National Policing Response to Antisemitism
Sarah Jones Excerpts(1 week, 6 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
Recent attacks on our Jewish communities are completely unacceptable. An attack on our Jewish community is an attack on us all, and we must take the safety of our Jewish community very seriously. Jewish people must feel safe and Government will strain every sinew to ensure that is the case.
The rise in antisemitism is a scourge on our society. In the year to March 2025, there were 2,873 religious hate crimes against Jewish people—106 per 10,000 of population—the highest proportion for any group by some distance. In the Community Security Trust’s recent antisemitic incidents report, for the first time ever, the CST recorded over 200 cases of anti-Jewish hate in every calendar month in 2025. Shockingly, the CST also found that the terror attacks in Heaton Park and Bondi Beach triggered immediate spikes in antisemitism, ranging from face-to-face taunting to antisemitic social media posts. The Government have heard loud and clear the experiences of Jewish people in our communities in recent weeks and months.
While tackling this hatred requires a whole of Government response and a whole of society response, the police have an important role to play. This Government have already invested an additional £25 million into policing patrols and protective security to support Jewish communities.
I can also confirm today that we are providing additional funding of £251.1 million for the police to tackle antisemitism in our communities over the next three years. Alongside the investment in protective security, this brings total funding for protecting Jewish communities to £309.5 million.
This will fund:
a recognisable, permanent policing presence in key Jewish communities across the country;
a national surge capacity to ensure all Jewish communities, wherever they live, can be protected;
stronger national co-ordination and specialised capabilities to deliver a consistent approach, with specified funding to deliver antisemitism training for all police officers in England and Wales and a centralised online hate crime investigations hub; and
additional protective security and other capabilities to be deployed by Counter Terrorism Policing, in recognition of the threat from state actors and proxies to Jewish communities.
The majority of British Jews in England and Wales live in London, which has the highest concentration of synagogues and Jewish schools in the country, and this community has faced significant threat in recent months. We are therefore providing £85.8 million to the Metropolitan Police Service to fund around 300 officers to support increased policing in Jewish communities. They will increase specialised capabilities, strengthen intelligence, investigative and co-ordination functions, all of which will allow for better operational deployment in response to specific threats. This is in addition to the £18 million uplift the Government announced in April.
A further £65.9 million will go to forces outside of London with a significant Jewish population to provide a permanent presence in Jewish communities and ensure they are equipped to provide the communities with the support they need. Of this funding, £22.5 million will be provided to Greater Manchester Police to sustain the increase in policing presence in response to the tragic attack in Heaton Park last year. The £43.4 million will be distributed across seven other forces with significant Jewish communities: Hertfordshire, Essex, Northumbria, Sussex, Thames Valley, West Midlands and West Yorkshire.
In recognition of the need to ensure consistency of policing responses to antisemitism across England and Wales, £40.8 million will be provided to support national policing co-ordination and capabilities. Jewish people and communities should feel confident that antisemitic crimes will face the full force of the law wherever they live. We will fund antisemitism training for officers in England and Wales and ensure surge resources are available to all forces to protect Jewish communities, during events or times of increased threat. This is in addition to the £2 million uplift the Government announced in April.
Finally, Counter Terrorism Policing will receive a further £58.6 million over the three-year period to provide further security to vulnerable communities, places and people.
Our Jewish community is an integral part of this country. To be antisemitic is to be anti-British. We will continue to do everything in our power to protect Jewish people, communities and places, and to bring those who seek to cause them harm to justice. This additional funding aims to establish a sustained police presence in Jewish communities, provide a national response to the threat of antisemitism, and most importantly reassure Jewish communities across the country at a time of great fear and concern.
[HCWS246]
Independent Review of Disclosure and Fraud Offences: Government Response to Part One
Sarah Jones Excerpts(1 week, 6 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
Today the Government publishes “Modernising the Criminal Disclosure Regime”, setting out our response to recommendations made by the independent review of disclosure and fraud offences and the independent review of the criminal courts on the operation of the criminal disclosure regime.
We are grateful to Jonathan Fisher KC for his thorough independent review of disclosure and fraud offences which has been published in two parts. This Government response refers to part one of his independent review: “Disclosure in the Digital Age”. The Government response to part two on fraud offences will be published in due course.
Disclosure is a statutory regime that applies to all criminal proceedings in England and Wales and is central to the right to a fair trial. It governs how material gathered in criminal investigations is recorded, reviewed, retained and shared, ensuring that relevant material capable of assisting the defence or undermining the prosecution is identified and disclosed.
Part one of this review reflects extensive engagement across the system and offers a practical package to raise standards, embracing appropriate technology, strengthening case management with an intensive disclosure regime for the most complex cases, and consolidating guidance and learning so that good practice is embedded consistently.
We also thank Sir Brian Leveson for his work on the independent review of the criminal courts, which included proposals related to disclosure, set out in chapter 5 of part 2 of his independent review. Our response considers Sir Brian Leveson’s proposals, alongside Jonathan Fisher KC’s proposals, which have enabled the Government to evaluate and implement disclosure reform collectively, drawing on the findings of both reviews. The Government’s full response to Sir Brian’s independent review of the criminal courts will be published separately in due course.
The Government response to these recommendations sets out how we will improve the disclosure regime while preserving its core legal safeguards. In summary, it supports the responsible and transparent use of advanced technology to manage large volumes of material more efficiently; strengthens learning, training and consistency across law enforcement and prosecutors; and considers improved court processes, including exploring a pilot of the proposed intensive disclosure regime to support earlier, more focused engagement between the prosecution and defence in the most serious and complex cases.
Taken together, these measures are designed to reduce unnecessary administrative burden on police and prosecutors, improve the speed and accuracy of disclosure, support victims, and uphold the right to a fair trial. This will deliver a disclosure regime that is transparent, modern and fit for the future.
This response has been developed jointly with the Ministry of Justice, owners of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 and its code of practice, and the Attorney General’s Office, which owns the Attorney General’s guidelines on disclosure. I am very grateful to the Solicitor General, the Courts Minister and officials across all three Departments for their close collaboration in producing a coherent, system-wide response.
The response is being presented to Parliament today as a Command Paper (CP 1601) and will be available on gov.uk.
[HCWS241]
Oral Answers to Questions
Sarah Jones Excerpts(2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
May I associate myself and my colleagues with your remarks about Ann Widdecombe, Mr Speaker? Ann was a Minister when I was doing my politics A-level, and she has been a firm part of our political life for the past three decades. May she rest in peace.
We are rolling out domestic abuse protection orders across England and Wales, and have trebled the number of forces with domestic abuse specialists in control rooms under Raneem’s law. We have established the national centre for violence against women and girls and public protection to transform the response to VAWG.
Lorraine Beavers
Kiena Dawes was pushed into taking her own life by her abusive partner. Before she died, she said that he had killed her. With domestic abuse-related suicides on the rise and women in abusive relationships being more likely to take their own life than to be killed by their abuser, will the Minister commit to the Home Office working with victims and campaigners to ensure that the law fully reflects the role that domestic abuse plays in the deaths of people like Kiena?
Sarah Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for raising such an important issue, and the answer, of course, is yes. We are funding research with all police forces to better capture information and inform our response. The Law Commission is reviewing homicide law, including the use of manslaughter offences where abuse may have driven someone to suicide. The former Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), was working hard on this issue, and I know that the new Minister will be too.
Jonathan Davies
One in five people experience domestic violence in their lifetime—around one in four women, and one in six or seven men—but it is thought that only 20% of it is reported. It is also thought that there is significant under-reporting of the domestic violence experienced by men, due to social stigma. What steps is the Department taking to understand the scale of the problem and to drive action?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend is right to raise this issue. Too many victims, including men, do not feel able to report domestic abuse, and we must change that. We recognise that male victims face additional barriers, and that has been set out in a dedicated explanatory note alongside the VAWG strategy. The Home Office funds the Men’s Advice Line to help male victims access support.
Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)
Intimate image abuse is increasingly being used to threaten, control and exploit women and girls after relationships break down, yet the police have no power to require the deletion of those images if they were obtained consensually. What steps is the Minister taking to close that gap and better protect victims?
Sarah Jones
The hon. Lady is right to raise that issue, and we are working hard on it. As she knows, a huge amount of work is going on with the Crime and Policing Act 2026, which has just been passed, and the violence against women and girls strategy. We will continue to do everything we can.
John Milne (Horsham) (LD)
One of my Horsham constituents, a victim of abuse, has seen her abuser let off with a suspended sentence after the case took too long to go to trial. She now has to live with a debilitating illness caused by her abuse, while her abuser gets to carry on with his life. Court delays are bad in any case, but for victims of abuse, they can be an extra hardship. Does the Minister think that we need to think of some special provision for such cases?
Sarah Jones
The hon. Gentleman is right to raise the issue of court delays. We have a whole strategy, led through the Ministry of Justice, to ensure that we speed up those court cases. He is right to highlight the particular impact for abuse cases. We are ramping up the support that we give to victims and making sure that we are helping people and trying to give them information about what is happening, even when there are delays. We will listen carefully to the points he raises.
Dr Zubir Ahmed (Glasgow South West) (Lab)
Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
The figure in the question represents the maximum number of animals expected to be used under licences granted in early 2026 for up to five years for the purpose of benefiting humans, animals or the environment. Animal use may only be authorised where no suitable alternative exists. The Government remain committed to accelerating the replacement of animals in science wherever possible.
Lee Pitcher
The statistics published just last week show that 2.45 million scientific procedures involving animals were carried out in Great Britain in 2025. That represents a decrease of just 4% compared with 2024, but a 9% increase in experiments on dogs, and a 13% increase on those using monkeys. Does the Minister agree that greater urgency is needed to accelerate the phase-out of animal testing, and will she consider the merits of a clear, long-term plan, as set out in Herbie’s law?
Sarah Jones
I agree that greater urgency is needed to accelerate the phase-out of animal testing, and I welcome the strategy that the Government published, which was backed by £75 million. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology has committed to publishing clear timelines for specific actions, and I look forward to seeing them.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
I take this opportunity to pay tribute to PC Jess Turnbull, who died in the line of duty aged just 18. I attended her funeral, along with other colleagues, on Friday. It is a reminder, if any were needed, of the price that we ask of our police officers. This Government are providing an extra £2.4 million to deliver the package of wellbeing measures set out in the police reform White Paper. That includes enhanced trauma support, improved occupational health provision, and stronger leadership on wellbeing. Working with police partners, we will ensure that officers and staff can access the timely, effective support that is vital for our police workforce.
Edward Morello
A police officer constituent of mine reported a senior colleague for sexual assault. Separately, she was domestically abused and raped by a partner. Her domestic abuser was arrested, with bail conditions preventing contact, but in her trauma-induced state she continued to instigate contact and was subjected to a police misconduct proceeding. Despite experiencing severe trauma, including a suicide attempt, evidence about her mental health and welfare was not considered. She will never be a police officer again. What steps will the Minister take to ensure police forces adopt genuinely trauma-informed misconduct processes for officers who are victims of sexual assault, rape and domestic abuse?
Sarah Jones
I am sorry to hear about the situation of the hon. Gentleman’s constituent, and I would be happy to talk to him about the case in more detail so that we can learn the lessons. We are looking at what happens during misconduct cases, and at the support that is given to officers. There is also a particular issue around the domestic abuse that is suffered by police officers, and we are trying to ensure, by working with women’s organisations and others, that we get our response right.
Jonathan Hinder (Pendle and Clitheroe) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her answer to my written question confirming that the Home Office does not collect data on post-traumatic stress disorder in police officers. Does she agree that either the Home Office or police forces need to have that data, so that we can understand the scale of the problem and support our officers accordingly?
Sarah Jones
I agree that we need to be doing all that we can to record data. We are looking at data on suicide, for instance, as my hon. Friend knows, and ensuring that we have the right information there. We are expanding our psychological risk assessments from 50,000 to 150,000, which will hopefully also give us more information that we can use. I stand with my hon. Friend in wanting to support our officers in any way we can.
Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)
Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
In England and Wales, there were 145,550 full-time equivalent police officers as of September 2025 and 146,868 police officers as of September 2024. This Government are focused on putting officers where the public expect to see them: back on the frontline, keeping our communities safe. We have already delivered more than 3,100 additional police officers and police community support officers into neighbourhood roles.
Sir John Whittingdale
The Minister has confirmed that under this Government the number of police officers has fallen. It is now proposed that in Essex they will become part of a regional force that will be more remote and less accountable to the people that they serve. How does that increase public confidence in policing?
Sarah Jones
As part of our measures to tackle antisemitism, this morning we have announced funding for an additional 500 police officers in areas where we need them most, which I am sure that Members across the House will welcome. The right hon. Gentleman asks about forces. As he will know, a review is currently being undertaken by Lord Bernard Hogan-Howe, who is looking at both local policing units and regional-level units, as well as the national police service, which we will be introducing.
Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
I welcome the 48 new neighbourhood officers and policy community support officers who have joined Cleveland police in the last year, but I want to see an overhaul of the national police funding formula to support the Cleveland area. The Policing Minister has committed to do that, but can she clarify the timeline for when we will see the formula changed and more officers back on our streets again?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend is right that the funding formula is completely outdated. It was not updated by the previous Government, and it is almost decades old. We are going to review it, and we are working on that now as part of the reform programme. As soon as we have an announcement, we will bring it forward.
Matt Vickers (Stockton West) (Con)
Under the last Government, police numbers reached a record high. Labour promised to increase police numbers, but instead we have seen them fall. As the Minister was forced to confirm, they are down 1,318 in the last year. Is the Minister doing anything to protect the number of officers in response policing so that when people ring 999 in their hour of need, they are not left waiting?
Sarah Jones
As the shadow Minister knows—and as we replay every question time—the previous Government cut the number of police officers by 20,000. They then recruited 20,000 and put 12,000 of them behind desks, which is not where the public want them to be. We have put 1,300 officers back on to our streets. By the end of this Parliament we will put 13,000 of them back on to our streets. Let me end with a statistic: under the last two years of the previous Government, shop theft rose by 60%, and it has just fallen by 1%. We are turning the tide on the terrible crime that the previous Government oversaw.
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
I understand that my hon. Friend went door to door talking to people about these issues; I appreciate his efforts in doing that. Our Crime and Policing Act 2026 is delivering new and enhanced powers to tackle antisocial behaviour. Respect orders will bear down on relentless ASB offenders, and we have ensured that every police force in England and Wales has a dedicated ASB lead and a local action plan to crack down on these thugs.
James Asser (West Ham and Beckton) (Lab)
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Operation Reckoning is delivering the Met’s largest ever enforcement response to phone theft. In the 12 months to May, phone theft in London fell by 18% on the previous year, and it pretty much halved in the west end, where we see most of that occur. He is right that phone companies need to do more. If phone theft does not continue to fall, we will take further action.
Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)
The Culture Secretary has quit X and removed her Department from the platform, citing its descent into misinformation and abuse. Does the Home Secretary agree with her decision? What is the Home Office doing about the abuse and misinformation on X? Will the Home Office be leaving, too?
Sarah Jones
I think that everyone in this place is concerned about the rise of hatred and division online, not just on X but on other platforms. As a Government, led by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and other colleagues, we are looking at how we crack down on that and at how we create a society in which we try to unite people and not divide them. Members in this place have a strong role to play in that.
Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend is right: a non-judgmental, victim-led approach is exactly what we need and that is what we are trying to drive through our response. We have established the National Centre for Violence Against Women and Girls to improve the police response to violence against women and girls, and the new trauma-informed first-line public protection programme is piloting in five forces this summer, equipping frontline officers with the skills to manage investigations and support victims.
Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)
Jonathan Hinder (Pendle and Clitheroe) (Lab)
Sarah Jones
As my hon. Friend knows, the chief executive is no longer in post. We are clear that the pace of change is not fast enough. We have made it clear in the police reform White Paper that we will bring forward any reforms necessary to ensure that the interests of rank and file officers are properly, effectively and robustly represented. It is important to say that there are good members of the Police Federation who are working across the country and doing brilliant work, including those who I met in Newcastle. We need to tread carefully, but he is right to raise this issue.
Saqib Bhatti (Meriden and Solihull East) (Con)
My constituents in Meriden and Solihull East are greatly concerned about abuse of the European convention on human rights, including article 8. They deem cases like that of the Albanian criminal who was not deported because his son would not eat foreign chicken nuggets to be an insult. The Home Office’s own analysis shows that abuse of the ECHR costs about £4.9 billion. I know that the Home Secretary wants to reform the ECHR, but does she accept that if this runs out of road, Britain should be allowed to forge its own way on human rights law, including by leaving the ECHR?
David Smith (North Northumberland) (Lab)
Two months ago my constituent, farmer Ian McKie, was subjected to a burglary in which his workshop was broken into and a quad bike was stolen. According to Mr McKie, such crime is happening more frequently and boldly in North Northumberland. What reassurance can the Minister give me about rural crime and the seriousness with which the Government are taking it?
Sarah Jones
I am sorry to hear that my hon. Friend’s constituent has been a victim of crime. We are funding the rural crime unit and we are putting neighbourhood police back into every neighbourhood, including rural areas, so that every single person, wherever they live, will have a named, contactable officer who they can get in touch with. We are also doing what we can in legislation to stop this kind of crime, and I am happy to speak to my hon. Friend about that.
Pete Wishart (Perth and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
There were truly shocking and appalling scenes in Glasgow last week, fuelled by misinformation about the accommodation of asylum seekers. People were harassed in their own homes and roads were blocked. When will the Government finally take on the spread of misinformation, and will they finally recognise the real threat posed by the right wing, which is ready to take advantage and exploit these situations?
Defibrillators in Police Vehicles
Sarah Jones Excerpts(2 weeks, 5 days ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I congratulate the hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling) on securing this important debate. I am grateful to him for doing so, and to other Members for contributing. I know that if this had been a wider debate, other Members would probably have wanted to speak in it—several Members feel very strongly about this issue.
The hon. Member for Torbay talked at length about the Our Jay Foundation and about the death of Jamie Rees, or Jay, who died when he was just 18. I have had the privilege of meeting Jamie’s mum, stepdad and godmother on two occasions. I discussed what they are doing and trying to achieve, and what the Home Office can perhaps do. For someone to be able to experience the death of their child and put it to positive use, in order to try to get something positive out of their child’s death, is enormously powerful and very brave. Indeed, not many of us would be capable of doing that if we lost a child. I join the hon. Member in praising Jamie’s family for what they are doing; it is enormously powerful and enormously impactful.
As the hon. Member said, the foundation has been raising money; I think it has raised about £800,000 to fund defibrillators and it has now funded hundreds of them. It also has an evidence base, which was shared with me, showing the number of lives that have been saved as a result of those defibrillators. There is a conversation to be had here, and it is one that we are actively having.
Last year, the Home Office funded 750 defibrillators that we gave to police—that happened before I became the Minister, so I cannot claim any credit for it at all. There was no stipulation on where the defibrillators were placed. Some will be in police vehicles and some, I suspect, will be in police buildings, but we provided those 750 defibrillators. I know my predecessor as the Minister for Policing and Crime, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham (Dame Diana Johnson), met representatives of the Our Jay Foundation as well and was very moved by them. Providing those defibrillators was a step in the right direction.
As I understand it—I will write to the hon. Member for Torbay if my statistics are wrong—27% of police vehicles now have defibrillators. He cited a figure of 10%, so I will check that and write to him if I am wrong, but I think it a slightly higher proportion than that.
We are having a conversation with police. If there is a debate here—and I have talked to the foundation about this—it is because there is a slight nervousness from some parts of the police about the role of policing versus the role of other emergency services. There are also questions about the ability to train police in many different aspects of first aid, and where their role ends and that of the ambulance begins.
Steve Darling
I thank the Minister for allowing me to quiz her further. Can she expand on that point? Is the pushback from the National Police Chiefs’ Council, from lower levels within policing or from Government Ministers? Anyone can use a defibrillator, because it walks them through it. This is not about additional training on how to use defibrillators; it is about the availability of defibrillators where there is a crisis. Defibrillators need to be in the right place at the right time, and I cannot think of a better place than the boot of a police car.
Sarah Jones
It is not a comprehensive view across policing; there is a general concern about the role of policing versus other emergency services. We often have a wider debate within policing about the huge quantity of time that is spent responding to mental health issues, when other services should be doing that, so there is a general nervousness about that.
I am in the process of writing to police forces and having a conversation with them, so that we can answer the hon. Gentleman’s point and find out whether there is a concern when it comes to defibrillators. The Our Jay Foundation would say that, where it has engaged with police forces and given them defibrillators, that has been welcomed and it is useful. I want to find out what the concerns are, if they exist, and I am in the process of doing that.
I have said to the Our Jay Foundation—and I also say it to the hon. Member for Torbay and others here today—that of course we want every piece of first-aid equipment that could possibly save lives to be as widely available as possible. In police cars there are already first aid kits, and a lot of police officers carry tourniquets. It is not uncommon for police to conduct CPR on people relatively regularly; that has to be their job when they arrive before other emergency services.
The step to then funding defibs—since we are talking about the funding question here—and putting them into all response cars or a proportion of response cars is the next stage we will look at. There are two stages. The first is talking to police to see what they think. As we have already given the police 750 defibs, it would be interesting to understand what they have been using them for.
Moving on to the next stage, we are going through a very significant period of reform, setting up a national police service. That service will procure the kit we need for the whole of policing, so it presents a really good opportunity to consider what should be standard in all our police vehicles, response cars and uniforms, and to have a conversation with the police. We are going to have a national police service and make decisions nationally about what we need across the police service, and whether we want to use some of our funding to put defibs into all police cars.
Steve Darling
I know timescales are tricky, but can the Minister provide some rough timescales on the different steps? I understand that the new national police force and procurement are a bit more distant, but can she tell us what timescales she is working to, at least on the first steps she alluded to?
Sarah Jones
We will engage with policing over the next few months, so that will be done relatively quickly, and we will see what people come back with.
The national police service is not that far away. We will hopefully introduce legislation in September to set it up, and there are things that we will be thinking about, doing and working towards before we set up the establishment itself, to bring together aspects of the organisations that will become part of it. For example, BlueLight Commercial, which does a lot of the procurement now, will become part of the national police service. This is an opportunity for us to ask collectively what a good police car looks like and what kind of car we need, and to have a conversation about whether we put defibs into all police cars. There is obviously a cost, and if that money is spent on defibs it will not be spent on something else, so I want us to make the decision in the right way.
I suspect the hon. Gentleman will come back to me even if I do not do this, but I am happy to let him and the APPG know how our conversations go with policing and how we progress this work. I cannot promise that we will do what he and the Our Jay Foundation want, but I can promise that we are actively looking at it. We have already invested in defibs for policing. The Our Jay Foundation is building an evidence base from what it is doing with police forces, and we will take that very seriously.
Of course, we want to do everything we can to save lives. The hon. Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) talked about bleed kits, and we are looking at those. There are campaigning organisations, also run by people who have sadly lost loved ones, putting bleed kits into police cars and many other public places, and those are also very useful when it comes to saving lives. We have decisions to make and I am actively looking at these things. I am very happy to keep talking to the hon. Member for Torbay as we progress.
Question put and agreed to.
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Temporary Class Drug) Order 2026
Sarah Jones Excerpts(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Temporary Class Drug) Order 2026 (S.I., 2026, No. 613).
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. The statutory instrument, which was laid before Parliament on 10 June, places controls on a new, highly lethal class of drug. Orphines are a type of synthetic opioid, which emerged in force in the UK drugs market last spring. In that time, they have been involved in at least 22 deaths, 14 of which were between December and March. Between 2024 and April 2026, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime received 206 reports from multiple countries of drug samples containing orphine compounds.
The report of 30 April from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, for which I am very grateful, stated that,
“the risk to the population from these recently emerging compounds is sufficiently great that urgent steps are required to protect public health.”
We have taken those urgent steps. Less than six weeks after the report was published, we enacted a temporary class drug order—the first in a decade—to control seven orphines. I will spare Committee members the complex chemical names, but they are all set out in the order and the explanatory memorandum. I confirm that three of the seven have been involved in UK deaths, and the European Union drugs agency has notified that the other four are present in the EU drugs market.
The TCDO makes it a specific offence to produce, supply or offer to supply those seven orphines; to possess them with an intent to supply; and to import or export them. Penalties are the same as for class B drugs—namely, maximum sentences of 14 years in prison. The TCDO also provides that the substances should be treated as if they were listed in schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001. Schedule 1 covers substances with no known medical uses, as is the case here, and requires anyone who needs to make legitimate use of them—for example, for research—to obtain a Home Office licence.
Unusually, the statutory instrument comes under the made affirmative procedure, by which it comes into force but then requires the active assent of both Houses—in this case, by next Friday. That reflects the fact that we are expanding the scope of the criminal law, but there is a pressing danger to public safety. Whatever views hon. Members may have about the harms of some drugs, I hope we can all agree that these drugs are a clear and present danger that must be quickly controlled.
We have also accepted the recommendation of the advisory council to make these substances—and some broader generic definitions of orphines—class A drugs. That is not for today. We will introduce draft legislation as soon as possible, as the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee has urged us to do, and a different Committee from this one will have the chance to debate it. I cannot give a precise timetable for that, but I assure the Committee that we are mindful of the fact that the TCDO lasts for just one year. The statutory instrument is vital to keep our communities safe, and I commend it to the Committee.
Sarah Jones
I thank hon. Members for their points and for welcoming the changes that we are making.
As I explained, we have accepted that orphines should be classed as class A, but there is a different parliamentary process through which we will make them class A. We will do that as quickly as possible. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Stockton West, asked when it will happen. I cannot give a specific date, but two things are true. First, we will do it as soon as possible, and secondly, the order lasts for only a year, so we will have to do it within that time anyway. We will ensure that we do it well within that time. It is the right thing to do, and we have accepted what the ACMD has suggested.
When we introduce the legislation to make orphines class A, we can use a more generic definition. The shadow Minister made a point about different forms of these substances, and the generic definition will help us to cover more substances as they get made. He is right to say that as we pick up and act on certain new synthetic opioids, new ones pop up along the way.
The hon. Member for Harrow East asked where the drugs are coming from and how they are presenting themselves. There is a risk of them being made in this country and coming from abroad, but they are mainly coming from abroad. I think there have been two cases where nitazenes—similar substances—have been found being produced in Scotland. I will write to the hon. Gentleman if I have the wrong drug type, but there are two cases where production has been found in Scotland. Sadly, Scotland has much higher levels of deaths than we do with the problems that it has.
The National Crime Agency, which would happily do a wider briefing on this issue, is very good at identifying new and emerging drugs and keeping them at bay. It is much harder to manage and reduce problems with the more traditional drugs that are coming in extreme quantities, although the NCA does good work in that space, too. It has been good thus far, and perhaps better than other countries, including America, which has seen a huge increase in fentanyl. We have not quite seen that, but we are seeing significant numbers and deaths across the country. Through the National Crime Agency, we will ensure that we are keeping our borders as safe as we possibly can to stop drugs coming in while keeping on top of production.
The hon. Member for Harrow East also asked how the police are recognising these drugs. We have a partnership across Five Eyes in particular, and we have relationships with other countries. We are introducing early warning systems through which we tell the police when drugs are emerging either across the EU or in some of our partner countries, such as Australia and the US. We tell them what these things physically look like so that they know what to look out for and what to expect. We have those partnerships under way.
This is a constant battle, as all Members know, and the order will make a helpful difference as we work quickly towards making orphines a class A drug.
Question put and agreed to.
Police Leadership Commission Report
Sarah Jones Excerpts(3 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
I refer hon. Members to the oral statement I will make to the House today, 6 July, on the publication of the police leadership commission report.
The report is available at: www.college.police.uk/police-leadership-commission
[HCWS187]
Police Leadership Commission Report
Sarah Jones Excerpts(3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on leadership in policing.
The police perform a unique and vital role in our society. They enforce our laws, tackle those who break them, and keep the public safe. These are awesome responsibilities. The officers and staff who uphold them every day, at all levels, are owed our respect, admiration and thanks. At the same time, if forces are to serve their communities effectively, they must secure and retain the trust of those communities. But in recent years, that trust has come under strain. Creaking systems, outdated structures and a lack of central grip from previous Governments have meant that the police have struggled to consistently hit the high levels of performance that we rightly expect of them.
Things have to change. That is why earlier this year, the Home Secretary announced the most significant police reforms in 200 years. Our plans will ensure that the right policing happens in the right place, building on the progress that we have already made on restoring neighbourhood policing and driving down serious threats such as knife crime, and creating a new model in which local policing protects our communities and national policing protects us all.
The reform programme provides us with a generational opportunity to address the long-standing challenges that have hampered the police’s ability to provide a consistently world-class service to the public. One such challenge centres on the question of how we ensure that our forces have the strong, effective leadership that they need to meet the significant demands that are placed on them. It is a question that is rightly the subject of considerable parliamentary and public scrutiny, especially when things go wrong, as they have in the recent past.
Equally, I want to emphasise that there are a great many outstanding officers and staff across the police service, including those in the highest ranks. When failings occur and the public are let down, they feel it more keenly than anyone. The reality is that leadership is about more than just individuals. It is about culture and standards, and about giving every member of the police workforce the support and skills that they need to flourish and become leaders themselves.
We are not the first Government to grapple with this topic. Various tweaks have been made to the system over the years, yet the same concerns keep arising, whether they relate to culture, conduct or the retention and promotion of talent. As we roll out our reform programme, this is clearly an issue requiring close examination. That examination has now taken place in the form of an independent review commissioned by the Home Secretary last year.
The police leadership commission was established last October and is co-chaired by two former Members of this House with extensive knowledge of policing: my noble Friend Lord Blunkett and the noble Lord Herbert of South Downs. Together with the other members of the commission, they have carried out the most significant review of police leadership in recent times. Its findings and recommendations are published today. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Lord Blunkett and Lord Herbert for the care and skill with which they have approached their task. I am grateful, too, to the other commission members, and all who have participated. There has been a particular emphasis on giving voice to those on the frontline, which is welcome and essential.
The review’s report sets out a comprehensive and, in places, candid assessment of police leadership in England and Wales. While the commission found examples of excellent leadership and delivery, it also identified concerns around consistency, capability and culture, and the impact that shortcomings in those areas have on the service received by the public. To quote from the report,
“the policing profession has not consistently had the excellent leadership it needs”.
It was also clear that those on the frontline are not getting the consistent support they deserve, amid wide variations in approaches to leadership development.
The commission highlights the critical importance of leadership to ensuring that policing is prepared for the challenges of the future while upholding the sacred principle of policing by consent, without fear or favour. It is also important to emphasise, as the report rightly does, that leadership must not be confined to the senior officer ranks. It can and does exist in all parts of the service. It should be nurtured at every stage of a policing career—for both officers and staff. The review’s findings are rightly unsparing, and I welcome its willingness to engage with difficult issues, because, as the report’s foreword states:
“Fundamentally, this is about ensuring that the public receives the quality of policing to which they are entitled.”
I will turn now to the review’s recommendations, of which there are 27 in total. They are ambitious in breadth and scale and, taken together, they make a compelling case for change. While it is right that we now take the time to consider them in full, we welcome the commission’s proposals and the intent behind them. In particular, we are actively looking at the recommendation to create a formal senior constable rank and at how this could be done.
The commission also recommends a new professional digital passport for every individual in policing, and other measures to put stronger supporting structures in place around professional development and performance. These could in the future help to build a route to a licence to practise, which is a proposal we included in our police reform White Paper, as one way of raising standards and promoting a stronger culture of professional development. Other recommendations from the review include: a new police leadership fast stream; a new targeted direct entry scheme to fill specific gaps in policing, with a focus on leaders from professions with transferable skills; and a role for the forthcoming national police service in promoting ethical policing at national level.
As I have said, we will consider all the report’s findings and recommendations carefully. I am certain that they will be of great assistance as we advance our police reform agenda. A full Government response will follow in due course. In the meantime, we are making progress on leadership-related measures designed to improve public confidence and police performance, such as a new senior appointments panel and reforms to promotion processes, alongside the wider work we are doing on restructuring, including the creation of the national police service, which will provide a single source of strategic leadership and a stronger set of national standards.
I will finish where I started: by paying tribute to the thousands of men and women who work tirelessly every day to protect our communities from harm. From the officers and staff on the frontline and their colleagues performing essential roles behind the scenes to the chief constables they ultimately report to, I am grateful to them all. While the threats they must tackle are evolving all the time, what will never change is our commitment to the founding principles of British policing, which dictate that in this country we police by consent, and assert that the police are the public and the public are the police.
To uphold these traditions while meeting the demands of modern crimefighting, we must ensure that our police forces are fair, open and meritocratic workplaces that are able to meet the high standards we rightly expect of those entrusted with keeping their fellow citizens safe and driven forward by strong, effective leadership at all levels. Reform on the scale required is no easy task, but working in partnership with policing and aided by the findings of this important report, I believe that we can and will succeed in making our police service stronger and our society safer. I commend this statement to the House.
Matt Vickers (Stockton West) (Con)
I thank the Minister for advance sight of her statement and pay tribute to the noble Lords Herbert and Blunkett for producing such a timely and thoughtful report.
The last year has done real damage to public confidence in police leadership. Of course, the report rightly recognises that there are many outstanding officers leading forces across the country, but the headlines that people remember tell a different story. From the shameful scenes surrounding the Maccabi Tel Aviv match to the heartbreaking murder of Henry Nowak, alongside too many other incidents, the public have been left asking a simple question: who is in charge?
Leadership is not about managing decline or issuing guidance; it is about setting a culture and making it unmistakeably clear that the first duty of every police officer is to protect the public and uphold the law without fear, without favour and without distraction. The report gets to the heart of that when it says that police leaders must refuse to take sides and remain focused entirely on preventing crime, catching criminals and bringing offenders to justice. Culture starts at the top. If we want frontline policing to change, leadership must change first.
What struck me most about the report was not simply its recommendations but the evidence behind them. This is not the work of critics looking in from the outside; it reflects what police officers themselves are saying. As the authors acknowledged in their letter to stakeholders, much of the evidence made for uncomfortable reading. Perhaps the most alarming finding is that only 13% of constables and just 17% of sergeants surveyed believed that they worked in a well-led and well-managed organisation. Think about that: more than four in five officers who put themselves in harm’s way to keep our streets safe do not believe that they work in a well-led organisation. If that does not ring alarm bells, I do not know what will.
Time does not permit me to go through all 27 recommendations, but there is much that deserves support. In particular, I welcome the emphasis on merit. Our best officers should be recognised, developed and promoted because they are the best, not because they have ticked the right boxes. But we also have to be honest about the context. The report sits alongside a programme of wider police reform announced by the Government, although reports suggest that the incoming Prime Minister is already getting cold feet about those reforms. That matters, because many of the recommendations assume larger forces and more centralised models. If those reforms do not happen, Ministers need to explain how the recommendations will work in practice rather than simply in principle.
There is another contradiction that cannot be ignored. If we want stronger leadership, we need to give police leaders the tools they need to succeed. That means enough officers on the streets and the technology to help them do their jobs effectively. Instead, officer numbers have fallen by about 1,300 across the country. At the same time, in London, the Labour mayor chose to pick a public fight with his own commissioner over the use of technology, with the commissioner making it clear that the mayor’s decision would leave the force able to achieve less. How can we demand better leadership while cutting officer numbers and denying forces the technology they say they need?
There is much in the report that hon. Members on both sides of the House can support. Better leadership is not a partisan cause—it is a public necessity—but if we are serious about restoring confidence in policing, we cannot stop at identifying what police leaders should do differently; we also have to stop making political decisions that make their jobs harder. The public deserve better, our best officers deserve better, and the future of policing depends on us getting both police leadership and political leadership correct.
Sarah Jones
I thank the hon. Member for welcoming the report. I agree with some of what he said. He is right that it is not the work of critics looking in from the outside. The evidence base was developed through nine months of forensic work, talking to police across all levels within the force, meaning that this is a very honest assessment of the realities in which we find ourselves.
As I said in my statement, police leadership has been a problem for some time. Inspections of police forces by His Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire and rescue services from 2023 to 2025 showed that not a single force had outstanding leadership. There are different leadership challenges across all our forces. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the public need to believe in the police and be confident in policing. The statistics on public confidence in policing have been worrying for some years now, and we must all look at them.
The hon. Gentleman made the usual point about officer numbers, and I will make the usual point back: as he knows, the Conservative party cut 20,000 police and then recruited 20,000 police, but then put 12,000 of them behind desks. We are taking them away from desks and putting them on the frontline. We are also investing in technology. For example, the £75 million that I put into PoliceAI will transform the bureaucracy on which our police officers have to spend lots of their time, so that they can focus on the frontline.
Overall, I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s nice comments on the leadership review. The review has been incredibly important, and it is important that we have cross-party agreement about the need to improve leadership in policing.
Jonathan Hinder (Pendle and Clitheroe) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her statement. I welcome the focus on police leadership, and look forward to reading the report in detail. I thank her for acknowledging that this Government are not the first to grapple with this issue. Those of us who have been around policing for a little while have seen lots of changes, whether police and crime commissioners, independent misconduct chairs, or the different entry routes that the Conservatives brought in and then went back on, and there is a real weariness about changes to these processes. Frontline officers want to know whether it will get easier to deliver on the priorities that they know the public have but that they do not really feel backed to deliver. Can she reassure the House that that will be at the centre—no matter what changes, well-intentioned though they might be, are made on the back of this report?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend is right. We have to be laser-focused on what will improve outcomes for the public and what will enable the police to do the job that we ask them to do. I do recommend that he reads the report—it is a very good read. At its heart, it says that we want our police to have sound judgment and common sense in their policing. We want them to be freed up to make the decisions that are commonsensical and the right thing to do. To do that, we have not only to strip away the bureaucracy and all the forms they have to fill in, but to ensure that they are trained to be the police officers we want them to be. How do we match that training with freeing up our police to get on and do the job that we all ask them to do in the first place?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)
I thank the noble Lords Blunkett and Herbert for the report, which is a welcome shining light on the challenges facing leadership in our police forces. I know at first hand from my constituency that police forces deal day in, day out with highly sensitive, dangerous and traumatic incidents. They keep us safe. It is deeply challenging work, and we are greatly indebted to them. That is why the findings of the report are so concerning.
The report shows that officers are too often hampered by scarce resources, excessive bureaucracy and conduct processes, which leave them unable to focus on delivering for the public. The Liberal Democrats have long campaigned for a return to the proper community and neighbourhood policing that our constituents want. For that to happen, officers must be properly supported and equipped to tackle the many issues facing our communities. Will the Minister set out what plans the Government have to increase the numbers of bobbies on the beat?
Even more concerning are the report’s findings on the inconsistent leadership standards across our police forces. The numerous instances of leaders falling short of the standards of integrity, honesty and professionalism expected of them—including in cases of cronyism, nepotism and abuses of power for sexual purpose—are appalling. It is clear that we need root-and-branch reform of the policing system, as the report calls for, to stamp out that bad behaviour, improve leadership and hold senior officers to the highest standard. Will the Minister confirm that that recommendation and others in the report will directly inform the forthcoming police reform Bill?
Finally, the Police Federation has highlighted poor leadership in the police and an increase in officer suicides, but we do not have the data. Will the Minister commit to requiring police forces to gather that data?
Sarah Jones
Taking those points in turn and working backwards, we are working with the Police Federation on data on police suicide. It is an area where there are some contested figures, and we are trying to rectify that so we have the right picture, as well as putting in place more comprehensive wellbeing support for officers and staff so that they can get support in the difficult jobs they are faced with.
The hon. Member asked whether the review will directly inform our reform agenda and the legislation we pass—absolutely it will. It is a very important part of the learnings that we will take forward.
The hon. Member points to nepotism and other challenges we have in policing. Hon. Members might have seen Lord Blunkett on the television yesterday talking about that. It is absolutely true, and many the reforms pointed to in the report that we will carefully consider are aimed at taking that away, whether through having a targeted direct entry scheme or the new rank of senior constable. A leadership fast stream has been recommended, which would be interesting to look at. I recommend that he looks at all those recommendations.
On bobbies on the beat, we have already increased the number of police on our streets by well over 3,000. As the hon. Member might know, we have a target of 13,000 police by the end of this Parliament.
Graham Stringer (Blackley and Middleton South) (Lab)
I am fully supportive of Stephen Watson, the chief constable of Greater Manchester. It is the first time I can say that about a chief constable since the 1970s. We have had chief constables who were mad—James Anderton, who carried out his prejudice against the gay community because he had a line to God—and who were bad—Peter Fahy, who refused to take action on Pakistani and Kashmiri rape gangs because he was frightened of damaging relationships, and Ian Hopkins, who made it more dangerous for police officers to go to crime scenes and into houses, because the computer system did not work and they did not know whether they were going into a dangerous situation. Over those years I have come to believe that the most important decision is getting the right person in the position of chief constable. I hope that the report the Minister has referred to, which I have not read, will lead to that; the chief constable is the most important person by far.
Sarah Jones
I completely agree with my hon. Friend and congratulate him on his honesty in his description of his previous chiefs. There are on average fewer than three applicants for each chief constable job, which is frankly woeful, and many are filled by internal applicants. We do not have the pool of people going for these jobs that we want to see. We had already said that through the police reform programme we would set up a national body to help with recruitment, as well as giving the Home Secretary new powers to remove chief constables in extreme circumstances. There is a lot in this report about how we can improve the pipeline up to the chief constable level, but also how we can achieve a better system of promotion within the chief constable ranks and ensure that we get diversity of talent, so that we have—as we would want—a good cohort of people applying for every single job.
Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
I am grateful to the Minister for the £100 million grant she has given to Lincolnshire police and the transformative extra £12 million a year. We have been campaigning for that for years and have averted 400 job losses. When the Government do something right, it is right that we should say thank you. However, she may want to say a word about our problem. We are losing our excellent police and crime commissioner, Marc Jones—she could perhaps say a nice word about him—and those powers will be transferred to the mayor, but we have the Lincolnshire police and Humberside Police, and Humberside Police, of course, straddles two mayoralties, so she has a problem. May I urge her, in any local reorganisation, not to do away with small police forces such as Lincolnshire, to concentrate on old-fashioned policing—not woke, not courses, not staff—and to try to avoid throwing too many chairs up in the air with boundary reorganisation?
Sarah Jones
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his words about the funding for Lincolnshire and join him in praising his PCC—and indeed all PCCs. We never had a problem with the model in terms of the individuals who held those posts; it is more the elected model that we do not think is right. As he will know, Lord Bernard Hogan-Howe is currently reviewing for us what the structures should be in a reformed police force that would sit between a national police service and local police areas; the local police areas will be absolutely key, and he will have some very interesting things to say about them.
Finally, the right hon. Gentleman asked for policing not to be woke, not to have courses and so on. There is a lot to unpick in what we want our police to do. We want them to have the skills to make common-sense, good, practical decisions to catch criminals and keep us all safe. In order to achieve that, we must make sure that there is good training, but that has been lacking. There has been very little leadership training at any level in policing. In the Army, 15 years after leaving Sandhurst a colonel in charge of 1,500 people would have had on average 72 weeks of leadership development, whereas in that same time a chief super in the Met would have had two or three weeks tops. That cannot be right. We have to teach people to be the leaders that we need them to be.
Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab)
I thank those in the police service for their work; their job is not easy and indeed can be very challenging. I also welcome the Minister’s response to the report published by the police leadership commission. However, it grieves me to say that it remains a shocking and disturbing fact that many children of my ethnic descent experience being over-policed and under-protected. A report released earlier this year by the Children’s Commissioner showed that black children are more likely than white children to be strip-searched. I do not want any child in my constituency or this country to experience unnecessary strip-searches, and I do not want black children to experience strip-searches disproportionately. We need only mention Child Q to be reminded of that awful situation. I recognise that the police data on that, and on those issues, is poor and that improved police leadership is very much needed, so how will the Government strategy address that?
Sarah Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for her question and her constant championing of this issue. She is right. We said in our manifesto that we would look at the powers on children and strip-searching. We have that job still to do, and we will do it in this Parliament; I would be very happy to work with her on it. She is also right that in some areas we have seen some improvements; on stop and search, for example, we have seen significant improvements, but there is a lack of data and an inconsistency in some of the data; we are looking at whether we can improve that so that we have the right picture before us.
The work the police leadership commission undertook involved a substantial amount of evidence from women and people from different ethnic minorities, who talked about their struggles within policing. We know that more people from different ethnic minority backgrounds leave at different stages, so there is a job to be done there, and that is highlighted in this report.
Sir Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)
As the hon. Lady has said, the House owes considerable gratitude to their noble Lordships Blunkett and Herbert, but surely the problem is very well rehearsed: a lack of consistent, high-quality leadership within the police. Will she explore further the benefits of having within the police the structure of a professional officer corps? That has been regularly advocated, and we know that in the military it delivers outstanding leadership and leadership structures. Will she therefore bear in mind that there are many brilliant, very senior officers in the British military who would bring undoubted leadership skills to bear at the most senior levels within the police, including in future for the role of Metropolitan Police Commissioner?
Sarah Jones
I suspect that we are some way away from not having a warranted police officer as the Metropolitan Police Commissioner—but maybe we are not. We are open to looking at how to get some of our police leaders out on secondment in other, similar sectors, so that they can get some experience and then come back, and to looking at direct entry to the police force for people from similar roles. Many people in policing have different views about the correlation with the Army; as part of the review, there was some interesting work looking at what the Army does, and I recommend it to the right hon. Gentleman. The new rank of senior constable is interesting, as are the suggestions about very senior police roles. I urge him to read the report; although, as he says, some of these things are well known, there is a huge amount of nuance and detail that makes it well worth reading.
Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her statement and my local police officers for their work. Trust in policing is essential, but that trust and confidence has been tested too many times in recent years. Does the Minister agree that strong ethical leadership is fundamental to rebuilding public confidence in policing? Does she also agree that the police leadership commission report provides an important opportunity to ensure that officers at every level are better supported to deliver the high standards that the public rightly expect?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The report is really strong on the importance of good ethical policing so that we can reset our police leadership culture around high performance, cutting crime, keeping people safe and, on top of that, preparing for the challenges that lie ahead. As we know, the force has not been forward-looking enough in the equipment and training provided to tackle new forms of crime. In addition, we have a very young force: as of March last year, a third of our whole police cohort had been in the police for less than five years, so building experience through an ethical framework is important.
Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)
The report finds structural issues within police forces, with fragmented and inconsistent systems that do not make the most of our police talent. If an officer sees cronyism, nepotism and abuse of power around them, they will not have their future career at the top of their mind or trying to break through that system. Given the impending Government reorganisation, how will whichever Home Officer Ministers are in place under the new Prime Minister ensure that the proposed police reorganisation puts strong systems in place, so that there is effective police leadership and development and we break out of the situation that has developed?
Sarah Jones
The reform that we have set out more broadly, not just in today’s report, is uncontested in many ways—some aspects are contested, but others are not. There is cross-party and cross-policing agreement about setting up a national police service and on having a more hyper-local focus, ensuring that the public can expect that acquisitive crimes that go unsolved are responded to in the way that they expect. Lord Bernard Hogan-Howe’s current work—as the hon. Gentleman says, it will straddle the periods of two Prime Ministers—is looking at the layers between police forces. There are different ways to approach that issue and we are working through all of them, but I do not think that anyone would disagree with the fundamental premise that, if we do not reform policing, we will not end up with a force that can face the future in the way that we need it to.
John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)
I welcome the report and I put on record my respect for the senior leadership of Warwickshire police, with whom I have engaged. In the spirit of the comments by the Father of the House, I will say that the Conservative police and crime commissioner is a good man, with whom I have a good relationship regarding policing. Every senior police officer—indeed, every officer of any rank—that I have dealt with wants to be scrutinised and to work to the very highest of standards. Does the Minister agree that, since they want to serve the public in the best way possible, no police officer of any rank should fear the leadership improvements that are set out in the report?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend has hit the nail on the head, because no police officer should fear that. The reforms suggested in the report are there to support officers and staff to move through the force in a way that gives them the skills and training that they need to do the job that we have asked them to do. That is at the core of what we are trying to do. In relation to his remarks about his Conservative police and crime commissioner, we made the difficult decision to remove police and crime commissioners—that was a hard thing for them to hear, for obvious reasons. They have consistently continued to work with me and the Home Office, to help with the reforms and to keep giving their ideas and time, and I am very grateful to them for that.
Sir Oliver Dowden (Hertsmere) (Con)
Does the Minister agree that a big part of the leadership malaise outlined in this report can be attributed to the lack of clarity from this place and the Government about what we expect of the police? While this report is welcome, the definition of police leadership in paragraph 90 runs to almost two pages.
Does the Minister agree that, in essence, this is about two things? First, this is about cutting crime. Too often, the leadership of the police is focused on being all-purpose social workers trying to solve every problem in society, leading to the extraordinary situation in which social media is policed more aggressively than shoplifting or burglary. Secondly, this is about having officers’ backs. Too often, police officers fear acting, because they will be hung out to dry if they make the wrong call. I am afraid we saw exactly that this weekend in the extraordinary scenes at the Pride march, where there was explicit antisemitism and people directly attacking Jews while the police stood back and watched. We have to achieve a cultural change. Does the Minister agree with those objectives?
Sarah Jones
I agree. The police have a duty to police without fear or favour, and that needs to be absolute. Everybody is equal under the law. I suspect that over the years, political decisions might have been made that may have made that job harder for the police. However, I do not agree with the right hon. Member’s analysis of what good leadership is. There are many different ways to cut crime and have officers’ backs, so I would not say that he has hit the nail on the head.
We expect our officers to cut crime and to keep people safe. We can all agree on that, because that is what we need people to do, but the question is about how we do that. How has leadership been so poor over the years that we are not achieving that outcome? It may be that decisions made in this place are partially to blame, but it cannot be right that, for example, out of 140,000 officers and many thousands more staff, only about 500 officers and staff will start a centrally delivered national leadership programme this year. We cannot be designing good leadership when we are not training people how to do it.
Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)
Page 39 of the report says that the college is hampered in its quest for reform by the constant attempts to try to reach consensus. In the light of that, what steps is the Minister taking to ensure that the governance of the national police service will be fit for purpose?
Sarah Jones
The national police service will set consistent standards and ensure that we have a national workforce strategy setting out exactly how many different people we need and in what roles. The report shows multiple areas where forces have a compliance culture and risk aversion—people do not want to speak out for fear of consequences, and there is a resistance to new ideas. All those things suggest a culture in which people are not being trained, supported or allowed to do the fundamental job that we ask them to do, which is to cut crime and keep people safe. The national police service will be able to set those standards at a national level and ensure that there is consistency across all the forces, rather than the current inconsistent approach.
Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Reform)
A white man on a night out in Birmingham is assaulted by two black men. The police intervene and arrest the white man—the victim—and allow the two black lads to flee the scene. They then call the victim a “dick” and hit his head against a police car while they are sticking him in it. They then misrepresent what happened at the event, saying that it was a fight, when it was actually an assault. They say that absolutely nothing is wrong. The footage then goes viral, as ever, and the police are forced to change their tune—footage that the police actually tried to suppress.
I have three simple questions for the Policing Minister. One, does she consider this to be another appalling incident of two-tier policing? Two, will she haul the acting chief constable of—
Sarah Jones
There is no room in policing for anything other than for the police to do their job without fear or favour, and that involves treating everybody equally under the law. Where the police are trained, have good leadership and are given good support, we believe we can ensure better outcomes for the citizens we are all here to serve. That is the point of the leadership work that has been done over many months, and it is the point of our reform programme. Where things go wrong, of course we must shine a light on that, and a huge amount of work has been done over the past few years—for example, police wearing body-worn cameras, publishing that evidence so that people can see it for themselves, and being quicker to speak publicly about what has happened in certain incidents. Those are all important, transparent changes that we are making to our police, but ultimately we need to make sure we are trying to bring people together through reforms that give them the policing we all need.
Chris Vince
This is the closest I am ever going to get to the Front Bench. [Laughter.]
Having spoken to police officers across my constituency of Harlow, I know that the two things they want to do are keep my constituency safe and—to paraphrase a new Labour manifesto pledge—tackle crime and the causes of crime. Can the Minister outline what she is going to do on the back of this review to ensure we take away the barriers, so that police officers can do their job of protecting my community and keeping the country safe?
Sarah Jones
I think my hon. Friend would look very fine at this Dispatch Box. I hope he gets to be here and has the privilege I have had of being in this role.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that we need to strip out all the bureaucracy and nonsense that the police have to deal with. All of us who have been out on response with police or been out with our neighbourhood police, or who have spent time with sergeants, know just how much bureaucracy, form-filling and time-wasting they face. We are trying to rip all of that away through reforms and technology so that the police can focus on cutting crime and keeping people safe, which is what they go into the force to do and what we all expect them to do. That is what I want to see, for the people of Harlow and people across the whole of this country.
Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)
Lords Blunkett and Herbert have done a good job, but I would counsel against introducing a new police rank when most large organisations are stripping ranks out and trying to compress their hierarchies.
Does the Minister agree that the No. 1 thing that needs to be done is to improve the quality of top leadership? Their lordships made that point very clearly. In 1839, Captain Samuel Meredith of the Royal Navy was appointed as the first chief constable of Wiltshire. Will the Minister give some consideration to the point made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) about allowing people from the armed forces and other uniformed services to aspire to top ranks within our police force? It would break down groupthink, and I think it would add a great deal—middle-grade senior people within the armed forces, in particular, would have a great deal to offer.
Sarah Jones
On the right hon. Gentleman’s last point, there is a suggestion of targeted direct entry schemes at those levels, so there is an opportunity for that. The Government have not yet properly reviewed this idea, but there is a compelling case for the new rank of senior constable. The vast majority of our police—about 113,000—are constables. It is often said that there are people who naturally step into leadership roles and perhaps never become sergeants. They fulfil that function, but are not sergeants. That gap has been recognised in the work that has been done, and we should look at it. There are far fewer people in the top rungs, and then we have this big cohort where there is no role other than constable. That is worth looking at.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
Dorset is about to get its fourth chief constable in just eight years. While I wish Amanda Pearson well in her retirement, those I spoke to who were involved in the recruitment panel said that the only potential candidates were the deputy chief constables or the assistant chief constables. In a place like Dorset, we tend to get someone who is either internal or about to retire. In almost every case, there is only one candidate. Given that situation, how will the Minister look to introduce fresh ideas and a culture free from nepotism, bias and toxicity in such a small cohort, so that we can get the leadership that we need?
Sarah Jones
The hon. Lady speaks to one of the problems that I highlighted earlier, which is that in the main, fewer than three applicants apply for a chief constable role, and many such positions end up being filled by an internal candidate. It cannot be right, as she said, that in a force such as hers that position will only be filled by somebody internal or thinking about retiring. It is a brilliant job—challenging, yes, but brilliant, definitely —and we should have many people aspiring to it. I again thank all those who have contributed to this piece of work, including many people who have given much of their time to help, to support and to think these things through. There is much in this work that will help us get to a point where, as we would all want, multiple people want to apply when a chief officer role comes up.
Draft Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2026
Sarah Jones Excerpts(3 weeks, 5 days ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2026.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart. The draft order seeks to amend the definition of “ninja sword” in the list of prohibited offensive weapons by amending the definition contained in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988. I will briefly set out the context.
The existing legislation, which bans ninja swords, followed a manifesto commitment to respond to the tireless campaigning by the family of Ronan Kanda, who was just 16 when he was fatally stabbed in 2022 by a person using a ninja sword. In 2024, the Government ran a public consultation on the proposed definition of a ninja sword in order to ban the weapons, in line with our aim to halve knife crime within a decade. The consultation sought views from the public and interested stakeholders on a draft definition of a ninja sword.
Ninja swords are defined as a bladed article with a blade between 14 inches and 24 inches in length, with one straight cutting edge and a tanto-style point. That length was chosen in order to exclude knives and tools designed for legitimate purposes, such as many kitchen knives and other types of knives. In order to be within scope of the ban, the article should also have the features described in paragraph 1(u) of the schedule to the 1988 order, namely: a “primary…cutting edge”, a “secondary…cutting edge” and a “blunt spine”, with either a “tanto style point” or a “reversed tanto style point”. Those terms are further defined in the detail of the legislation. We introduced legislation following analysis of the consultation responses, and ninja swords became prohibited from 1 August 2025.
However, the Government recently became aware that the wording of the legislation does not correctly describe the length of the secondary straight cutting edge of a ninja sword, as was intended. The draft order therefore seeks to rectify that and align the legislation with the original intention. To be clear, this amendment is a technical clarification to existing secondary legislation banning ninja swords. Although the amendment to the definition widens the scope of the existing wording, it does not introduce new offences, bring any ninja swords out of scope, or impose additional requirements on the public.
Under section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, it is an offence to possess, import, manufacture, sell, hire, offer for sale or hire, expose or possess for the purposes of sale or hire a weapon specified in an order made under that section. The legislation contains a detailed description of the tanto-style or reversed tanto-style point of the sword. The legislation states that
“a secondary straight cutting edge is a cutting edge…which forms an angle with the primary straight cutting edge and the spine, and…is no more than 5% longer or shorter than the width of the blade immediately after the handle.”
The reference to the 5% is incorrect and limits the scope of what size of tip falls under the legislation.
We therefore propose to use the order-making powers under section 141(2) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to amend the definition to:
“a secondary straight cutting edge is a cutting edge…which forms an angle with the primary straight cutting edge and the spine, and…is no more than 105% longer than the width of the blade immediately after the handle.”
That correction will allow the legislation to function as intended and remove any ambiguity about which swords fall within scope of the definition. We have also included an additional diagram in the explanatory note to make the definition easier to understand—it certainly helped me, and it may be useful for Members.
To conclude, the Government are determined to stop dangerous weapons getting into the wrong hands, and this clarification will assist the police in exercising their powers to prevent violence and keep the public safe. I commend the draft order to the Committee.
Sarah Jones
I associate myself with the hon. Lady’s remarks about Ronan Kanda’s family and their tireless campaigning. We are very grateful to Ronan’s mother and sister for being part of our coalition to tackle knife crime. They give their time freely and generously, and we spend lots of time listening to what they have to say. They are pushing us, as they should, to go further in tackling knife crime. Their work has led us to consulting on a licence regime for knife sales—we are working through that at the moment—and they keep pushing us to do more. We have had some success, with a 10% fall in knife crime and a 27% fall in knife murders, but we have a long way to go.
To reassure the hon. Lady, we understand there have been no cases in which the legislation has impacted on any outcome. We have talked to the police about it and sought to rectify the error that was made as soon as we could. In no case has somebody not ended up going to court because of this problem. We are right to fix it as soon as discovering it, and that is what we are doing. I hope that the Committee is reassured that we are doing the right thing as quickly as we can, and that we will continue to bear down on knife crime.
Question put and agreed to.
Digital Proof of Age: Alcohol Sales
Sarah Jones Excerpts(3 weeks, 6 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
Today I am pleased to inform the House that those members of the public who are fortunate enough to look younger than their age, but are always having to carry their passport or driving licence to prove that they are 18 or over to buy a pint in a pub, will soon no longer have this dilemma. In future, digital ID will be a quick and secure way to prove age without revealing any additional personal details to bar staff, and will mean that passports can be left safely at home by those who choose this option.
I am therefore laying a statutory instrument to deliver on our commitment to update the Licensing Act 2003 (Mandatory Licensing Conditions) Order 2010 made under the Licensing Act 2003. This change will permit the use of certified and registered digital verification services for the sale and supply of alcohol in England and Wales, where certain conditions are met.
Currently, the order requires physical documents bearing a photograph, date of birth and security features to verify age. However, with the increasing adoption of secure digital technologies, the Government recognise the need to align legislation with today’s consumer habits and modern technology. Those who prefer to prove their age using physical documents can still do so.
This change will allow alcohol retailers and clubs to accept digital proof of age, provided it is presented from a DVS that is certified against the UK DVS trust framework, appears on the statutory DVS register on www.gov.uk'>www.gov.uk, and meets certain conditions as specified in the mandatory licensing conditions. Certified and registered digital verification services allow individuals to choose from a range of identity evidence when setting up a digital proof of age, including physical documents, information held by public authorities and digital credentials issued by the Government, like the upcoming digital driving licence. To prove age when purchasing alcohol, there will not be any requirement to use a specific source of identity evidence if using a DVS, and physical forms of identification will still be accepted.
The updated mandatory condition will:
Permit the use of registered DVS for age verification in alcohol sales and supply where specific conditions are met.
Help to ensure that those DVS meet strict standards for security, privacy, and reliability, as set out in the trust framework.
Maintain the core licensing objectives, including the protection of children from harm, by ensuring that digital age checks are as robust as checks using physical documents.
Subject to Parliamentary procedure, the Government intend the statutory instrument to come into effect in autumn 2026. An Economic Note will be published on legislation www.gov.uk alongside the instrument.
[HCWS160]
Grooming Gangs: Independent Inquiry
Sarah Jones Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will make a statement on the progress made since the publication of Dame Louise Casey’s review into group-based child sexual exploitation, and the impact of recent developments on confidence in the Government’s statutory inquiry.
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
I thank the hon. Lady for her question. Tuesday marked one year since the publication of Baroness Casey’s national audit on group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse. The House will recall that the Government accepted all 12 recommendations of what was a landmark report, exposing more than a decade of failure and inaction on the part of the state. Scandalously, the most vulnerable in society were let down by the very institutions that should have protected them.
As the Home Secretary made clear in her written statement to the House earlier this week, this Government are determined to directly and decisively confront the failings that occurred. We have made good progress against the mandate for change set out by Baroness Casey, with action taken or ongoing in relation to all 12 of her recommendations. We have changed the law on rape to remove any ambiguity about the ability of 13 to 16-year-olds to consent to sex; established a new national police operation, Operation Beaconport, overseen by the National Crime Agency and backed by £38 million of funding this year; legislated to disregard any convictions for so-called child prostitution; and commissioned new research into the drivers of these heinous crimes, including ethnicity, religion, cultural factors, group dynamics and the role of online technologies.
Central to our response is the statutory independent inquiry into grooming gangs. Having been formally established in April, the work of the inquiry is under way and it will shortly announce the first local areas that will face investigation. The terms of reference have been shaped by the testimony, priorities and lived experience of victims and survivors. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to them, and to all who have campaigned to get us to this point.
The inquiry will have a laser focus on grooming gangs, including the role that ethnicity, religion and culture played in these terrible crimes. Our message is clear: we will do whatever it takes to secure justice for those who were so badly let down—pursuing the evidence wherever it may lead, exposing failings and taking every necessary step to protect the most vulnerable in our society. For too long, questions about what was and will forever be one of the darkest moments in this country’s history have gone unanswered. That must change, which is why the Government have established a full independent inquiry to shine a light on past horrors. That is happening alongside our wider work to tackle exploitation and abuse, backed by a record £100 million in Home Office funding this year, in an unrelenting effort to keep our children safe from harm.
Mims Davies
I thank the Minister for her answer. It has been one year since Dame Louise Casey’s stark and deeply troubling review of group-based child sexual exploitation, known rightly as the rape gangs. She exposed what we now know was a culture of institutional blindness, weak data and fragmented accountability and a reluctance to confront uncomfortable truths and ultimately to stand up for women and girls who have been systematically abused, or a culture where people simply chose not to act for the bigger fear of being labelled racist. It is disgraceful. Deep concerns remain that progress on justice has been too slow, and in some areas is simply superficial.
The Minister has rightly warned of a box-ticking culture. This Government talk a good game, but recent ministerial Home Office resignations have raised serious questions about what they are delivering in practice. How does the Minister respond to the deeply distressing but bold testimony of Fiona Goddard, who has bravely highlighted that some of the men convicted of abusing her have been released early, with others potentially due for release soon? These are Labour’s choices, and we warned about them. What action is being taken to rebuild the confidence of the victims in this process? Does the Minister deeply regret opposing measures to prevent early release in such heartbreaking and horrific cases?
Finally, how are the Government ensuring that sentencing and post-release supervision reflect the severity of these crimes? I remind the House that we warned them about the consequences of their dire choices for the safety of women and girls. What are they going to do about it? Will anything change before the next election, or is this issue simply in the long grass? Survivors’ voices and community concerns need to be heard. This is a matter of justice, accountability and trust. This Government need to step up and protect our women and our girls.
Sarah Jones
I think we can agree on some of what the hon. Lady has said. She is right that there was institutional blindness. We have seen that in other ways across the state, and not just in these horrific cases. It is something that we know we need to change. She is right to speak of the victims and the horrors that they have suffered, and she is right to keep a focus on that.
The hon. Lady said that the Opposition warned us about the prison situation; I gently say that we warned them, for very many years, about the state of our prison estate. When we came into government, we found a catastrophic situation: simply not enough prison places, and the whole system at the point of collapse. We have had to respond to that. As Policing Minister, I have a duty to ensure that our police are policing our streets and keeping everybody safe. We always ensure that we keep an eye, in the right way, on former criminals who come out of prison, and I spend a lot of my time talking to the police about how we do that.
We all greatly admire Louise Casey and are very grateful for the work that she continues to do. Of course she is right to push us to go faster, as she always will. That is why we asked her to do the job: because she demands the best from us. She has also praised the progress made by the Government in establishing the inquiry and in the work that has been done to date. She is understandably pushing us on three areas: the non-child prostitution convictions of some people who have been groomed, having the right information flows for Operation Beaconport, and Whitehall treating this issue with the urgency that it needs.
On all those issues, we are going as fast as we can and responding to the questions that Louise Casey has rightly asked. We are pushing to get all that work done as quickly as possible. She was clear that the inquiry should be relatively speedy. That was one of the challenges of the Professor Jay inquiry, which took many years, excellent though it was. The inquiry will be concluded by 2029. It has £65 million of funding. We will get to the answers.
Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)
The Spicer review of 2018 into the handling of the widespread sexual exploitation of children and vulnerable adults in Newcastle found a culture that enabled and did not investigate the exploitation and rape of children and vulnerable adults, and a culture of victim blaming. It also praised Newcastle city council and Northumbria police’s actions following the investigation.
I have repeatedly contacted Northumbria police to raise issues around child exploitation and to seek reassurances about its actions. Given the comments in the Casey review, how can I ensure that Northumbria police has the resources and support it needs to identify and support victims, believe them and encourage them to come forward, and to create a culture of investigation, openness and transparency to reassure my constituents?
Sarah Jones
I am happy to facilitate conversations, but it sounds like my hon. Friend is already having them. As she will know, we are working on police culture. The Hillsborough law and some of the wider work we are doing across Government aim to ensure that we have the right openness, transparency and culture of being professionally curious and seeking out solutions. That is very important. All forces across the country have had a funding increase this year, and Operation Beaconport has its own fund of £38 million. The funding should be there, but I am happy to have further conversations with her about that.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
It is deeply disheartening that, a year on from Baroness Casey’s audit, the Government have not made greater progress. The victims have already been failed once; they must not be failed again. Previous inquiries have produced more than 800 recommendations, most of which have not been implemented. We see this over and over again across Departments: inquiry launched, recommendations produced and accepted by the Government, and then nothing—while victims continue to suffer.
I wholeheartedly support the independent inquiry into grooming gangs, but it must not become an excuse to delay implementing the changes that we already know are needed. Will the Minister set out a clear timeline for implementing all Baroness Casey’s recommendations in full, and make clear to every organisation with a duty to safeguard children that the hundreds of recommendations from previous inquiries are not “nice to haves” but must be implemented at pace and without further delay?
Sarah Jones
The inquiry, led by Anne Longfield, will look at previous inquiries and recommendations and bring them all into the inquiry’s remit. I encourage the hon. Lady to sit down and talk to Anne Longfield, if she has not done so already, to ensure that her concerns in that space are felt.
Sarah Jones
I see that she has done so already.
The hon. Lady’s point about inquiry recommendations is not unreasonable. I recently gave evidence to the Nottingham inquiry which, among other things, is considering the fact that Government inquiries happen over many years, recommendations are made, and then there is no oversight. The Cabinet Office is acting on that, bringing bodies together and ensuring that it can drive things forward, and that whatever the Department and whatever our role, we prioritise those recommendations from inquiries.
We are making progress on all of Baroness Casey’s recommendations—I would say we are making good progress. The hon. Lady is right, of course, that we need to push as fast as we can.
Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)
Victims and survivors absolutely must be at the heart of this inquiry. How are they being put at the centre of this work in practice, are they being provided with access to support, and what meaningful opportunities do they have to shape the outcomes of the inquiry?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to highlight the role of victims and the need to be survivor-focused and trauma-informed throughout—that is exactly what the inquiry is focused on. The inquiry is working on a victims charter that it will publish soon, which will set out answers to all the questions she has asked about how we ensure that we are both supporting the victims and hearing their voices front and centre, when we know they were not listened to for so long.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
I sat on the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee for 14 years. We saw the first exposé of the scandals of the grooming gangs, particularly in Rochdale and other places in the north of England. Dame Louise Casey came in front of us and made recommendations that have still not been carried out, so full power to the Minister to actually make this happen.
The sad reality, as I understand it, is that police forces are resisting the collection of ethnicity data, and indeed resisting investigations into those who turned a blind eye to what was going on with the grooming gangs. Will the Minister ensure that police forces carry out their duties properly and that those who turned a blind eye to what was going on are brought to justice and suffer the consequences of not protecting vulnerable girls?
Sarah Jones
I would be happy to have a conversation with the hon. Gentleman about any information he may have about police forces and what he has heard on that front. It would be very worrying if what he describes were the case. We have made it clear that ethnicity needs to be reported for the grooming-based CSE that we are dealing with here. In addition, in the police reform White Paper, which was announced in the King’s Speech and will be introduced soon, we committed ourselves to doing that across the board, so ethnicity reporting will be mandatory for the police.
Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)
The Minister mentioned institutional blindness to these horrific crimes. Will she outline how this vital inquiry’s terms of reference have been designed to ensure a thorough examination of those institutional failings, which meant that action was not taken to protect children?
Sarah Jones
The terms of reference are very wide and very clear. They will look at culture, ethnicity, race and any kind of bias that was in the system. There is a wider question that Louise Casey has talked about many times, and which I am trying to drive through in policing, and others are trying to drive through in other areas of work, which is about professional curiosity: keeping an open mind; problem solving; looking and finding; being curious to get to the bottom of what is happening; and finding those connections. There is also a big piece of work around information sharing across different organisations, because there is a blindness that comes from all the different institutions not talking to each other in the way that they should and not picking up vulnerability where we should. We saw that with Southport and Nottingham, and we see it here. There is a big job to be done there, too.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
The abuse of children is the most disgusting of crimes, and anyone who is involved in it, or who protects someone involved in it, must face justice. The hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe), who I note is not in his place, published his report this week, and my constituents are eager to understand why the statutory inquiry will take three years—[Interruption.] Another two years—several years. Why is the Government-backed inquiry going to take so long?
Sarah Jones
The hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe) has done a piece of work. I welcome the work that he has done, and hope that he will pass on to the police and the inquiry any evidence, criminal or otherwise, that he has gathered. This is an independent statutory inquiry—it is a very different thing. It will be absolutely ruthless in making sure that we can outline every single part of what has gone wrong here and learn every single lesson that we have to learn, so it is a completely different thing.
Statutory inquiries have taken years and years in the past, and Louise Casey was very clear that she wanted it to be time limited, so we have said that we want it finished, which is unusual for an inquiry—some inquiries that the previous Government set up are still ongoing. It will be done by 2029, but it is a completely different piece of work. It will be enormously thorough, get to the bottom of what happened, and bring us the answers that I know victims and the whole country want to see.
Jas Athwal (Ilford South) (Lab)
The grooming gangs represent the most profound betrayal of some of the most vulnerable people in our society, and the victims were failed by the very institutions that should have protected them. Justice was denied, while perpetrators escaped accountability. The vile individuals who systemically groomed, abused and violated these girls must face the full force of the law. Can the Minister provide an update on Operation Beaconport and explain how its work is helping to identify offenders, secure justice for victims, and strengthen the national response to tackling these heinous crimes?
Sarah Jones
Operation Beaconport is being led by the National Crime Agency, which is the very best of our serious organised crime operators, and we are treating this issue as we would treat serious organised crime, which is what it is. We are treating it with the utmost seriousness. The NCA is working with local police forces around the country to review of closed cases. It made an announcement yesterday—Members can see it online—about reopening cases, and this year it has received £38 million of funding, which is a substantial amount of money and will enable the NCA to uncover, go back over and reopen cases where it feels that injustice has been done and that they need to be opened again.
Ben Lake (Ceredigion Preseli) (PC)
For the inquiry to secure justice for victims and survivors in Wales, it is essential that it fully understands the devolved context in Wales and the various lines of accountability that arise from it. One way to achieve that would be for Wales to receive a specific investigation as one of the inquiry’s designated local areas. Will the Minister consider that?
Sarah Jones
As the hon. Gentleman knows, the inquiry is entirely independent, so it is not for us to say where it should lead. I know that the inquiry will shortly announce the first tranche of areas that it will go to, so he will be able to see the that soon.
Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)
Does the Minister believe that the inquiry has the appropriate powers and flexibility to allow it to follow the evidence, wherever it leads, so that the recommendations can drive lasting improvements in safeguarding and child protection? Is she in dialogue with the Scottish Government on these matters?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend can be reassured that this inquiry has all the powers it needs to go, without fear or favour, to find the answers we all seek. This issue is too important for us not to have ensured that, so we absolutely have. I know that the Minister for Safeguarding will be in contact with her counterparts in the Scottish Government to make sure we are joined up in in our approach.
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
I echo the comments about how disgusting these particular crimes are. Lady Casey has identified how, in quashing convictions, the Government have failed to take account of the whole picture. Quashing convictions for under-age prostitution is laudable, but there are other convictions such as for possessing the drugs given to those who are abused by their abusers or carrying them under coercion. The Minister referred to professional curiosity. Could she encourage people around her to engage in exactly that, and to look further than just the very first or main conviction to sort this out?
Sarah Jones
As the hon. Lady says, we have quashed convictions for people under 18 who were tried for prostitution—a very important part of this picture—and Louise Casey is suggesting that we go further. At the moment, victims can come in and apply, and I think she wants a more proactive response, so we are working on more proactive guidance for victims.
Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her response, and for her reassurance that this inquiry will have the powers to go wherever and to whomever it needs to get the answers for families in Redditch and other areas affected by these heinous crimes. When the initial set of inquiries are announced, if the area I represent is not included, but I still want to persist and ensure families get the justice they require, how am I best placed to do that via the Department and the Minister?
Sarah Jones
As I have said, the inquiry is independent of the Government, as is right and proper. I suggest he speaks to Anne Longfield, who is leading this work, or her panel. When they make their announcement, I am sure people will say, “Well, what about other areas?” I am sure they will be working through that and dealing with the priorities as they see them, and I am sure they would welcome input from my hon. Friend.
Sir Christopher Chope (Christchurch) (Con)
The Minister has referred to the grooming gangs inquiry carried out by our friend, the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe), and early-day motion 380 makes a number of recommendations. Will the Minister engage with the hon. Member to ensure that his ideas and recommendations can be taken forward, because we do not want to have to wait until Baroness Casey’s report in three years’ time?
Sarah Jones
First, I reassure the hon. Gentleman that we are not waiting three years until the inquiry’s report to act. We are already doing a lot of work, as I have outlined—such as Operation Beaconport to reopen cases—and we are using the legislative process to do what we need with data collection and ending the statutory rape definition. We are doing a whole raft of work, and we of course have our wider piece of work on violence against women and girls, with our ambition to halve it in 10 years.
I hope the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe) is talking to Anne Longfield, who is chairing the independent inquiry and will take all information from all places. I hope he is feeding his information to her, and that if he has criminal evidence he is passing that to the police. I am sure he has uncovered the most grievous harm and talked to victims of it, and we want to make sure that they see the Government are acting in the most appropriate way.
John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)
My thoughts are with the victims of the despicable grooming gangs. Does my hon. Friend agree that, despite the numerous actions that this Government have taken to protect women and girls, hon. Members sometimes use language, both inside and outside the House, that allows the spread online of tropes about my party and hon. Members on this side that—I speak from personal experience here—have real-world implications? Those online tropes affect the behaviour of people in the real world. Does she agree that it is incumbent on right hon. and hon. Members, both inside and outside the House, to use temperate language? Opposition is needed and expected, but politicising such an important issue can create real risks for hon. Members and others in the real world.
Sarah Jones
I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. We all have a duty to try to use language in a way that does not incite hatred and division. Of course, there are very strong feelings around this area in particular, because the crimes are so heinous and there was so much that was wrong about the way that the state, in all its forms, responded to those crimes. I understand the anger, but I urge all hon. Members to be careful with their language. We have all seen, in real life, the impact of what we are seeing online. That can be very scary and very dangerous, so I urge everybody to treat this issue with the respect it deserves.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister very much for her encouraging answers, and put on record that no one doubts her commitment to delivering justice. We thank her for it. What urgent steps will the Government take to action the recommendations on the mandatory ethnicity recording of offenders and the deportation of all foreign national perpetrators, and those relating to the full institutional failures by the police, the social services, local authorities and the NHS? Will she follow through with a national public inquiry, with subpoena powers?
Sarah Jones
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. On ethnicity, we will legislate in the police reform Bill, which will come before Parliament shortly, to ensure ethnicity is recorded in the way that I think everyone in this House wants. He will know that we have increased very substantially the number of foreign national offenders being deported. Since the previous Government, there has been a big increase. That is quite right, and we will continue with that. We will continue to do the work across all our Departments to make sure that people are acting in the way that they should. There is a whole raft of work under way across multiple Departments to make sure of that.