime long before they come to the attention of the police, their lives shaped by instability, by trauma and often by neglect—the kind of childhood that most of us in this House could barely imagine. Some grow up surrounded by violence, addiction and abuse, while others are moved endlessly around children’s homes or foster care placements, never staying in one place long enough to have the stability needed to feel safe, let alone the love and care that would enable them to really thrive. All those factors make them more likely to end up in the justice system. When we fail to intervene early enough, the consequences can be devastating—for those children, of course, but also for victims and entire communities, because around 80% of prolific adult offenders first enter the justice system as children.
The risks that children face have also changed. Today’s children are navigating online harms, criminal grooming through social media and exposure to extremist content. Too often the system has struggled to keep pace: opportunities to intervene are missed, warning signs go unnoticed and agencies do not consistently share information. This means that children can slip through the cracks between services, which risks escalation, and responsibility between agencies becomes blurred. The lessons emerging from the Southport inquiry, following the tragic murders of three young children by Axel Rudakubana, a violent 17-year-old who was known to authorities, are a terrible reminder of what can happen when systems are not sufficiently co-ordinated and not sufficiently decisive in the face of escalating concerns.
We must learn those lessons but also strike the right balance. The system must recognise that they are still developing and that most have huge capacity to change. We should not over-criminalise but, at the same time, avoiding criminalisation must never mean overlooking risk or failing to act. Benign neglect, however well intentioned, is still neglect. Where behaviour causes harm, timely, proportionate and effective intervention is essential to protect the public and to support children to change course.
That principle is reflected throughout this White Paper. First, we will intervene earlier, investing an additional £46 million over the next three years in our turnaround programme, which is already showing promising results in diverting children from crime, and by strengthening the join-up with other programmes that support children on the cusp of offending. We will also strengthen and expand the use of parenting orders, which can compel parents to address their child’s behaviour, including attending counselling or guidance sessions. If they do not act, they will face penalties. We will deliver on our manifesto commitment to introduce an offence of child criminal exploitation, building on the work carried out by others, including Baroness May, and placing the focus where it belongs: on the adults who groom, the adults who coerce and the adults who profit from exploiting children. Through new youth diversion orders, we will tackle the increasing number of young people who commit terrorism offences, allowing agencies to intervene before that risk escalates.
Where offending does happen, we will ensure that children get the right response at the right time. Diversion must be firm, fair and effective. We will fundamentally reform the youth out-of-court resolution framework, to improve consistency and public confidence so that children receive interventions that genuinely address their behaviour and cut crime. We will also pilot problem-solving youth intervention courts, laser-focused on rehabilitation and prevention. They bring together judges, youth workers and specialist support to tackle the root causes of offending, whether mental ill health, school absence, addiction or exploitation, while still demanding accountability from young offenders.
Custody will always be necessary for the most dangerous offences, but for many children even a short spell inside can deepen their problems, exposing them to more violence and criminal influence. So we are setting an ambition to cut the number of children remanded in custody by 25% over this Parliament, alongside an intention to reduce the use of short custodial sentences, which so often are ineffective, with more than two thirds of children going on to reoffend. Instead, we will invest £5 million in intensive community placements and stronger bail support, protecting the public while giving children a genuine chance to change course.
We will also reform the childhood criminal records regime, because mistakes made at 13 should not become a life sentence of closed doors and lost chances, not least where this prevents young people from getting a job, which is a crucial factor in helping offenders turn their lives around. We will carefully consider the age of criminal responsibility in this country, which currently sits at just 10 years old, to ensure that it still reflects a modern understanding of childhood, vulnerability and development. We will also strengthen local youth justice services so that they are better equipped to meet the needs of today’s children.
We will soon set out detailed proposals for a new approach to youth justice service oversight, and funding arrangements so that children receive consistently high-quality support wherever they live. That includes reforming the Youth Justice Board, sharpening its focus on continuous improvement of local services and transferring some of its key functions to the Ministry of Justice, so that Ministers are fully accountable for how the system performs.
I have been clear that custody will, where appropriate, be necessary for public safety. However, we will take further action to improve safety and education across the youth estate, while setting a clear long-term direction of travel away from large, outdated institutions and towards smaller settings that can better rehabilitate children.
The White Paper is also about fairness. Not all children in our justice system are equal. Those in care are still far more likely to be drawn into the system. Black children remain vastly over-represented—22% of the youth custodial population, compared with 6% of 10 to 17-year-olds overall. Black children are also over-represented among victims, being around six times more likely to be victims of homicide. I warned about this disproportionality when David Cameron asked me to do the Lammy review, nearly a decade ago, and the fact it persists today should shame us all. These reforms will begin to address that, building a system that is fairer and more consistent.
It is not a choice between punishment and rehabilitation; it is about what works: protecting the public, cutting reoffending, and stopping vulnerable children—so often victims themselves—becoming tomorrow’s dangerous adult offenders. This Government will do whatever it takes to give more children the chance of a better future, and to keep the British public safe. I commend this statement to the House.
Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)
It is obvious that we are now in the legacy-hunting stage of this Government. Less a range of exhausted volcanoes, more a row of trampled molehills, Ministers are desperate to be remembered for something. This morning a word cloud was published by the pollsters at More in Common. The public were asked for the Prime Minister’s greatest achievement, and emblazoned across the page, in huge capital letters, was the sad word “Nothing.”
Today’s announcement, however, is a fitting tribute to the Justice Secretary and his predecessor, the right hon. Member for Birmingham Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood). So desperate are they to find the causes of crime that they sometimes forget that their job is to prevent and punish crime itself. The truth is that Labour just does not have it in its DNA to be tough on crime. The Government have let 60,000 criminals out of jail early, they are abolishing short-term sentences—so that almost all shoplifters and the majority of knife criminals will no longer be sent to prison—and they are pretending that they are doing these things because they have to, but they are doing them because they want to.
The Prisons Minister says that only a third of prisoners should be locked up. The Minister for Sentencing, the hon. Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards), says that a pretty big chunk of the overall population should not be in prison, and today’s announcement is more of the same. So I have some specific questions for the Justice Secretary. He wants to increase the age of criminal responsibility to reflect a
“modern understanding of childhood, vulnerability and development”.
From smoking bans to voting rights, this Government have a confused view of childhood, so what should be the age of criminal responsibility?
With a wave of sexual and violent crime committed by illegal immigrants, many of whom pretend to be children, can the Justice Secretary guarantee that those people will not escape justice a second time by giving a fake age to the police? The Government say they will review the function and purpose of criminal courts for child defendants, but the purpose of a criminal court is obvious: to try criminals. Can the Justice Secretary rule out abolishing criminal trials for under-18s?
The Government also say that they want to end lifelong disclosure requirements for the under-18s. Can the Justice Secretary guarantee that those requirements will still apply to people guilty of violent crimes and to prolific offenders?
The Government say they will slash custodial remand for young offenders by a quarter, but remand should be used in response to need, not arbitrary targets. What is the Justice Secretary’s alternative? Will he just send criminals home? Will he stick to that target regardless of the level of violent crime and repeat offending?
The Government want more parenting orders, but this morning the Justice Secretary said that they are not used much at the moment because all judges can do to enforce them is issue a fine. He was unclear on this question. So will Ministers—[Interruption.] The right hon. Gentleman was asked on the radio this morning whether parents who do not comply will face custodial sentences. He fudged that question, so I am asking him to answer it now.
The figures show that young repeat offenders often start with theft and move on to drug offences and violence, yet the Government’s big idea is to stop punishing swathes of crimes committed by under-18s. The gangs who swarm shops to steal goods in places like Oxford Street, Ilford and Clapham do not need to be put on a course; instead, they need clear punishment, which can include prison.
The results of soft-touch liberalism are visible in towns and cities up and down the country, yet the changes that the Justice Secretary is announcing today risk amounting to more of the same. This is a big call. If youth crime goes up as a result, it will be on this Government.
Mr Lammy
The Tories have a mixed record when it comes to youth justice and keeping young people out of criminality. We should remember that their local authority spending cuts led to a huge fall in council services for young people—about 70% in real terms. While they were in power, £1 billion was lost, leading to the closure of many youth clubs, a reduction in the outreach work that is vital to keeping young people on the right track, and youth workers being completely undermined. All that early intervention work was stopped—an entire generation sacrificed at the altar of austerity.
As the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) will know—he was at the driving wheel—the Tories also cut 20,000 police officers and 7,000 police community support officers, leading to a collapse in visible neighbourhood policing. On their watch—[Interruption.] Conservative Members really should listen to this. On their watch, more than 1,000 Sure Start centres closed. Early intervention was demolished on their watch.
I said it was a mixed record because there was a fall in the number of first-time entrants into the youth justice system. Figures peaked at around 110,000 back in 2007, but fell to just 7,500 while the Tories were in office in 2023. When they entered government, there were around 2,000 children in youth custody; by the end of their tenure, that had fallen to just over 1,000. Those were great achievements. It is interesting that the hon. Gentleman does not want to celebrate those achievements, which began under David Cameron and Michael Gove.
The hon. Gentleman asks about the age of criminal responsibility. As he will know, the Bar Council is consulting on this issue, and I look forward to receiving the conclusions of its work. He also asks about foreign national offenders. We are absolutely clear in this consultation that we will look at the 16 and 17-year-olds who arrive in our country from somewhere else and commit a violent crime; if they do so, I am afraid that they will be deported. We are really clear about that. We have driven up deportation in our country.
The hon. Gentleman asks whether we are abolishing the youth court and the criminal standard. Of course we are not. However, we are consulting on youth intervention courts because, just as we have seen in our family drug and alcohol courts, problem-solving approaches —gripping the young person, their parents and those who work with them; looking at the addiction and mental health issues and giving them support; holding the multidisciplinary teams to account—can really make a difference. We stand by that.
The hon. Member asked about young people on remand. We want to recruit a new generation of specialist foster carers, because it is much better to have a responsible, loving adult—
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)
We used to have them.
Mr Lammy
Exactly—we used to have them, and the Tories abolished them. We want to bring them back and grow their numbers so that we can support these young people.
There are a range of things we can do through this White Paper, and I encourage the hon. Member for West Suffolk to read it in detail. A lot of his predecessors would agree with it. It is good work, and we need to get on with it.
Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)
I welcome the White Paper, which shines a welcome light on an often-neglected part of the criminal justice system. The remarkable drop in the number of young people in custody, from a high of 3,400 a day, is sometimes box-ticked as “job done”, but when half those young people are on remand and a majority do not go on to receive a custodial sentence, there is clearly more to be done.
The Justice Committee is conducting an inquiry into children and young adults in the secure estate. While the Government are right to look at early intervention and alternatives to custody, will the Lord Chancellor also look at the successes and failures of the current custodial system for young people and how it can better rehabilitate young people and reduce the risk of reoffending?
Mr Lammy
We will look at this and do the necessary inquiry, and I know that my hon. Friend’s Committee is doing that work at the moment. He is concerned, quite rightly, about the huge rates of both prolific crime and recidivism. Clearly, the system is not working. We have this group of young people present in the system, and sometimes over two thirds of them go on to reoffend. We can do better, and we must do better. We have put rehabilitation at the heart of this youth justice White Paper.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
The Government’s White Paper represents a truly critical opportunity to transform the youth justice system and, importantly, reduce lifetime offending. We know that most offenders in our prisons today are repeat offenders and that persistent offending often begins early in life, with eight in 10 prolific offenders in England and Wales committing their first crime as a child. We must stop this chain of escalation, and the earlier we intervene, the better.
Nowhere is that more applicable than for children in care, those from ethnic minorities and those with special educational needs, who are disproportionately represented in the justice system. Will the Secretary of State set out how this overhaul will ensure that these children, given their specific vulnerabilities, will receive the targeted support that they desperately need?
May I take this opportunity to highlight the great work of the organisation SHiFT and encourage the Justice Secretary to engage with it? I believe that SHiFT’s model could be rolled out across the country, helping young people before they even commit their first crime?
Education for young offenders can be a crucial step in diverting them from a path to reoffending. We are pleased that the Children’s Commissioner will undertake a review of education in young offender institutions, but can the Justice Secretary ensure that it will take into account the fact that 80% of young people who are sentenced have special educational needs and make sure that the support they are getting in those institutes is fit for purpose?
The Youth Justice Board provides vital independent oversight of the youth justice system, yet the Government have chosen not to act on the report they commissioned from Steve Crocker, instead bringing a number of the board’s functions more directly within the remit of the Ministry of Justice. What is the purpose of those reforms? What benefit will the Government gain from bringing those functions in-house, and will the Justice Secretary address the concerns from across the sector that these reforms risk reducing specialist experience and weakening independent accountability?
Finally, will the Secretary of State set out how the use of parenting orders will affect the recruitment of foster parents, those being asked to take on special guardianship orders or kinship arrangements, and those considering adoption? If parenting orders will not apply to those families, how will they be supported effectively to ensure that this measure does not lead to further family breakdowns and more children ending up in the care system?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for the manner in which she made her remarks. She understands that we have seen this revolving door, where two thirds of children and young people released from custody go on to reoffend, and many of those young people are extremely vulnerable. We have to do something about it.
I thank her for mentioning the cohort of young people —way too many—who are within the care system. I am very grateful that the Minister responsible for children in care, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), is on the Front Bench today alongside me. He takes a huge interest in the work that our Departments do together to deal with this area.
The hon. Lady mentioned young people who are adopted. She knows that I am a parent of an adopted child, and I take these issues extremely seriously. She is right, and we are looking in totality at the way in which parenting orders have worked. There must be something going wrong if the number of parenting orders issued has fallen over the last decade from more than 1,000 to just 33 last year. We have to look at it in the round and ensure that judges have the right tools to support parents and guardians over this next period.
The hon. Lady raises the reforms we are making to the Youth Justice Board. It is still the case, if we look across the country, that there is a postcode lottery. We have to eliminate that postcode lottery, which also exists because of online harms, because of grooming, because of mental health and because of neurodiversity. I was in Feltham recently and I saw the good work that it is doing with young people who are neurodiverse. It is important that the Department, working with our colleagues in the Department for Education and the Department of Health and Social Care, bring some of these powers back to the centre so that we can get coherence across the country and end that postcode lottery.
Pam Cox (Colchester) (Lab)
I welcome this statement and the White Paper. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to ensure that programmes such as turnaround are felt in constituencies such as mine in Colchester and beyond?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for mentoring turnaround, which is an important scheme that began under the last Government and has continued under us. It is making a big difference by diverting these young people. I will look closely at its use in her constituency, but we are absolutely clear that it is about not just diverting them but ensuring that we are diverting them to quality. We can see from the recidivism rate of 7% that turnaround is an exceptional programme.
Sir Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con)
Can I ask the Secretary of State about two things? The first is education, which he has mentioned. It is, of course, important to look at education for young people in a custodial setting, but does he agree that it is also important to consider the link between attendance at education and rehabilitation for those who have received non-custodial disposals, and will he ensure that his proposals make that link clear?
Secondly, in relation to advocacy on behalf of young people within the youth justice system, the Secretary of State will recognise that, with a smaller number of young people going through the system, it is more and more difficult to maintain a specialist advocacy profession and to ensure that advocates are properly rewarded for the very specific skills they need to develop. Will he look at the fee structure for advocates and ensure that we continue to encourage the right balance of skills, attention to conferences and that they get to know the client, which is particularly important for young people in the youth justice system?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his expertise in this area. He is right to mention the role that the education system plays, and not just for those in custody. There is more to do in respect of education for young people in custody. Too many of them spent time in their cells during the pandemic, and not outside their cells getting skills. We are looking at reforming referral orders and, whereas we previously had just volunteer panels keeping up to date with these young people in communities, we are looking a bit closer at the role of the judge and professionals in those referrals to ensure that education is taking place and that we have a more multidisciplinary approach in respect of the outcomes for those young people. I thank him for mentioning special advocacy and I assure him that the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley, is looking closely at this and chairing a group to look at the issues.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
I welcome the White Paper. My right hon. Friend has acknowledged that 80% of prolific offenders first offend as children and that two thirds of children reoffend within a year after being released from custody, so does he agree that early and fast intervention is crucial to cut crime? Can he please also outline what specific youth provision, including mental health help, is available to young people in my constituency of Wolverhampton West to deal with this issue?
Mr Lammy
I will look specifically at my hon. Friend’s constituency. It should be the case that turnaround and diversion work can make a difference, and I hope it is making a difference in his patch. I met the previous Health Secretary to discuss these issues, and I look forward to taking them up with the new Health Secretary in the coming days.
Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
I thank the Lord Chancellor for his statement. The Justice Committee heard that, as of February 2026, there were only 412 young people in custody, of whom about 44% were on remand, so when he says, with a great flourish, that he intends to reduce the number by 25%, he is talking about reducing a very small number—about 185—down to about 135. That is a very small number of individuals. Rather than making a huge effort, as he appears to be doing, to bring about this very small reduction, his efforts would be better spent on improving education and training in the youth custody system.
Mr Lammy
I say very gently to the hon. Gentleman that we can do both. We can improve education in our youth custody system—I entirely accept that there is more to do, particularly coming out of covid and particularly because of chronic under-investment by his party—but I encourage him to think a bit harder about the remand population. There is, of course, tremendous churn among the 400 young people who are currently in custody, and therefore we are not talking about a sliver of 25%, adding up to 135. That is not the case. It is significantly more than that, because over the course of a year, it gets into the thousands of young people. [Interruption.] He shakes his head, but that is basic maths.
Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the White Paper and put on record my thanks both to my right hon. Friend and to the Minister for youth justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards), for their work on this issue. One of the most heartbreaking things I have to do as a Member of Parliament is meet families and young people who have been failed by the system after those young people have taken actions that have caused disturbance for their families and the wider community. Accountability matters, but one of the crushing realities I have learned as an MP is that state failure plays a large part in criminality and the lack of options for young people. Can my right hon. Friend reassure me that youth intervention courts and other measures will begin to address not just criminality and the lack of accountability, but the lack of opportunity in training, caring, support, education and—particularly in my patch—apprenticeships, so that we divert people from prison in the first place and those in custody have opportunities when they come out?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to my hon. Friend, and of course I know his city of Peterborough very well. Peterborough has a vibrant third sector, and we have to get it involved in offering opportunities to young people in the community. There is no doubt that there are lots of skills and training opportunities in Peterborough and the whole of East Anglia, and we want young people to take them up.
Mr Lee Dillon (Newbury) (LD)
The White Paper contains many announcements that we, as Liberal Democrats, can support, so I gently ask the Deputy Prime Minister what evidence the Government have that the potential threat of a prison sentence will be an effective mechanism for compliance with a parenting order. Have the Government done an impact assessment, and how can he guarantee that the use of stricter punishment will not adversely affect the outcomes for the child involved?
Mr Lammy
I recognise why the hon. Gentleman has raised the extremely rare circumstance in which we would expect a judge to remand a parent in custody, but I think he will agree that the judge’s effectively having only a fine does need reform. That is why we have seen the number of parenting orders come down. It is important that we are there to support and encourage parents. I was hugely shocked when I sat recently in Highbury magistrates court, with a lot of young people facing quite serious offences, and there was no parent in sight.
Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and welcome the publication of the White Paper. Education has a vital role to play in reducing youth offending. There is a strong link between the offences committed by young people and educational disengagement earlier in their lives. What is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that the Department for Education’s work on persistent absence, exclusions, special educational needs and disabilities, and support for care-experienced young people is properly joined up to ensure that the Government have a focus on removing disengagement from education and reducing youth offending?
I welcome the work that the Secretary of State has asked the Children’s Commissioner to do on the quality of education in young offender institutions, but we already know that the quality of that education is abysmally poor and that action is urgently needed. Will he set a timescale for that work, so that we know when we will see the positive change that is so urgently needed?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for championing these issues. I hope that she sees an indication of what she seeks from the fact that two Ministers are working hand in hand and sitting on the interministerial group to direct this activity. There is more to do on education in the youth custody context and more to do on neurodiversity and its prevalence among this cohort of young people. We have to extend that work into communities and join up better with local child and adolescent mental health services as well.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
May I ask the Justice Secretary to explain a bit more about the intensive community placements to which he made brief reference? Can I put to him a particularly challenging scenario? Imagine that we have, say, a single parent—a single mum—who is very much afraid of her own adolescent child. She is aware that that child has been getting machetes and other violent accessories through internet-related delivery services. Let us imagine that she does what she is supposed to do, and what we would all think she ought to do, which is to report the child. Given that no offence has yet been committed by the child, what protection will be offered to her against potentially lethal violence from her own adolescent son?
Mr Lammy
The right hon. Member raises a very serious issue, and it lies at the heart of what we are discussing, because we are seeing young people, particularly this prolific cohort, becoming addicted—often addicted online and often groomed—and this is where the knives and, sadly, the terrorism come in. This is not a stand-alone policy; the work of Prevent, the police and social services matters. Here we have to do better to join up that work, and that is the signal we got following the Fulford inquiry into what happened in Southport. This is an attempt to move directly in that direction, recognising that we are seeing that addictive behaviour in a cohort of young people, and that they are often neurodiverse. We need to support parents to get this right, and an intensive supervision court can make a real difference and put a judge right at the centre of that ring.
Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab)
I truly welcome the statement and the White Paper. I am pleased to see in the statement a consultation to end lifelong disclosure to ensure that a child or young person’s poor choices in their early life do not define their future prospects as an adult. My right hon. Friend will be aware of the work I have done with FairChecks and Penelope Gibbs. I suggest that he considers how tougher accountability for parents or carers could go on to further affect the stability of families, especially when they feel they have been failed by earlier interventions or intervention services. Will my right hon. Friend agree to meet me to discuss this matter further?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to my hon. Friend not just for championing these issues from the Back Benches, but for the tremendous work she did while she was Children’s Minister. She will be pleased to hear that I met Penelope Gibbs just last week to discuss these very issues, and I am happy to meet my hon. Friend to look at what more we can do. This is an important consultation. A third of people on jobseeker’s allowance have an offence on their record. We have to do something to ensure that these things do not follow young people for the rest of their lives.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
Devolving youth justice powers is hardly a novel argument, and the White Paper itself acknowledges Wales’s action on the prevention of youth offending. Will the Secretary of State clarify whether Labour will finally listen to the people of Wales, who have elected a Government clear in their stance on devolution, and allow Wales full powers over justice?
Mr Lammy
I look forward to meeting the new team in Wales soon to discuss what more we can do together.
Gill German (Clwyd North) (Lab)
I am so pleased that early intervention and working with families is at the heart of this Government’s approach. As a former cabinet member for children’s services in Denbighshire, I know how important that is. Will my right hon. Friend set out how increased investment in programmes such as Turnaround will help children in Clwyd North before they enter the justice system?
Mr Lammy
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her question, and she knows from her experience how vital this is. It goes back to the point that I was making about the postcode lottery that we see across the country. We must even up standards and ensure a universal element to this, so that it is not just a pick and mix from local authority to local authority. That is why I am bringing powers back to the centre from the Youth Justice Board, as well as empowering it to drive change and innovation in local communities. That is why we must continue with that £46 million funding for Turnaround over the next three years.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
Let us be honest: tens of thousands of young people have been let down in this country by successive Governments. The right hon. Gentleman said that those in care are drawn “disproportionately” into the justice system, and all that talent—in my view, forgive me, God-given talent—is wasted. We talk about productivity in this country, but what about social productivity? What about social justice for those young people in care homes? It is completely wasted talent. People go from children’s homes, paid by the state, into prison, also paid by the state. Although I welcome some of what the Secretary of State has said, the fact is that the Government, and previous Governments, have lectured parents on how to parent, but the worst parents of all—look at the evidence; look at the data—are the Government themselves. Will the right hon. Gentleman work with the Secretary of State for Education to ensure that social workers in whatever part of this country keep an eye on what young people are doing at school, follow up when they are failing in their exams, and ensure that they leave school with qualifications, so that fewer of them end up in the criminal justice system?
Mr Lammy
The right hon. Gentleman and I have been friends for many years. I know that, like me, he has a deep Christian faith; one heard the power of redemption in his voice. I have long believed that the phrase “looked after” is one of the biggest oxymorons in the English language. Those kids are not sufficiently looked after, which is why I am so grateful that the Under-Secretary of State for Education is sitting beside me and doing such considerable work to turn this system around.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
My constituents want and deserve a justice system that is fit for purpose, delivers justice for victims, and tackles crime properly and effectively. That said, poverty and deprivation play an important role, so will the Secretary of State assure me that there is a proper and effective cross-Government approach? He mentioned the Department for Education, but the heart of this strategy goes further than that. We need a carrot and stick approach, not just words.
Mr Lammy
My hon. Friend is right, and he knows from his long experience that the role local government plays, alongside mental health services and education, is vital, and we must do much better to join this up. Whenever something goes badly wrong, it is usually because services have not been sufficiently joined up. That is why the new intensive supervision course in this area can make a real difference for young people.
Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)
In my 20 years’ experience in the courts, I have watched young people’s attitude change: there is no respect for the courts when they walk into the courtroom, and no fear of the police. Prison—or young offenders institution—sentences are no longer a deterrent, because they are simply not given out. We rarely see parents in court in support, for lots of different reasons: these children are neglected because their parents are battling alcohol or drugs, have financial issues or are out of work; or they are in a care system that is letting them down. I have visited care homes that I know let under-age youngsters go out at night and prostitute themselves, because nobody can keep an eye on them or control them. The care system fails those kids too. In places such as my constituency, I witness kids going out in gangs, subject to organised crime gangs. They need opportunities, they need apprenticeships—
Mr Speaker
Order. One of us is going to give way and it is not going to be me. [Interruption.] Please, sit down immediately. I need to get everyone’s questions in. If you want to make a statement, you can apply for an Adjournment debate. I am sure there are many other ways to do that, but you cannot just hog the whole of this debate.
Mr Lammy
This is one of the few occasions—the first ever, I think—when I have agreed with the hon. Lady, specifically about the context for these young people. She brings tremendous experience to the Chamber as a magistrate working in this area, and we can agree about children in care, the adult grooming that we are seeing and parents often not being present in the criminal justice system—we have to do more to support them. She will find a lot in the White Paper that perhaps Reform can adopt as its policy for the next election.
Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)
I thank the Justice Secretary for recognising the disproportionality that still exists within the criminal justice system for our black communities. Education and diversionary activities are absolutely essential to early intervention. After the anti-Muslim hate marches and anti-Muslim rhetoric that we saw at the so-called “Unite the Kingdom” march last weekend, how will the Government ensure that this White Paper provides our schools and youth services with the tools they need to prevent young people being radicalised and exploited by hateful, violent ideologies?
Mr Lammy
I know that my hon. Friend has a tremendous track record in championing issues of disproportionality in this House and beyond this place, and we are grateful for all the work that she does in that area. She is absolutely right that in this White Paper we are getting up to date and gripping the online harms facing our most vulnerable young people, who, in a care context, are living without sufficient parenting and are often groomed into terrorism and vile hate. We must do something about that. There are adults who we can gather together to make a difference in the lives of those young people.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
I appreciate what the Justice Secretary wants to achieve on reducing the rate of recidivism. He said in his statement that
“custody will always be necessary for the most dangerous offences”,
but went on to say that there will be
“an intention to reduce the use of short custodial sentences.”
Will he add some more detail around the length of sentence that he considers to be a “short” custodial sentence? In relation to knife crime, he will know that the minimum sentence for threatening with a knife can be as little as six months. Young people already do not have much fear about being searched for a knife or facing the criminal justice system. If they know that they will not receive a custodial sentence at the end of the process, what deterrent will there be to their carrying or using a knife?
Mr Lammy
Behind the hon. Gentleman’s question is a serious issue. The evidence suggests that short custodial sentences have poor outcomes, with recidivism of almost two thirds, whereas good community support has far better outcomes, with recidivism down by about a third. This is not about just leaving these young people to their own devices in the community. With tagging, specialist foster care and secure accommodation in communities, one can make a real difference and ensure that young people are monitored, which sometimes does not happen in big institutions.
Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)
It seems clear that the lack of early-years intervention, the lack of SEND support and the cuts to youth services in the past 14 years have let down a generation of our children. How will the youth intervention courts bring together those agencies to tackle the entrenched root causes, including poor mental health and disengagement with schools?
Mr Lammy
I should call to mind not just the work of the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, but the youth guarantee introduced by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and all her work to ensure that young people have opportunities wherever they live in the country. Turnaround is making a difference in bringing those services together. We are remodelling the Youth Justice Board, bringing more back to the centre so that we can ensure consistency across the country. At this time, expertise in these areas, particularly in online harm, does not always exist in communities, so we need to do better.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
On Friday, I was at Leeds Trinity University and met with a group of future teachers. They were talking about the exclusion-to-offending pipeline in our schools, and the challenges in meeting the needs of SEND children. Will the Secretary of State elaborate further on what tangible steps his Department will take with the DFE to get this right?
Mr Lammy
I am pleased that under the new Government, we have gripped the pupil referral unit scandal that was happening up and down the country. Too many young people were not even attending the pupil referral unit; they were effectively on the streets. When they did attend the pupil referral unit, they were not really being supported either therapeutically or educationally. That lottery is coming to an end under this Government. There is absolutely a pipeline into crime, and we have to be joined up for not just those young people in custody in the criminal justice system, but those young people who are often in a pipeline into custody if the pupil referral unit is not working as successfully as it should.
Kevin Bonavia (Stevenage) (Lab)
I recently hosted a screening of a short film called “The Orphan”, a dramatisation of a boy being caught up in county lines activity. It was directed by Leo Powell and supported by Stevenage borough council and across our local schools. I welcome the White Paper, particularly the new offence of child criminal exploitation and other early intervention measures, including the Turnaround programme. Will the Secretary of State say more about how that programme can help to tackle the disgrace of county lines?
Mr Lammy
At this point, it is important to mention the county lines programme, which sits with the Home Office. We in the Ministry of Justice work very closely with it, and it is making a difference. It is an absolute scandal that young people—as young as 10 or 11—have been travelling up and down the country ferrying drugs. No one knew where they were or what school they went to, and they had no support, but we are bringing that to an end. For the first time in a long time, we are seeing knife crime falling, and the number of young people falling into county lines is coming down.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. Is he concerned that by reducing the relative punishment for youth offending relative to adult offending, he may inadvertently be making the young people of Spelthorne and across the country more attractive to be recruited by county lines gangs? That would clearly be an unintended consequence of his actions, but will he think again if it turns out that that is the case?
Mr Lammy
I assure the hon. Gentleman that that will not be the case. The 412 young people in custody at the moment are there for public protection; they have to be there. Many of those young people are there because of very violent crimes, and some of them are serving very long sentences. Public protection must always come first, but this White Paper recognises the modern world—the world that we live in. It also recognises the vulnerability of the particular cohort we are talking about, which has changed vastly from 20 years ago. There is more that we can do with agencies to support these young people, particularly in communities, so that they are not criminalised, mixing and going on to the adult prison, and to reduce the overall numbers.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I am the Member for Harlow, if people were wondering.
May I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his really important statement and the non-partisan way in which he gave it? I welcome the fact that he is sitting next to the Minister responsible for children, families and wellbeing, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister). I have listened to Members across the Chamber, and it strikes me that to really make a difference to young people in my constituency and across the UK, we have to ensure that Government Departments do not work in silos. What work is the Secretary of State doing with the DFE, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that we do not let any young people in my constituency and beyond be left behind?
Mr Lammy
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for the work he does in Harlow. He knows that I know Harlow very well, because it happens to be the second home of Spurs supporters in the country. He will be pleased that just two weeks ago, I was sat discussing these issues with the Secretary of State for Education and my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington on the interministerial board that we have, which looks particularly at children in care and their outcomes, what more we can do, what more we can join up and how we can continue to make a difference for them. Over the five years that we have in this term in government, and it is five years—there has been some speculation in recent days that it might be less—I am determined that we are going to make a difference for looked-after children.
Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
I welcome these fairly comprehensive proposals, which I hope will seek to help young people who are either in the criminal fraternity or on the cusp of entering it. We all know that prevention is better than a cure—the old adage, “idle hands become a devil’s workshop” comes to mind. In Birmingham, where a third of our population are under the age of 20, we have lost a significant number of youth centres. In 2011, there were 59; that number has reduced to 16. What will the Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State do to address this, and will he join me in commending voluntary organisations such as Real Aston football club and the parents who are coming together to fill that vacuum and support our young children?
Mr Lammy
I hope the hon. Gentleman will recognise the work that Turnaround is doing in Birmingham to make a difference and create effective diversionary activity for these young people, so that they do not continue in a life of crime. He is absolutely right about the devastating cuts to youth centres that we saw across the country. It will take some time to rebuild them, but I know that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, working with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, has a strategy. It has set about that strategy, alongside the youth guarantee that also exists for the young people of Birmingham.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I very much welcome the Secretary of State’s statement—it would be churlish of anyone in this Chamber not to welcome the White Paper’s proposals, which have been put forward in a positive fashion. Can I perhaps help the Secretary of State in a gentle way? The Youth Justice Agency in Newtownards in my constituency is doing a phenomenal job of liaising with young offenders to help them understand the impact of crime on victims. The reoffending rates of those who have been attending the Youth Justice Agency in Newtownards are significantly reduced, so could the Secretary of State share what he intends to do with so much understanding and development, which is something that the whole United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland can benefit from? Newtownards is doing it; let us do it here as well.
Mr Lammy
On the issue of restorative justice, we are working with Jacob Dunne in particular to make a difference—he was involved in that punch situation. I hope to get to Northern Ireland particularly over the coming months, because I know that very good work in this area goes on there.
Youth Justice Reform and Delivery Plan
David Lammy Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr David Lammy)
Today I am publishing the Government youth justice White Paper, “Cutting Youth Crime. Changing Young Lives”, which sets out our plan to reform the youth justice system in England and Wales so that it intervenes earlier, responds more consistently, and does more to protect the public.
Over the past two decades, sustained efforts across the system have led to very significant reductions in the number of children entering the formal youth justice system and the number of children in custody. As a result, the system is now working with a much smaller but far more complex cohort, including many children who face multiple and overlapping vulnerabilities including substance misuse, children who are victims of exploitation, and in some cases children who present a serious risk of harm to others. However, the systems and structures designed for an earlier era have not kept pace. This limits our ability to prevent escalation, reduce reoffending, and keep victims and communities safe.
This Government are clear about the balance we must strike. Children are still developing and have a strong capacity to change, and the system must respond accordingly. But avoiding unnecessary criminalisation must never come at the expense of public protection. Where children’s behaviour causes harm, or where risks escalate, the system must act decisively. Firm, timely and proportionate intervention is essential both to protect the public and to support children to change course.
We will strengthen early intervention to prevent risky behaviour or offending from escalating. This includes continuing to invest in the turnaround programme, improving alignment with wider services that support children at risk, and taking action against the adults who exploit children and draw them into crime. We will also publish a strengthened national protocol to reduce the unnecessary criminalisation of children in care and care leavers, while ensuring that risks are identified and managed effectively.
Where offending does occur, children must receive the right response at the right time. We will reform the youth out-of-court-resolution framework to improve public confidence and ensure interventions address the drivers of offending. We will take a fundamental look at the function and purpose of criminal courts for children, pilot new problem-solving youth intervention courts, and develop specialist training requirements for lawyers representing children. We will ensure custodial remand is used appropriately and fairly, and modernise the sentencing framework to support public protection and rehabilitation. Alongside this, we will deliver proportionate reform of the childhood criminal records regime, so that people who have turned away from offending do not face lifelong consequences for childhood mistakes.
We will strengthen local youth justice services so they are equipped to manage risk and deliver effective interventions for today’s cohort. We will reform youth justice service oversight and funding arrangements, and we are reforming the role of the youth justice board to sharpen its focus on continuous improvement, so that children receive consistently high-quality support wherever they live. We will back innovation and modernisation through a new youth justice innovation fund, new devolution arrangements and better use of technology.
This Government are clear that, in some cases, custody is a necessary and appropriate response to protect the public. But we must ensure that children come out better than they went in. We are taking action to improve safety, safeguarding and education across the youth custodial estate, while setting a clear long-term direction away from large, outdated institutions, towards smaller, more rehabilitative settings that better support children to turn their lives around. We will set out further detail in a youth custody transformation plan in the autumn.
Taken together, these reforms represent a decisive shift for youth justice. A system that intervenes early to prevent escalation, provides firm and decisive community responses, and uses custody where necessary, is a system that will cut youth crime and change young lives.
The White Paper is being laid before Parliament today.
[HCWS31]