Draft Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 and the Terrorism Act 2000 (Port Examination Codes of Practice) Regulations 2025
Rebecca Paul Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. I congratulate the Minister on maintaining his role during what some have described as the purge of the Home Office. It is therefore appropriate to thank him for his remarks about the legislation, and pay tribute to his staying power.
Turning to the draft regulations, the periodic updating of codes of practice is a regular occurrence for Governments. With the codes last altered in 2023, it has been deemed necessary to provide further clarification. The regulations we are debating today appear to present proportionate clarification to the existing system, while maintaining the powers necessary to question individuals. As the Government have stated in their documentation, the changes should not alter the original intention of the legislation. Furthermore, steps appear to have been taken to ensure that the powers within the Acts remain usable under the new guidance. The response of the independent Office for Police Conduct illustrates the broad agreement that these powers will continue to be used appropriately by the authorities.
On the broader point, measures that ensure transparency and improve communication—for example, ensuring clear notification—should be welcomed, provided the powers remain effective. The steps on examinations appear proportionate. However, they will also make the process more effective and quicker. I recognise that the clarification relating to public order policing is somewhat limited. However, I note that the amendment to the code explains that the examples of changes provided are illustrative, not exhaustive. Given some of the recent debate around the relationship between protests and terrorism, I ask whether the Minister has had conversations with the police to ensure that those using this power have a sufficient understanding of the changes, so that officers can accurately identify those who may be involved in the instigation of acts of terrorism, and avoid incidents such as those in the past that have prompted these changes.
I am aware that many of the changes are in line with recommendations from the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation. On that point, I would like to ask the Minister about the changes to the code of practice concerning schedule 7 and Northern Ireland. Given the ongoing challenges with terrorism in Northern Ireland, the Minister’s code of practice set out the continuing use of the 2000 Act. However, that appears to contradict the recommendation of the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, who proposed abolishing the power under schedule 7 on the basis of its lack of use. It would therefore be helpful if the Minister could outline how he envisages the power being used in future, and whether it still has a role to play in stopping the heinous acts of terrorism that we unfortunately continue to see in Northern Ireland.
Stopping terrorism is a responsibility of the Government, which Members across the House take with the utmost seriousness. It is therefore right that we support measures that improve the system.
Oral Answers to Questions
Rebecca Paul Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)
The European Court of Human Rights has confirmed that at least 19 public bodies, including organisations across the policing, education and health sectors, are misrepresenting the law on single-sex spaces. That is a breach of the Equality Act 2010, as confirmed by the recent Supreme Court ruling. Has the Minister been told which bodies they are, and how can women and girls have any confidence in them if they are knowingly and deliberately breaking the law?
Bridget Phillipson
The results of the previous Government’s call for input showed that, although the law was being followed in the majority of cases, a small number of examples were identified that seemed to have misinterpreted how the single-sex exemptions of the Equality Act operate. As the hon. Lady will appreciate, it is for the independent regulator, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, to follow up on these issues through the appropriate processes. It is doing so in more detail and will work with organisations to put that right.
Oral Answers to Questions
Rebecca Paul Excerpts(10 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dame Nia Griffith
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for her work in this field, including on the Council of Europe. I can assure her that we will deliver on our manifesto commitment to bring forward a full trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices, protecting LGBT+ people from abuse. We are committed to listening to all viewpoints and concerns with respect, and to engaging with a wide range of stakeholders, organisations and all LGBT+ communities. I was very pleased to join her at the event she mentioned. We will engage further with parliamentarians and stakeholders in the new year.
Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)
The previous Government committed to a parent-first approach to guidance. As part of the Government’s review of the statutory relationships, sex and health education guidance, will the Minister make it clear that parents should be involved in decisions that affect their children, including if their children are gender-questioning?