Orphines: Temporary Class Drug Order
Sarah Jones Excerpts(2 days, 15 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
Tackling illegal drugs is key to delivering this Government’s missions by making our streets safer, improving our nation’s health, breaking down barriers to opportunities for all and supporting economic growth.
In the last year orphines, a class of lethal synthetic opioids, have emerged in the UK. The National Crime Agency and Office for Health Improvement and Disparities have reported that in England alone there have been more than 15 confirmed deaths in which orphines were involved since the spring of 2025. The OHID’s National Drug Treatment Monitoring System data shows that 12 of these were in the period September to December 2025, including five in December.
I am today laying a temporary class drug order before Parliament, under section 2A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. This will control seven named orphines. Three of the seven have been identified as being involved in deaths in the UK; the other four were notified by the EU Drugs Agency as being present in EU drugs markets. This is in line with a recommendation from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, for whose recent report on orphines I am grateful.
The TCDO will make it easier for law enforcement to take action against those supplying orphines. It will make it a specific offence to supply, offer to supply, produce, possess with intent to supply, import or export these seven substances. The maximum sentence will be 14 years’ imprisonment.
The TCDO comes into force tomorrow, and lasts for a year, unless the substances named within it are, before then, permanently controlled under the 1971 Act. I intend to lay before Parliament in due course a draft Order in Council which would, if agreed by Parliament, enact such a permanent control by making these substances class A drugs.
These substances are not believed to have legitimate uses, but should someone need to make legitimate use of them, for example for research purposes, they will be able to apply to the Home Office for a licence.
We will continue to support law enforcement agencies in taking action against these and other harmful drugs, to protect our communities.
[HCWS105]
Oral Answers to Questions
Sarah Jones Excerpts(4 days, 15 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
There were several large-scale events in London on 16 May, the Unite the Kingdom rally being one of them. I had several briefings with the Met, who took a robust approach to the Unite the Kingdom rally, and I was in the control room on 16 May to see the operation for myself.
Douglas McAllister
What happens in our capital city has a knock-on effect across our entire country. My West Dunbartonshire constituent, Lindsey, contacted me to express her deep concern and shock at the abhorrent displays at the Unite the Kingdom rally. Participants openly incited racial hatred in inflammatory speeches but, more significantly, there were provocative Islamophobic stunts, involving mocking the religious dress of Muslim women. I understand those responsible were not arrested and I share my constituents’ disgust. Is the Minister satisfied with the Metropolitan police response? What future action will be considered to prevent a recurrence?
Sarah Jones
The Metropolitan Police Service maintained public order and kept Londoners safe on a day when there was an unprecedented number of large-scale events. Some 43 arrests were made at the Unite the Kingdom rally and the Nakba 78: March for Palestine. In advance, 11 foreign nationals were prevented from entering the UK to speak at the event and were prevented by the Met from broadcasting to the event. Of course I understand the concerns that my hon. Friend’s constituent raises, but the Metropolitan police, with their 4,000 officers on that day, did a very good job.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
Many in the Muslim community are feeling bewildered, besieged and beleaguered. When they exercise their democratic right to vote and the results do not go a certain way, they are accused of sectarianism. When they take to the streets to protest peacefully against genocide, they are accused of going on hate marches, all the while witnessing not one but two Unite the Kingdom marches, where there were open calls for their expulsion from this country, which are met with apparent indifference. What steps is the Home Secretary taking to protect the Muslim community from further alienation and what message does she send to those who incite hatred against them?
Sarah Jones
This Government are committed to tackling all forms of hate crime, including anti-Muslim hostility. We are actively seeking to ensure the safety and protection of all individuals and communities. The UK has a proud tradition of racial and religious tolerance within the law, and this Government are absolutely committed to building the strong and integrated society that we all want to see.
Naushabah Khan (Gillingham and Rainham) (Lab)
Last week, I met one of my constituents who had faced horrible racist abuse on the train home from people who had been on the Unite the Kingdom rally. As someone of mixed white and middle eastern heritage, she told me that for the first time she felt scared in her own country. Does the Minister agree with me that we have a responsibility to tackle racial division across our country and not to ignite the situation, and that when the leader of Reform UK takes to the airwaves in the aftermath of heightened racial tensions to tell the public that they must react with “pure cold rage”, it is people such as my constituent who pay the price?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend’s story about her constituent will not be the only one we hear about. I notice that Reform UK is quick to slam into the television stations as soon as something occurs, but its Members do not then come to this place to debate it in the normal way. Members of this House and those beyond have a critical role to play in building the strong and integrated society that we all want to see, one that is not fuelled by hatred and division.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
I think the Minister speaks for the whole House in thanking the Metropolitan police for policing riots and protests that go beyond the realms of what is legally appropriate or acceptable, and that should happen to everybody, whatever the subject of their protest. Does the Minister agree that the rules on donations to fund these rallies—one of the organisers of the rallies, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, who has thanked his donors, is a prominent member of a political party—should apply to the organisers as much as they do to anybody involved in politics, and that those donations should be declared with the transparency expected by this House and my constituents? Does the Minister agree that anybody receiving money from domestic or foreign sources should declare it?
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
As with all new technology, decisions about procuring and using AI are a matter for operationally independent chief constables. The Home Office is supporting the police to adopt AI rapidly and responsibly, with £115 million of investment over the next three years. That includes investing in the national centre for AI, which will help the police make informed decisions.
Martin Wrigley
Palantir appears to have a habit of avoiding competitive tender and scrutiny by using free trials and locking up the contract specifications after getting a foot in the door. I congratulate the London Mayor on stopping the recent potential contract offered by the Met police without a competitive tender process. However, last week, the estimated £17 million contract for the National Firearms Licensing Management System was won by a bid from Palantir of just £7.5 million, just 44% of the expected price. That suggests either a massive error in estimation, or Palantir buying the job, giving it unfettered access to whisper in the ear of all 43 police forces. Will the Minister pause the signing of that contract, which is due this Thursday, so that appropriate scrutiny can take place to ensure that a competitive tendering process has been followed transparently?
Sarah Jones
I can assure the hon. Gentleman that Palantir is not buying the job. In the Home Office we have very robust processes, which were followed in full. The current licence management system is approaching the end of its life, and it is very important that we have a good one to maintain safety. There was an open and competitive process, run by the Police Digital Service and BlueLight Commercial, which do these things on behalf of policing. The hon. Gentleman is right that the contract is yet to be signed, but Palantir is the preferred supplier and all the right processes were followed.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the new legal framework around facial recognition technology. We have seen successful trials of this in Harlow, but does the Minister agree it is essential that that technology is deployed lawfully, proportionately and with accountability, and that that is taken into account when any Government contract is granted?
Sarah Jones
I agree with my hon. Friend that live facial recognition is an extraordinarily innovative new technology that helps us catch really nasty criminals in my constituency and in other parts of the country, and we are investing in it through our police reform agenda. We are also legislating for it, because we totally recognise that there is some uncertainty about what it is used for and how it should be used. We want to put that right, be really clear about it, and put it on the face of legislation.
Jack Rankin (Windsor) (Con)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
Through our Crime and Policing Act 2026 we have new and enhanced powers to enable local agencies to tackle antisocial behaviour offenders, and our neighbourhood policing guarantee has ensured that every police force in England and Wales now has a dedicated antisocial behaviour lead and a local action plan to crack down on offenders who blight our communities.
Jim Dickson
Residents of Darenth and other parts of my constituency are facing persistent nuisance owing to the antisocial riding of motorbikes and quad bikes in local woodlands over the last few years. I know from my conversations with the new district commander for Dartford and Gravesham that the police are starting to use the powers in the Crime and Policing Act to seize and crush vehicles and issue community protection notices to offenders. Can the Minister tell Dartford residents how those new powers, and other Government measures, will finally tackle this antisocial behaviour at source?
Sarah Jones
I think we all share the hunger to tackle this awful crime, which blights communities. Through the Crime and Policing Act, we have strengthened police powers to swiftly seize vehicles that are used antisocially. We have stripped away the requirement to issue a warning, which enables officers to act immediately to take vehicles off the streets, and we are introducing new respect orders, which can tackle persistent offenders in this and other areas. We have just carried out a consultation, and will shortly be looking at what we can do to shorten the period for police dispersal so that these things can be crushed more quickly.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
In my constituency and across the country we have seen a troubling rise in violence towards wildlife, often with the use of catapults. Wildlife crime is not an isolated incident; it is usually related to something else. Studies have shown that seven out of 10 victims of domestic violence who owned pets said that their domestic abusers were also threatening, harming or killing those pets. Will the Minister please look at Holly’s law, which would create an animal cruelty register to deter wildlife crime, which often leads to other violent crimes?
Sarah Jones
We will certainly look at any proposals to tackle wildlife crime. I know that the use of catapults is a particular issue. This week I shall be holding a roundtable with a number of interested parties, including people who will, I suspect, be saying the same thing as the hon. Lady. We fund the national rural crime unit and the national wildlife crime unit, which provides more resources for this purpose, but we will certainly keep all options on the table.
Jas Athwal (Ilford South) (Lab)
Liam Conlon (Beckenham and Penge) (Lab)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
Around half of vehicle crime involves manipulation of signals from remote devices. Through the Crime and Policing Act 2026, we have criminalised the possession, importation, making, adapting and supplying of the electronic devices used to commit vehicle theft, which will make a real difference in my hon. Friend’s constituency.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
Sarah Jones
The hon. Gentleman is a bit behind the times; we have already announced that we are reforming that formula.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Sarah Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for her question—[Interruption.] The right to peaceful protest and public assembly is one that we must protect, but it must be balanced with the need to maintain public order and keep the public safe. Perhaps she could write to me with further detail. If she wants to have a meeting to talk about it, I would be very happy to do that.
Mr Speaker
Order. I just want to help the hon. Member for York Outer (Mr Charters). The Minister was answering, and you walked straight across both of us—not that I should need to explain that.
Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)
Sarah Jones
I am working closely with the Department for Transport on the challenges with e-scooters and the use of e-bikes, which I know many Members across the House will have. Making sure that we have more neighbourhood police in our communities is the absolute core of the issue, and that is what the Government are delivering.
Jess Phillips (Birmingham Yardley) (Lab)
I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute back to the Home Secretary, who has worked incredibly hard on the issues on which the Government made their announcement today. The BBC carries the headline that we will stop children sending and receiving images; can she say for the House that the change will also stop children ever taking naked images of themselves, and give us an assurance that her Department is working on robust legislation and a legislative vehicle to make sure that can happen?
Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)
Sarah Jones
The murder rate is at its lowest level ever recorded in London. The police have more money and more resources to tackle crime, and we are working closely with them as they do that. I gently remind the hon. Gentleman that when his party’s Government recruited police officers, they put them behind desks. We are putting them on our streets, fighting crime.
Dame Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab)
With the news that the Stradey Park hotel has now gone into receivership, what assurances can the Minister give my constituents in Llanelli that his Department has no plans to use the premises for asylum seeker accommodation?
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
My constituents hate seeing organised shoplifting taking place with apparent impunity. Norfolk police recognises this and has identified suspects in more than a third of all cases, but what is the point when the Government’s assumption is that any sentence shorter than 12 months will automatically be suspended? What are the Government going to do about it?
Sarah Jones
We are making some progress in this space. It may seem small, but there was a 1% fall in shop theft offences last year, and a 30% increase in the last year of the hon. Gentleman’s Government, so we are making progress. In particular, we are working hard on how we target prolific offenders more. We are using new technology and of course working with the private sector. Our Crime and Policing Act 2026 introduced new powers, so we are going to tackle shop theft in a way that the previous Government did not. We are also launching the centre for AI soon, which will give us new technology that we can use. We are bearing down on shop theft.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
Sadly, last week Dudley town centre fell victim to vandalism again. The new central seating area was damaged, impacting local businesses and footfall. I welcome the Government’s efforts to restore neighbourhood policing and our new police station, but what further steps will the Minister take to tackle antisocial behaviour and to take criminals off our streets and allow businesses to operate safely?
Sarah Jones
We are working hard to introduce respect orders, which will be really important in this space. I am happy to visit my hon. Friend to see exactly what the problems are and what we can do, but we are introducing whatever powers we can to tackle “low-level” antisocial behaviour—that is what the previous Government called it—which actually blights our communities.
Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst (Solihull West and Shirley) (Con)
I listened carefully to the Minister’s response to my hon. Friend the Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew), but the reality is that every day shopkeepers are facing abuse and threats and being stolen from. A direct consequence of the presumption in the Sentencing Act 2026 that those with a sentence of 12 months or less will not face prison is that there is no deterrent. Can the Minister genuinely say that our streets are safer as a result?
Sarah Jones
First, we have introduced a new offence of assaulting a shop worker, which the previous Government failed to do. We are using every single tool in our armoury. Unfortunately, the previous Government did not provide the prison places they promised, so we have to deal with the situation as we find it.
Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab)
The role of faith liaison officer is extremely important in Lewisham, but the post has been deleted. The officer is important with regard to preventing extremism and building community cohesion: they meet with faith leaders and have been integral to the inter-faith peace walk. I ask the Minister to look again at the role and see what more can be done. This is important not just for Lewisham but across the Met area and, indeed, across the country.
Sarah Jones
As my hon. Friend knows, that is a decision for the Met in terms of how it allocates its resources, but I hear what she said. In the light of the tensions we have faced in recent months, I am sure there is a role for policing in building relationships with our faith communities.
Pete Wishart (Perth and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Every few weeks, assorted far-right activists descend on my peaceful city of Perth to holler abuse at asylum seekers placed in hotels by the Home Office. They come tanked up on misinformation and loathing, and the people of Perth are getting thoroughly sick of it. Some who attend have even been served with bans in their own communities, yet they roll up in Perth. What will the Home Secretary do about these individuals? Will she consider something like buffer zones between the protesters and the hotels?
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
Stephen Yaxley-Lennon has publicly thanked the donors who funded the recent Unite the Kingdom marches, which needed a significant police presence. We have heard mention several times this afternoon of equality before the law, so does the Home Secretary agree that the laws regarding the reporting of donations, both from the UK and from overseas, apply to members of all political parties equally?
Sarah Jones
Transparency underscores democracy, and we need to make sure we have that. Of course, we will talk to our colleagues at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government who run elections to make sure we are doing everything we should be doing.
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
The horticultural sector in Cornwall is worth about £100 million a year, but it is reliant on the seasonal worker scheme. The scheme numbers are announced annually at the end of the year, but the daffodil season in Cornwall begins in January. Will Ministers meet me to discuss an earlier announcement and a two-year rolling scheme?
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
My constituent, Richard, has been unable to work for four months because of Disclosure and Barring Service delays. Things are getting desperate at home, and he faces the prospect of defaulting on his mortgage this month. There has been a 10-month delay from the point of application to now. Will one of the Front-Bench team look at his case in particular, to help him out, but also try to take a hand of the DBS more generally?
Sarah Jones
I am certainly happy to look at that particular case. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman could write to me and I will look into it.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
As if the Government’s announcement on watering down the provisions of the Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023 were not disappointing enough, the secondary legislation to enact what is left of it still has not been tabled. Where is it?
Sarah Jones
It is a shame: the hon. Gentleman is much nicer when we meet personally than he is in the Chamber. He knows that we are working on that, and he knows that we will do it as soon as we can, but I am happy to have another conversation with him.
Edward Morello
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In my topical question earlier, I asked the Minister whether the Department would reform the police funding formula to account for seasonality and rurality. The Minister said that that announcement had already been made; actually, only a review of the funding formula has been announced. Can you give me guidance, Mr Speaker, on how I can get information on what will be included?
Draft Animal (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (Amendment) Regulations 2026
Sarah Jones Excerpts(1 week, 2 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 Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (Amendment) Regulations 2026.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. Following EU exit, the Government have been reviewing retained EU law to ensure that it functions clearly and effectively within the UK domestic framework. The draft regulations will ensure that the UK’s high standards for the use of animals in scientific research continue to operate clearly and effectively in domestic law. The regulations were laid on 25 March 2026 using powers under the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023.
The regulations make technical amendments to retained EU legislation relating to the use of animals in scientific procedures. They preserve existing animal protection safeguards, responsibilities and enforcement powers within a clear UK legislative framework, and assure transparency of operation. They do not create new permissions for animal testing, nor do they reduce the rigorous standards that establishments and individuals licensed to use animals for scientific purposes must meet.
The UK operates one of the most robust regulatory systems in the world, founded on the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Under that framework, animals may be used only when there is no viable alternative, with the number of animals used kept to the minimum necessary and with methods refined to reduce suffering. Those requirements are enforced through a comprehensive system of licensing, inspection, audit and enforcement by the Animals in Science Regulation Unit.
Alongside the primary legislation, animal welfare standards are supported by the code of practice for the housing and care of animals bred, supplied or used for scientific purposes. The code sets out the minimum standards that licensed establishments must meet for the care and accommodation of animals used in scientific work. Compliance with the code is a condition of holding a licence. The regulations ensure that the code remains legally effective within the UK framework, so that the same high standards continue to apply.
The use of animals in science attracts significant public interest, and it is right that it is subject to robust scrutiny given the important welfare and ethical considerations involved. The Government’s position on animal testing is clear: we are committed to working towards our long-term vision in which animal testing is replaced in all but exceptional circumstances. That is why, in November 2025, we published the “Replacing animals in science” strategy, backed by £75 million of investment to accelerate the development, validation and uptake of non animal methods. It includes commitments to establish a UK centre for the validation of alternative methods, to create a preclinical translational models’ hub, and to expand challenge-led innovation for alternative methods.
At the same time, there remains an immediate need for the use of animals in some areas of scientific research and testing to protect human and animal health and the environment. When we rely on medicines and medical technologies, we rely on rigorous safety testing that, in some cases, still requires the use of animals. Where animals must still be used, it is essential that they are protected by a rigorous and enforceable regulatory system. That is exactly what the regulations do. They preserve existing protections through a framework designed to minimise harm, drive continuous improvement and ensure that animal research is conducted responsibly and only when truly necessary.
The regulations provide legal clarity, following EU exit, to ensure that the UK’s high protection and welfare standards continue to be upheld. For those reasons, I commend the regulations to the Committee.
Sarah Jones
I thank Members for their brief but excellent contributions. On how we will work with DSIT and continue to improve experimentation on animals to make sure that we always push the standards we need to push, there is a whole package of work in the £75 million plan we have announced that will take us further and faster. Many colleagues across the House have campaigned for something called Herbie’s law, and measures in our reforms include timebound action plans, progress reporting and public expert advisory committees.
There is a whole programme of work, but the three Rs—replacement, refinement and reduction—bind together everything we do in respect of animal testing. We cannot use animals in research unless we absolutely have to. As the research and technology improve, we will use animals less. We have to use the minimum number of animals through the reduction process, and we have to use the experiments that cause the least harm through the refinement programme.
The hon. Member for Stockton West asked about ASPA; we have set up a cross-departmental ministerial team to deliver the strategy, led by my colleague Lord Hanson, with Lord Vallance and with Baroness Hayman from the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs. I hope that reassures Members and, once again, commend the regulations to the Committee.
Question put and agreed to.
Biometrics Commissioner Valedictory Report: 2024-25
Sarah Jones Excerpts(3 weeks, 3 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
I am pleased to announce that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is today publishing the valedictory report of the Biometrics Commissioner, Francesca Whitelaw KC.
The Biometrics Commissioner is appointed under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and provides independent oversight of the retention and use of biometric material by the police and other authorities.
This report covers casework data from January 2024 to March 2025 and includes reflections on the commissioner’s interim tenure from July to October 2025. It provides transparency on the oversight of national security determinations and applications made under section 63G of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and sets out recommendations for operational improvements.
The report does not contain material requiring exclusion for reasons of national security or public interest.
The report has been laid before the House and will be available from the Vote Office and on gov.uk.
[HCWS39]
Draft Controlled Drugs (Drug Precursors) (Amendment and Revocation) Regulations 2026
Draft Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Act 1990 (Amendment) Order 2026
Sarah Jones Excerpts(3 weeks, 3 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 Controlled Drugs (Drug Precursors) (Amendment and Revocation) Regulations 2026.
The Chair
With this it will be convenient to consider the draft Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Act 1990 (Amendment) Order 2026.
Sarah Jones
It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms McVey. The draft regulations and the draft order, which were both laid before Parliament on 26 February, will address the harms caused by illegal drugs, which do terrible damage to health and to communities. Acquisitive crime and 50% of homicides are linked to drugs, and drug deaths reached 3,500 in 2024.
Although many drug precursor chemicals have legitimate industrial uses, they are also used to make illegal drugs. We therefore control DPCs in two ways. The first, which the draft regulations are concerned with, seeks to reduce the risk of DPCs that are used legitimately in industry being diverted to producing illicit drugs. The second, which the draft order is concerned with, is through measures to tackle the deliberate illicit use of DPCs to produce drugs.
I turn first to the draft regulations. Companies must generally obtain licences or other authorisations to use DPCs. In most cases, they must maintain proper records of consignments, and they must always notify the National Crime Agency where they suspect diversion of DPCs for illicit use. Before Brexit, those requirements were set by the EU; since Brexit, EU rules have continued to apply in Northern Ireland under the Windsor framework, while a similar regime operates in Great Britain as assimilated law.
The draft regulations will amend deficiencies in that assimilated law. For example, Ministers lack effective powers to control new DPCs in Great Britain, so no new chemicals have been controlled there since January 2021. The EU has added 10 DPCs and 14 related substances since then; those controls apply in Northern Ireland, but not in Great Britain. The substances are used to manufacture MDMA—commonly known as ecstasy—and fentanyl, amphetamine and methamphetamine. All of them, except amphetamine, are class A drugs. The draft regulations will therefore ensure that the requirements on companies that make legitimate use of DPCs in Great Britain apply to those 10 DPCs and the related substances. They will also provide powers to control additional substances in Great Britain in future.
The draft regulations will also provide a statutory mechanism to control movements of DPCs between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Such controls help to prevent diversion of DPCs and ensure that we meet our international obligations. We will not require companies to pay fees to do so, however; this is to ensure that there are no unnecessary impediments to free trade within this country.
Lastly, although companies are already required to keep records and report concerns in respect of a wide range of chemicals, the criminal penalties for failing to do so cover a smaller group of substances. The draft regulations will ensure that the rules and the penalties relating to documentation and reporting apply to all chemicals that are controlled under the regulations.
I turn to the draft order, which will add 12 DPCs and 16 related substances to the list of substances that it is a crime to supply or make if the defendant knows or suspects that they will be used to make controlled drugs. As I say, those DPCs are also used to produce ecstasy, fentanyl, amphetamine or methamphetamine. The UN controlled those substances between March 2014 and March 2024. The legislation should have been updated sooner; I have written to the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee to address its concerns about the causes of the delay.
I draw the Committee’s attention to the correction slip for the draft regulations, which corrects two minor typographical errors. First, a reference to “United Kingdom” has now been changed to “the United Kingdom”. Secondly, the original draft referred to the “third place” the phrase “countries of destination” appeared in the text; it should have read “second place”, as there was no third.
I commend the draft regulations and the draft order to the Committee as instruments that will provide the Government with further means to tackle the illicit drugs that cause harm to so many.
Sarah Jones
I thank hon. Members for their comments, for agreeing with the legislation and for making some helpful points. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Stockton West, is right to say that we must make sure that the list is as current as it can be. He is also right that with all the new synthetic drugs that are sadly becoming more prevalent in this country, we must make sure that we are absolutely on top of their use, which is where the draft regulations will apply.
The shadow Minister mentioned the EU and Northern Ireland, and the relationship between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The draft regulations will remove regulatory divergence between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, because the same DPCs will now be controlled in both, as I hope he will recognise.
The shadow Minister and the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills, both asked why it has taken so many years to get to this point. I wrote in some detail to the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee in March, and I am happy to provide colleagues with a copy of that letter. Obviously I cannot comment on decisions made by previous Ministers, but we have been working to rectify this matter since the general election. The perm sec is taking responsibility for making sure that we have the right logs in place in the Home Office, so that where legislation needs to be updated over time, we are completely aligned with that and alive to it.
The hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills suggested that we have taken our time since the election, but we have worked through these things as quickly as we can. We previously introduced generic controls on nitazenes, which was incredibly important, and we are working through these things as fast as we can.
I hope that I have reassured hon. Members. I am very happy to provide my letter to the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee if members of this Committee would like it, but I think I have covered all the issues that have been raised. I acknowledge those issues and hope that hon. Members will support these two very important pieces of legislation.
Matt Vickers
Has any advice been received on the appropriate approach to past charging?
Sarah Jones
On past charging, we are offering repayments. We think the cost of those repayments will be about £3,000 in total. It is quite a small amount, but we are making that available to people.
Question put and agreed to.
DRAFT CRIMINAL JUSTICE (INTERNATIONAL) (CO-OPERATION) ACT 1990 (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2026
Resolved,
That the Committee has considered the draft Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Act 1990 (Amendment) Order 2026.
Firearms Licensing Fees
Sarah Jones Excerpts(4 weeks, 1 day ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
The Government are today laying a statutory instrument before Parliament to introduce increases in firearms licensing fees by the rate of inflation to ensure that these fees continue to provide full cost recovery for the police. These increases follow the comprehensive review of, and increases to, firearms licensing fees in February 2025. The new fees come into effect from 4 June 2026.
The fees are increasing by 3%, in line with the consumer prices index, for all statutory firearms licensing fees, based on Office for National Statistics CPI figures for the 12 months to February 2026.
[HCWS1555]
Crime and Policing Bill
Sarah Jones ExcerptsWednesday 22nd April 2026
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Crime and Policing Act 2026 View all Crime and Policing Act 2026 Debates Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: Commons Consideration of Lords Message as at 22 April 2026 - (22 Apr 2026)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
I beg to move,
That this House disagrees with the Lords in their amendments 2H and 2J, but proposes in lieu of those amendments amendment (a) to their amendment 2F and amendment (b) to their amendment 2G.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
With this it will be convenient to discuss the following Government motion:
That this House insists on its amendments 439C and 439D and disagrees with the Lords in their amendments 439E and 439F in lieu.
Sarah Jones
It is with regret that we return to the Lords amendments to this Bill. The elected House has made its views crystal clear on the issues before us. We have already voted twice, by substantial margins, to reject the Lords amendments. It is time for the considered views of this House to prevail. Let me deal briefly with the two remaining issues before us.
In our earlier debates, I have been clear that the Government agree that the enforcement of public spaces protection orders and community protection notices must be proportionate. Fixed penalty notices must never simply be seen as a money spinner for enforcement agencies, but as an appropriate and proportionate means of tackling antisocial behaviour in our communities. We will make this distinction absolutely clear in our statutory guidance. To this end, we have already agreed amendments to provide that the statutory guidance issued under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 must address the proportionate use of fixed penalty notices by authorised persons. I know the Liberal Democrats want early action on this, so we have brought forward a further amendment to provide that such guidance must be issued within six months of Royal Assent.
It is particularly regrettable that the Opposition have returned yet again to Lords amendment 359, albeit in modified form. The amendment is simply unworkable, and it is wholly contrary to the approach taken by successive Governments to the exercise of the powers in the Terrorism Act 2000 to proscribe terrorist organisations. There is no more important duty on the Government than to safeguard this country from terrorist attack, but requiring the Government to in effect give a running commentary on whether any organisation linked to the Iranian armed forces should be proscribed does not for one moment add to our security. Their lordships can keep insisting on this amendment, but our response will be the same. This is not an amendment that any responsible Government can or should entertain.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
In the papers today, there are pictures of six ladies who are going to be executed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is in charge in Iran, because they protested in the streets for liberty and freedom. For those six ladies whose lives are on the line and for the millions of people in Iran who want freedom, I think the Government should proscribe the IRGC, and they should not delay in doing so. I say respectfully to the Minister that it is time to face the realities we have in this world.
Sarah Jones
None of us would say for one second that we are anything other than appalled by what we see happening in Iran. None of us supports the Iranian Government and none of us supports the IRGC. We have sanctioned over 550 individuals and organisations, including the IRGC, to prevent them from coming here and to take their assets where we can do so. The point is that this Parliament is not the place for a Government to say one way or the other what they are going to proscribe or not proscribe. That is not the way government is done in this country, and it is not the way we are going to operate now. However, I get the hon. Gentleman’s point for sure. None of us supports the IRGC or anything it does, and we are appalled by the very significant, awful number of deaths we have seen in recent times and, indeed, over many years.
In conclusion, we are reaching the stage where the issue before the House is no longer the detail of the various Lords amendments, but whether the unelected Lords should continue to disregard the clearly and unequivocally expressed views of the House of Commons and delay the enactment of the Bill. We have already rejected the Lords amendments on two occasions, with majorities of well over 100. Let us send these amendments back to the Lords, hopefully for one last time.
Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)
Those in the other place have asked us to reconsider Lords amendments 439E and 439F, which compel the Home Secretary to review the proscription of groups linked to the Iranian armed forces, including the IRGC.
There can be absolutely no doubt about the threat that Iran and its proxies pose to this country and our national security. In 2015, terrorists linked to Iran were caught stockpiling explosives on the outskirts of London. In 2020, amid protests in Iran, the IRGC sought to assassinate two journalists on British soil. Just last year, the IRGC was linked to an attempted attack on the Israeli embassy in Kensington, which was foiled by counter-terrorism police. The organisation has been linked to at least 20 credible threats in the UK.
Even beyond the direct risk posed by IRGC terrorism, the organisation is responsible for funding and supporting other extreme groups in this country, and has worked closely with criminal gangs to undermine our national security. We will be able to combat that threat only if we are willing to tackle it head-on, using every power available to us to do so. To that end, the very least we can do is make it harder for Islamist extremist groups to operate legally in this country. By proscribing the IRGC and other groups linked to the Iranian armed forces, Ministers would be able to protect not only those being attacked—actually, it is our Jewish community that we are really thinking about at this difficult time. These Lords amendments can only be a good thing. They would help to strengthen those protections.
When Labour Members were on the Opposition Benches, many of them agreed. In April 2024, the now Foreign Secretary called for exactly this policy. Yet now, they are refusing even to review the proscription of groups such as the IRGC, which fuel the Islamist cause and are directly linked to the Iranian armed forces. I urge the Minister and her colleagues on the Government Benches to change their minds and accept the Lords amendments. The threat is far too grave to be ignored. By burying their heads in the sand, they will not make the problem go away; they will only put our country and its people more at risk.
Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)
I recognise that, since the last round of ping-pong, a concession was made on youth diversion orders in the other place and we welcome that. We are disappointed that the Government have not made suitable concessions on fixed penalty notices. However, we do not seek to force that to a vote this evening. We hope to work with the Government and we will pursue other avenues.
The shadow Minister set out the case very well for the motion on the proscription of Iran-linked groups. Recent activities in this country give us further cause for concern. The rise in antisemitic sentiment on our streets and the way in which Iran is clearly seeking to foment discontent on our streets by funding activities that further antisemitic hatred and terrorist outrages should give us pause for thought. I would hope that Members on both sides of the House recognise that—I know that they do. Even though the Government are clearly not going to vote for the motion this evening, we will.
Sarah Jones
I hope that we are here debating this Bill for the last time. I know that Government Members earnestly want to see the Bill enacted so that we can deliver safer streets for all our communities. I thank the Liberal Democrats for not pushing their amendments to a vote on this occasion.
On the issue of the IRGC, I have been clear that no responsible Government who put the safety and security of the country first can give a running commentary on whether or not this organisation will be proscribed, and it is time to close down this debate. The hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey) was absolutely right to mention the Jewish community; we are all deeply concerned by what we have seen happen to our Jewish friends and colleagues across the country in recent days, particularly in London. We are doing all we can to ensure that our Jewish community is kept safe. As the hon. Lady will know, we are investing to ensure that we have protections for synagogues and other Jewish spaces where we need it, and we are working with them to do everything that we can. The hon. Lady is right on that matter—I agree with her on it.
However, as to the question of whether the Government can be told in this place that we must immediately proscribe an organisation—that is not the way that this Government work. It is not the way that any Government have worked. I respectfully suggest to the other place and to Members in this place that the time has come to call it a day and to let this Bill pass.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House disagrees with the Lords in their amendments 2H and 2J, but proposes in lieu of those amendments amendment (a) to their amendment 2F and amendment (b) to their amendment 2G.
After Clause 190
Proscription status of Iran-related entities: review
Motion made, and Question put,
That this House insists on its amendments 439C and 439D and disagrees with the Lords in their amendments 439E and 439F in lieu.—(Sarah Jones.)
Crime and Policing Bill
Sarah Jones ExcerptsMonday 20th April 2026
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Crime and Policing Act 2026 View all Crime and Policing Act 2026 Debates Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: Commons Consideration of Lords Message as at 20 April 2026 - (20 Apr 2026)
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
I beg to move,
That this House disagrees with the Lords in their Amendments 2D and 2E but proposes in lieu of those amendments Amendment (a) to its Amendment 2B and Amendment (b) to its Amendment 2C.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
With this it will be convenient to consider the following Government motions:
That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their Amendment 11 but proposes Amendments (a) to (d) to the Bill in lieu of the Lords Amendment.
That this House agrees with the Lords in their Amendments 265D to 265H.
That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their Amendment 342, but does not insist on its Amendment 342A in lieu and proposes Amendments (a) and (b) to the Bill in lieu of the Lords Amendment 342.
That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments 359 and 439 but proposes Amendments (a) and (b) to the Bill in lieu of the Lords Amendments 359 and 439.
Sarah Jones
I hope we are on the home straight with this enormous piece of legislation. I start by welcoming the fact that the House of Lords has heeded many of the arguments and votes in this House last week—of the 19 issues that I went through in my speech last Tuesday, we are now down to just four. As for those four, we have again listened carefully to the points raised in the Lords and tabled further amendments in lieu.
Let me turn first to amendments 2D and 2E on fining for profit, tabled by Liberal Democrat Front Benchers. I again recognise the concerns expressed about enforcement agencies potentially issuing fixed penalty notices for antisocial behaviour offences where there may be a financial incentive to do so. We have listened to those concerns, and hon. Members will recall that last week we agreed amendments making clear that the statutory guidance issued under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 may, among other things, address the issue of the proportionate issuing of fixed penalty notices by authorised persons for breaches of community protection notices and public space protection orders. The Liberal Democrat Front-Bench spokesperson in the other place said that discretion to issue such guidance was not good enough, and that there should be a duty to do so. The amendment in lieu now provides for just such a duty. I hope this will persuade hon. Members that the Government are committed to addressing this issue.
Turning to the question of fly-tipping, the Government again recognise the strength of feeling on this issue. Our recent waste crime action plan has set out our zero-tolerance approach to prevent waste crime, pursue the criminals responsible and accelerate the clean-up effort. On the specific issue of vehicle seizure powers, I want to be clear that local authorities already have powers to seize vehicles if they have reason to believe the vehicle is being used, or is about to be used, to commit a fly-tipping offence. However, to further support local authorities, we have tabled an amendment in lieu that makes clear what the statutory guidance on fly-tipping should cover. For example, it must include advice on collecting strong evidence against the offender that can help to secure a successful conviction and advice on what action can be taken, including the seizure of vehicles.
Local authorities are the lead agency for tackling fly-tipping, and it is right that they lead on enforcement, so the power to seize and dispose of vehicles used in fly-tipping properly rests with them. The police already have general powers of seizure under section 19 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, where they have reasonable grounds to believe that the item is evidence in relation to an offence. That power can be used to seize vehicles involved in fly-tipping. Where the police seize a vehicle, they would be expected to liaise with the local authority, which would then take action to dispose of that vehicle. As such, Lords amendment 11 seeks to close a gap in the law that, in practice, just does not exist.
I turn next to youth diversion orders. We were disappointed by the Lords’ decision last week to reject the Government’s amendment in lieu, which was tabled in response to Baroness Doocey’s amendment 342. Baroness Doocey raised concerns regarding the lack of a requirement for police to consult organisations beyond criminal justice services, flagging that this missed an opportunity to legislate for consultation with other agencies such as health, education and social services.
We respectfully disagree with Baroness Doocey that her amendment would directly respond to the recommendations made by Sir Adrian Fulford in his recent report on the horrific Southport attack. Multi-agency engagement will be critical to the success of these orders, which is why the Bill already includes a duty on the police to consult youth justice services. In England and Wales, this will be through local youth offending teams, which are multi-agency in nature—they include representatives from health, education, social services and probation, as is underpinned in statute by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. They may also extend beyond those mandated agencies to include child and adolescent mental health services, education inclusion teams, voluntary and community organisations, and local early help services. We are therefore confident that youth diversion order applications will be made following consultation with a wide variety of agencies, and will benefit from the expertise of those agencies in working with young people.
Baroness Doocey also raised concerns regarding the police’s consideration of alternative interventions. The statutory guidance, which will be developed by the Home Office and laid before Parliament for scrutiny ahead of publication, will include guidance on alternative interventions that police may wish to consider instead of, or alongside, a youth diversion order.
Mr Joshua Reynolds (Maidenhead) (LD)
The Minister is using words such as “may”. What she has outlined is incredibly important, but Lords amendment 342 obviously goes further than “may”—it insists that diversion orders will involve those necessary consultations. Will the Minister commit today to making sure that the police will have all these statutory duties, not just that they may have them, and that the consultation will be required?
Sarah Jones
The hon. Gentleman has anticipated what I was going to say. I will explain what we want to see as we go forward. It is important to recognise that the court will need to consider the necessity and proportionality of the order when making its decision, and that will necessarily include consideration of alternative options where relevant. All that being said, in the light of the most recent decision by the Lords, we have tabled a further amendment in lieu that builds on the previous Government amendment. It offers further reassurance on the role of wider organisations, and we hope it addresses their lordships’ concerns.
The amendment in lieu extends the list of considerations that the statutory guidance may advise the police to consider as part of a youth diversion order application to include the circumstances in which it may be appropriate for the police to consult others, beyond the youth justice teams mandated in clause 174 of the Bill. That will extend to applications for an order, as well as when the police are considering a variation or discharge of a youth diversion order. It will go further and make it a requirement for the statutory guidance to include guidance on these matters, rather than there simply being a power to do so, as the previous amendment provided for. I trust that with these changes, the Liberal Democrats will now be content that we have met the intent of their amendment.
Lastly, Lords amendment 359 relates to the proscription of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. It is disappointing, to say the least, that the Opposition seek to return to this issue yet again. Successive Governments have adopted the position that it would be wrong in principle to give a running commentary on which organisations are being considered for proscription under section 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The decision to proscribe an organisation is a serious matter, requiring careful analysis of whether the test in section 3 has been met. To suggest, as the amendment provides, that the Government should review every organisation related to the Iranian Government within one month of Royal Assent is simply not a serious proposition. To help the Opposition and others to understand the proscription process, we have instead brought forward an amendment in lieu that requires the Government to lay before Parliament within six months of Royal Assent a statement about the general policies and procedures of the Secretary of State in relation to their powers under section 3 of the 2000 Act.
Before I conclude, let me briefly explain Lords amendments 265D to 265H. Members will recall that last week we agreed amendments to criminalise the possession or publication of pornography that depicts sexual activity involving an adult credibly role-playing as a child. This new offence is intended to capture content that mimics child sex abuse and risks normalising such horrific conduct. The Government amendments agreed in the Lords clarify the drafting of the new offence. The revised drafting makes the offence clearer, ensuring that context can be taken into account, where it is relevant to whether the person is being depicted as a child under 16 and whether the content is showing sexual activity. That will ensure that the offence can, for example, capture a scenario of one person on camera being directed by another behind the camera to engage in sexual acts.
I fully respect the role of the House of Lords as a revising Chamber. It is entitled to ask this House to think again. On each of these four issues I am addressing today, we have already done that once.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister, as always, for her hard work. In the other place, Lord Weir of Ballyholme highlighted freedom of speech in relation to the Public Order Act 1986. Within the Bill coming forward tonight, there is a fine line in terms of the expression of belief, such as through street preaching. Does the Minister believe that the legislation will ensure that people in this Christian nation can publicly speak the word of God in every corner? Some of us believe that it cannot. Can the Minister confirm that, please?
Sarah Jones
As the hon. Gentleman said, there is a fine line to tread throughout public order legislation. We come back to these issues time and again, and it is right that we do so. As times change, the nature of protests changes and the nature of the risks changes. We have new debates about public order. This Home Secretary felt strongly that it was time for a more fundamental look at our public order legislation. That is what we are going through with the review of our public order legislation and our hate crime legislation that Lord Macdonald is undertaking. He will look at whether it is in the right place and doing the right things. I have every confidence in the legislation we are passing today, but the hon. Gentleman knows that there is a review to follow. It perhaps will have more to say, and we will bring it back to this place.
Last Tuesday, this House voted on all four issues that we are debating today and emphatically rejected the Lords amendments. We should again send these amendments back to their lordships with a clear message that they have done their duty but the elected House is clear and unequivocal in its own mind, and the time has come to let this Bill pass. The time for debate has ended. It is now time that this Bill goes to His Majesty for Royal Assent, so that we can get on with implementing the provisions and making our streets, communities and country safer.
Adam Jogee
It was very well said, but it is also important that my constituents are heard in the fight against fly-tipping and keeping our communities safe, clean and green.
When the Minister winds up, I hope she will provide confirmation to Members of the House and to my constituents in Newcastle-under-Lyme that strengthening the statutory guidance on enforcement, including the use of vehicle seizure powers, will help councils. This is important because the people of Newcastle-under-Lyme will be voting in the Newcastle district borough council elections on Thursday 7 May, and I really hope that people in my community vote for the excellent Labour candidates on the ballot paper that day. It is also important because we need our councils to take tougher, more visible action against the fly-tippers who blight our communities. I hope the Minister will provide that confirmation when she winds up, because it is important not just to me, but to the good people of Newcastle-under-Lyme.
Sarah Jones
In the interests of transparency, Madam Deputy Speaker, my glasses are reading glasses, but they also happen to be sunglasses. I will try not to put them on, but my eyes are beginning to go. I do not want to pretend to the House that I am trying to be cool if I put on my glasses; it is just so that I can read the words in front of me.
I want to start by thanking all hon. Members who have spoken in this short but very interesting debate on a wide variety of issues. In particular, I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Harlow (Chris Vince), for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) and for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee).
Chris Vince
I thank the Minister for giving way. I realise she has only just started her speech, but what I did not do in my speech was pay massive tribute to the Harlow Wombles. They are not little creatures from Wimbledon, but representatives of the Harlow community who go out week in, week out to collect rubbish in their local community. I want to thank them for what they do to ensure that our local community stays clean and tidy.
Sarah Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for that excellent intervention. We all thank the Harlow Wombles for the work they do. I do not think we have Croydon Wombles, but we probably need to get some. We do, however, have many very good people who go out and collect rubbish, like my hon. Friend in Harlow.
All three Back-Bench speeches showed the strength of commitment from our 2024 intake in this place. They are debating the issues that matter to local people and which are important. The Government are already taking action on all fronts, and the Bill will help us to tackle the scourges of everyday crime that my hon. Friends touched on.
Turning to the four issues before us today, I am disappointed, coming first to fixed penalty notices, that the Liberal Democrat Front Bench is not persuaded. Lords amendments 2D and 2E amended the Government’s amendment that allows the Secretary of State to issue guidance addressing the issue of fixed penalty notices by enforcement companies and contractors for profit. The amendments specify that the guidance must, rather than may, address that point. The Government have had many conversations on that, both with our colleagues in the Lords and in this place, and I hope those on the Liberal Democrat Front Bench recognise that engagement.
We believe that a provision for private companies to collect and support the Government and local government in their public spaces protection orders and other such measures is fundamentally important to ensure that people abide by the rules of the land. The Government brought forward an amendment in lieu to provide that the statutory guidance issued under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 must, as opposed to may, address the issue of fixed penalty notices by authorised persons, so I had hoped that the Liberal Democrats would recognise that that is going some distance and I am disappointed that they have not on this occasion.
We have had many debates on fly-tipping in this place, and we inherited from the Conservatives a shocking situation where it was not seen to be the serious crime that it is. As a consequence, many of our communities are blighted by it, and my hon. Friends have talked about it in this debate. I am disappointed that the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) continues to argue for Lords amendment 11. I hope he accepts that the police are not the lead agency for enforcing all criminal offences. They work in partnership with the National Crime Agency, the Serious Fraud Office, the Environment Agency, the Gambling Commission and many others, including local councils in their guise as waste authorities.
The police do have the powers to remove a vehicle. In fact, when I was out with the police in Kent only last week, we seized a vehicle because a crime was being committed. Four young men were in a car that was not properly insured, so the men had to get out of the car and we took it away. We were very glad to do so, although the men were not very pleased. It is within the police’s power to stop a car if a criminal offence is occurring and to take that car away.
Matt Vickers
Of the million fly-tipping offences that take place in the country every year, how many does the Minister think end in the seizure of a vehicle?
Sarah Jones
When it comes to fly-tipping, if a crime is being committed, the police can take away the car; the issue we are talking about is the subsequent removal and disposal of that car—taking it away permanently—which the local authority can already do. I encourage all local authorities to make use of this power. This debate arises because in the years in which the Opposition were in government, they did not put enough resources into local government, as I think everyone would agree, to allow it to enforce the laws already in place. There are already powers for local authorities, and we are building on those powers in this legislation.
Sarah Jones
I will give way in one moment.
If someone is caught using a vehicle to fly-tip, we can, as a result of this legislation, add up to nine points to their licence, which is surely a really powerful disincentive against fly-tipping. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would like to explain why he did not bring this in, when he was in government.
Matt Vickers
I will explain more than that. I was delighted to put forward an amendment in Committee proposing just that, and the Ministers sat on either side of the Minister—the Under-Secretaries of State for the Home Department, the hon. Members for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips) and for Dover and Deal (Mike Tapp) —voted against penalty points for that offence. I do not think the Minister heard me when I asked this question before: how many of the million fly-tipping offences that take place in this country does she think result in the seizure of a vehicle? In a year’s time, when we come back and have this discussion again, how many does she think will have been seized?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)
More than under his Government.
Sarah Jones
I suspect, as my hon. Friend says, that there will be a lot more than were seized under the previous Government. This Government encourage our police and local authorities to investigate any crime, and to ensure proper punishment. That is why we are introducing this very substantial piece of legislation, which also increases the punishment for a whole raft of criminal activities.
Many people are profiting from fly-tipping and making it their business; perhaps they are doing a house clearance, and want to avoid paying fees to get rid of the furniture, so they just dump it on our streets. It is right that we encourage our local authorities to ensure that those people are punished, and that, where necessary, we crush their vans, rather than just taking them away, so that they can never be used by those people again. That is what we are keen to do. That is why my right hon. Friends in the Cabinet have prioritised tackling fly-tipping in all its forms, from very small to very large cases. We have organised criminal gangs fly-tipping across the country, leading to vast fly-tips; this Government will fund their removal, through the legislation we are bringing in.
I move on to youth diversion orders. Again, I am disappointed that the Liberal Democrats do not feel that they can support our further amendments in lieu. We have further strengthened the provisions in the Bill in respect of statutory guidance, which must now expressly address the circumstances in which it may be appropriate for chief officers to consult persons other than youth offending teams before making an application for a youth diversion order or the variation or discharge of such an order. This squarely addresses the concerns raised in the other place. We do not feel that we need to go as far as the other place suggests. I am disappointed that the Liberal Democrats have not listened to us today, and that they feel it necessary to continue to push the issue.
Returning to the fourth issue that we are debating today—the proscription of the IRGC—it is a long-standing principle, adopted by successive Administrations, that the Government do not comment on which organisations are being considered for proscription. It would violate that principle if we mandated the Government to review whether to proscribe Iranian Government-related organisations. The shadow Minister knows that that is the case. The Government cannot support Lords amendments 359 and 439.
Matt Vickers
Was the Foreign Secretary wrong when she said that the IRGC must be proscribed?
Sarah Jones
As we have said, we know the horrors that the Iranian Government and the IRGC have inflicted on their people, and the work that they have done. Of course, we must do all we can. As we have said in this place, we already sanction hundreds of Iranians, who cannot come to this country as a result, and who have had their assets seized. However, the shadow Minister knows that legislation must be passed to enable us to do this piece of work. As a responsible Government, committed to protecting the safety and security of this country, we will not deviate from that position.
Sarah Jones
We are now.
The time has come for the will of the elected House to prevail. We have listened and responded positively to the great majority of amendments put forward by the House of Lords. We should send these amendments back in the hope, and indeed the expectation, that it will be for the last time. We have been debating the Bill for long enough—14 months—so it is time to stop talking. It is time to deliver the changes wrought by the Bill to protect all our communities.
Question put.
Police Federation
Sarah Jones Excerpts(1 month, 4 weeks 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, Mrs Harris. I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe (Jonathan Hinder) on his career in policing, on everything he shared with us and on securing this debate. The start of his speech was incredibly powerful, and reflected what I hear often from our police both in my incredibly privileged position as Policing Minister and in my constituency role in Croydon.
I have heard of many cases, such as that of a police officer in Croydon who had to hold the wound of someone who had been stabbed while they waited for the ambulance. The trauma of that side of the role is there loud and clear for everyone to see, but there is also cumulative trauma from all the other things that have to be done, from how the police are sometimes treated and from how they feel that they do not necessarily have the support of Government or the public. My hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe described that well, and I cannot do it better.
Tomorrow, I will spend the day trying to be as incognito as possible while going around with a neighbourhood police officer. I will spend the whole day on a shift and hear as much as I can about the lived experience of being a police officer. I am sad not to have done that before this debate, but I am looking forward to it very much. However, my hon. Friend made a powerful speech and, as I think all other Members in the debate have said, the police do a brilliant job and we should not underestimate what they do. We should thank them, never forget what we ask of them and always do right by them.
Within that context, the Government are trying to reform policing to enable the police to do the job that they came into the service to do, whether that means ripping away the bureaucracy of a lot of the tasks that the police are given—historically, we have not invested in new technology and pieces of kit—or putting police back into our neighbourhoods, so that we can do the things that the public want us to do without public frustration at the lack of response. Of course, the biggest police reform in 200 years is looking at the whole structure within policing. In that context, police officers still have to get on with their job; they not only have a difficult job, but have quite a lot of change heading their way. We need to respect that.
In the middle of all that is the Police Federation, which has an interesting role. A lot of Members have said the same thing: on the one hand, the police do a brilliant job, and a lot of the fed reps do a brilliant job, but on the other hand, something is clearly wrong with how the federation has been functioning. We have talked about this before, but since I became the Minister in September I have seen the fed every two weeks and we have a catch-up. Most of the conversations are about what we are doing on the transformation journey, what has happened and what is coming down the line. I think that it is fair to say there has been frustration, such as about the 33 recommendations for changes needed in the federation made by Baroness Bousted in her review. The change is not coming in the way that people expect, as fast as people want, or in a way that we would expect.
Government have a role, but we do not have quite the same relationship with any other organisation; we have a statutory responsibility. The legislation states:
“There shall continue to be a Police Federation for England and Wales for the purpose of representing members of the police forces in England and Wales, and special constables”,
and that in fulfilling that purpose, the federation
“must…protect the public interest…maintain high standards of conduct, and…maintain high standards of transparency.”
Our obligation as a Government to ensure that those things are happening is set in law. Clearly, therefore, we take the question of whether those functions are fulfilled in the way that they should be very seriously.
It is no secret that we have been frustrated, as have many others, at the pace and scale of change. Of course, we saw arrests that came in the middle of this conversation as well, which have made things very difficult. We were very explicit about this in the White Paper on police reform. We said:
“We expect to see clear plans and…demonstrable improvement”
in the fed’s operation. We also said:
“In the absence of such improvements, this Government stands ready to bring forward reforms to ensure that the interests of rank-and-file officers are properly, effectively and robustly represented.”
Given the arrests since the publication of the White Paper, it is very hard for the federation to give us the reassurance that we need, because of everything that has happened. We are continuing the conversations with the federation. There is a lot of interaction between officials in my Department and the fed, and we are sharing data and information, and talking these things through.
I do not think that anyone can pretend that the status quo is an option. It is not. This Government stand ready to do the right thing. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers), asked what we are considering. I am not in a position to say what the next steps look like, but clearly matters have moved on and we need to ensure that there is proper representation for rank and file. The judicial review, as well as the criminal investigation, means that there is a limit to what I can say.
I very much welcome this debate and the contributions to it. I thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for his kind remarks and I will see the Superintendents’ Association of Northern Ireland soon. My hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham (Margaret Mullane) talked about what she and the police in her community need, and she said that she is supporting the campaign. The hon. Member for Eastleigh (Liz Jarvis) talked about the importance of mental health.
The Lib Dem spokesperson, the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Marie Goldman), talked about the challenges for women members of the fed in particular, which is something that is very live to me as well. I have attended several meetings in which I have talked about the issues that arise if a police officer is, for example, in a relationship with another police officer and there is domestic abuse in that relationship. What we do in that space is very difficult; there are lots of challenges there.
I thank everybody who has attended this debate, including the shadow Minister, for their thoughtful comments. I think that we all know that there is a problem and I recognise the frustration felt by my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe, because he wants to see movement. We are looking at this issue very carefully. We are very mindful of the arrests that have happened, very mindful that we have not seen the pace of change that we want, and very mindful of our legal obligation to make sure that the rank and file have representation.
Knife Crime
Sarah Jones Excerpts(1 month, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Policing and Crime (Sarah Jones)
Before I come to the statement, I want to echo the Home Secretary’s words yesterday following the publication of the Southport attack inquiry report. That was a truly sickening crime, and my thoughts, and those of everybody in this place, are with the families, victims and everyone who was affected.
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on the Government’s plan to halve knife crime in a decade. That commitment, made in our manifesto, is rooted in recognition of a tragic truth: in too many places, a deadly cycle has taken hold, as fear and violence feed off each other, leaving people—and especially young people—feeling that they have no choice but to carry a weapon to stay safe. In the most devastating cases, that results in the loss of lives that have barely begun.
All that is wretchedly familiar to the House and to me. We know it from the long list of tragedies about which we have spoken with families across the country. We hear it in the anguished words of bereaved parents, whom many of us have met after fatal stabbings in our constituencies. We see it when we look at our children, whose safety is too often the cause of worry and sleepless nights. In these and so many other ways, knife crime is destructive and devastating, and has for too long been plaguing communities and destroying lives.
The task of putting that right falls to this Government. Since the general election we have acted decisively to deliver a response that matches up to the scale of the threat, implementing bans on zombie-style knives, zombie-style machetes and ninja swords; restoring neighbourhood policing to the heart of our communities; getting more than 63,000 knives and dangerous weapons off our streets; ramping up action against county lines gangs to record levels, with over 2,700 lines shut down last year; setting up the coalition to tackle knife crime; and legislating to deliver the toughest crackdown yet on online knife sales. The concerted effort that we have mounted, alongside our partners in the coalition, law enforcement and communities across the country, is having an impact. Since the start of this Parliament, knife crime is down by 8% and knife homicides are down by 27%, to the lowest level in a decade.
Together, we are making progress, but it is not enough. Knives are still being carried, stabbings are still occurring and lives are still being lost. Indeed, there have been several fatal cases in recent days and weeks, and I take this opportunity to express my deepest sympathies to the victims’ loved ones. For them, for all the families out there whose world has been forever changed by knife crime, and for the country as a whole, we must do more, and we are doing more.
We have published the “Protecting lives, building hope” plan, which details the action that the Government are taking and will take to further reduce knife crime and, ultimately, achieve our goal of halving it in a decade. The plan outlines activity and investment designed to drive progress across four key outcomes: supporting young people, stopping those at risk from turning to knife crime, policing our streets and ending the cycle of knife crime. I will address each in turn.
First, we will do much more to give every boy and girl the best possible start in life by addressing the root causes of knife crime; increasing investment in youth services; launching 50 Young Futures hubs to bring together wellbeing support, careers guidance and positive activities in areas badly affected by knife crime; stepping up support for children who are persistently absent from school; and investing in mental health support teams in schools. We do all that and more because we recognise that, to deliver the change that is needed, we must act early and prevent harm before it escalates into violence in later life.
Secondly, we are ramping up efforts to stop young people being drawn into knife crime, be they at risk of being an offender, a victim or both. A new Safety In & Around Schools Partnership, backed by Government funding, will see around 250 schools given targeted support to boost their capacity to tackle knife crime and reduce the risk of harm. We are also investing in the county lines programme and the highly effective network of violence reduction units, and strengthening crime prevention in the communities that need it most.
Thirdly, we will ensure that victims of knife crime get the justice that they deserve, and that dangerous criminals face the full force of the law, through a robust and effective police response. Visible local policing is central to our approach not just on knife crime but across the full breadth of this Government’s agenda on law and order. The severity of the situation that we inherited has been well documented, so I will not retrace that ground, except to say that we have made it a first-order priority to rebuild neighbourhood policing, by putting an additional 13,000 police personnel into neighbourhood roles in England and Wales by the end of this Parliament, with over 3,000 in place two months ahead of schedule, and by implementing the neighbourhood policing guarantee, under which every community has named, contactable officers devoted to tackling local issues.
Police boots on the ground are essential, but we must also ensure that forces are equipped and empowered to make interventions that are precise, timely and effective. We will therefore support the development of tools and approaches that have the potential to enhance prevention and detection, with substantial funding to enhance crime mapping, invest in research and development aimed at improving our capability to detect high-risk knife carriers, and enable targeted action in the police force areas that see the most knife crime through a new knife crime concentrations fund. We will also support forces in maximising the use of intelligence-led stop and search, and where the law needs strengthening, we will not hesitate, as shown by our commitment to introducing much tougher rules around the online sale of knives, through measures we know as Ronan’s law, after Ronan Kanda, who was fatally stabbed aged 16 and whose mother and sister have campaigned heroically for change since his death. That will all be underpinned by the most radical programme of police reform in 200 years.
Fourthly, we will seek to end the cycle of repeat harm by strengthening the youth justice system, improving the rehabilitation of adult offenders to reduce the risk of reoffending and developing a new national approach to identify, prioritise and manage habitual knife offenders who pose the greatest risk to public safety.
Each of those four strands is important on its own, and the steps that we are taking within them have been chosen because the evidence supports that. Equally, I am clear that this work transcends individual policies or initiatives. Ours is a whole-of-Government, whole-of-society mission aimed at building a safer, more hopeful future for all. The publication of this plan marks a significant moment in that mission, not because of what it says, but because of the action that it will drive.
Above all, we think today of the victims, and of the families that are smaller than they should be. Although we can never undo the pain inflicted on them, we can prevent others from suffering as they have. It will not be easy, but this Government will be unrelenting in the vital effort to protect lives and build hope. As Pooja Kanda so aptly put it,
“Every child deserves to grow up safely.”
She is right, and we must and will do everything in our power to make those words a reality in every part of our country. I commend this statement to the House.
Matt Vickers (Stockton West) (Con)
I thank the Minister for advance sight of her statement. Halving knife crime is a measure that every Member of this House would subscribe to. It is a devastating crime with devastating consequences. Only yesterday, this House discussed the tragic events in Southport and the impact they can have on a community. Those events are, unfortunately, representative of a much broader problem, whereby too many people view it as appropriate to carry and use a knife criminally. That is horrific and must be stopped. We owe it to the country, and particularly those in communities affected by knife crime, to take knives off our streets and prosecute those who believe that using weapons is acceptable.
Unfortunately, since the election, knife-enabled crime recorded by the police has increased. In addition, we must acknowledge that, based on the data up to September 2025, 30% of all knife offences took place in London, despite London making up only 15% of the population. We need proposals that recognise the geographical nature of this crime, with so much of it occurring in particular areas. As such, it is welcome to see that the Government’s plan includes the knife crime concentrations fund, to support surges in policing where knife crime is most prevalent. However, I am afraid that the Labour Government’s proposals will not be sufficient without two critical foundations: powers for officers to stop and search individuals, and sufficient officer numbers to put this strategy into effect.
The hotspot policing outlined by the Government must be used in conjunction with effective stop and search, which the Government’s strategy acknowledges is broadly supported by the public. That is why we have set out plans to triple the use of stop and search and to use section 60 suspicionless stop and search in high-crime areas. That should be supported by changes so that a single suspicion indicator is enough to merit a stop and search.
That would be supported by 10,000 new officers. In contrast, the Government have presided over a decrease in officer numbers, with 1,300 fewer officers during their time in power, with particularly steep falls in the Metropolitan police, who cover the area where this crime is most prevalent. In the Government’s plan, they talk about the need for officers, but that is not reflected in the overall figures, as police forces across the country highlighted during discussions on police funding. If we want to see the police help achieve these reductions and the Government meet their targets, there cannot be fewer officers.
In addition, under the Sentencing Act 2026, many of those convicted of knife crime will be eligible for release earlier than under previous rules. The strategy covers many important areas, but there are few references to sentencing perpetrators of knife crime for longer. It is pitiful that those convicted of knife crime offences who would previously have gone to prison could now avoid it. That is unsurprising, as it took extensive effort from Opposition Members and those in the other place to increase knife crime sentences in the Crime and Policing Bill. The Labour party repeatedly speaks strongly, but it fails to back this up with the necessary custodial sentences.
The Government’s statement today and their strategy set out a number of important proposals and rightly recognise the importance of education and culture, building on work conducted by the previous Government on violence reduction units and the county lines programme. However, that must be supported by stronger enforcement, ensuring that those who commit these crimes are imprisoned with appropriate custodial sentences. Knife crime is truly horrific, and we owe it to everyone to give the police every power necessary to investigate and seize these weapons. I worry that without stronger enforcement, this plan will not be the significant moment the Government believe it will be.
Sarah Jones
I thank the shadow Minister for welcoming the target of halving knife crime, the content of the plan and the knife crime concentrations fund in particular. Where we can, we should try to work cross-party on tackling such heinous crimes.
The shadow Minister mentioned sentencing. It will always be the case that people found guilty of serious knife crime offences will go to prison—that is not changing. We are making a couple of changes that he would hopefully support. To give one example, currently around 1,000 children a year are found in possession of a knife, and no action whatsoever is taken to try to get them away from that activity—none whatsoever. We have changed the rules on that, so that every single child who is found in possession of a knife will be given a plan, which will ensure that they get the support and the interventions they need to move away from crime. If they do not adhere to those conditions, it will become a criminal matter if necessary. That is a big gap we are filling.
In the Crime and Policing Bill, which the House will debate this afternoon, we are introducing a new offence of knife possession with intent—currently, there are offences of possession of a knife, and possession involving a threat to life—and there will be a seven-year maximum sentence for that crime. I hope that that reassures the shadow Minister.
We could get into a debate about numbers, but I do not want to do that today, because we have done it many times before, and I am sure we will do it many more times. However, I reiterate that there are 12,000 officers in our country who are sitting behind desks. We do not think that is right. We want to get them out into our communities. There has been an 18% increase in the number of police in our neighbourhoods in the last year. We want those officers to do the job that we want them to do, not waste time on bureaucracy, so we are investing hugely in artificial intelligence and new technology. That will free up the equivalent of 3,000 full-time officers—just by giving them the tech that they should already have had to help them do their job. We are pushing as hard as we can, not on the exact number of officers, but on outcomes.
I end by repeating a statistic that I am very pleased about, and that shows that we are moving in the right direction: knife crime is down 8% overall, and knife murders are down 27%. We are focusing on outcomes, not police numbers.
Sam Carling (North West Cambridgeshire) (Lab)
On Sunday, there was a horrific attack in my constituency; a 16-year-old boy was fatally stabbed in Orton. My thoughts—and those of the House, I am sure—are with his family.
I welcome the Government’s ambition to halve knife crime. How will that help to tackle the issue in Peterborough and across Cambridgeshire? What work is under way on understanding the root causes of why, in certain regions, knife crime is not following the national trend and decreasing, so that we can better address those root causes?
Sarah Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for his question; of course, all our thoughts are with the family of his constituent who has lost his life. These things are always tragic, and I know that he will be involved in trying to help the community heal from such a difficult situation. I know that arrests have been made on suspicion of murder and other offences; I think four people have been arrested. That is good, but of course, nothing will bring back that young lad.
We have to understand where knife crime is happening and why, and we are investing a huge amount of funding in exactly that. Through our work, we are able to identify exactly where the knife-crime hotspots are across the country, and we are working with local partners and the police to ensure that we understand exactly why there are these hotspots. In some parts of the country, this is happening just after school, because, sadly, this is a crime that involves young people. Sometimes the night-time economy is driving knife crime, and sometimes it is other things. We are absolutely focused on the causes of knife crime, and on providing a lot of support to young people to try to bring them out of a life of crime, but also on understanding exactly what is going on in some areas. As my hon. Friend says, there will be some areas where knife crime is going up, and some where it is coming down. We need to understand that and address it.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)
The Liberal Democrats welcome the publication of the strategy, and I am particularly glad to note the involvement of the Ben Kinsella Trust in formulating it. The trust does remarkable work with young students and teachers to make sure that we take a holistic approach to knife crime, which is badly needed. That is particularly true of its chief executive officer, Patrick Green, who I had the pleasure of meeting at Finsbury library last year. We Liberal Democrats have said time and again that we need a smarter approach to knife crime, not just to save lives but to improve them. Will the Minister commit to securing long-term funding for the measures outlined in the strategy? Without that guarantee, the strategy will be little more than warm words.
Secondly, will the Minister confirm whether the 13,000 new police officers in the neighbourhood teams that the Government claim to be deploying are actually a new resource, or is this an accounting trick, whereby existing officers are redeployed? The Minister may not want to talk about numbers, but they are particularly important in London; the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has said that it is increasingly difficult to keep Londoners safe with a shrinking force, and estimates suggests that there are 2,503 fewer police officers in London today than there were in May 2024. I am happy to be corrected on that number.
Finally, will the Minister explain why the Government continue to skirt around the edges of a meaningful public health approach, without adopting one outright? We know that knife crime is not just a policing issue; it is a public health crisis. If we are serious about tackling it as the epidemic that it is, we must treat it as one, and bring together every person who sees the warning signs: teachers, GPs, youth workers, social workers, sports coaches—trusted adults who know when something is going wrong—and, tragically, as we have read in the conclusions of the Southport inquiry report, parents too. Right now, all those groups are isolated and do not talk to each other. We need to break down the silo walls and build real partnerships across civil society. Until the Government recognise that and invest in a public health approach, our progress will be blunted.
Sarah Jones
I appreciate the Liberal Democrats welcoming the plan. I join the hon. Gentleman in praising the Ben Kinsella Trust and Patrick Green. Patrick has been brilliant throughout the development of the strategy, as have the members of the coalition that brought together a group of people, many of whom have lost loved ones in very difficult circumstances, to push for action to stop other people losing their loved ones. I pay tribute to all of them.
The funding for the plan will come from across Government, not just the Home Office. Home Office funding amounts to about £130 million—a substantial sum—but the Department for Culture, Media and Sport is leading on the Young Futures hubs, the Department for Education is leading on interventions in schools, and the Ministry of Justice is making a huge investment in the youth justice system, so there is a big cross-Government approach.
I have done a lot of work over the years on the public health approach. It is quite simple; it basically says that violence is catching. If people have violence in their life, they are more likely to be violent. Someone who was in a domestic abuse situation as a child is more likely to be violent; people who join a gang are more likely to become violent—it is relatively straightforward. The interventions that we are putting in place are designed to prevent those crimes and stop that violence spreading. That is why the figures on violence are coming down, and we are seeing the first shoots of success.
On the numbers, there has been a 0.6% drop overall in the number of police officers from March 2025 to September 2025—that is a very small drop. The key question is: what are our police officers doing? Having 12,000 officers behind desks is not right; they should be out in our communities. Obviously, some of them need to do jobs that do not involve being out on our streets, but we want our officers out on our streets. We have always said—we said it in our manifesto—that the 13,000 will be a mix of new officers, police community support officers and redeployed officers.
We are introducing new technology, so that we can free up the equivalent of 3,000 officers’ time. It is much better for that 13,000 to be a mix of officers; it means that we have already been able to deliver 3,000, some of whom are already trained officers, so they know what they are doing. If we were just recruiting new people, there would be the challenge of new officers not having the experience that others have. We have always said that we would be taking a mixed approach. The point is that we are putting 13,000 police officers into our communities and neighbourhoods, which is what the public want. Those officers will help to tackle the epidemic of everyday crime, and knife crime too.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Chair of the Justice Committee.
Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for agreeing to meet me and members of the safer knives group, which brings together experts on the type of knives most commonly used in knife crime. Does she agree that restricting sales of pointed knives, and moving to rounded-tip versions for kitchen use, could limit the number and type of injuries caused, especially in domestic and impulsive violence, potentially reducing death and serious injuries?
Sarah Jones
I applaud the work that my hon. Friend has been doing with others, including Leanne Lucas, who was sadly at the horrendous event in Southport, and who has been campaigning on the issue since then. I have had the honour of meeting her several times to talk about this. My hon. Friend is right that ordinary kitchen knives are used extensively in domestic and impulsive violence. When it comes to the streets, there are a whole range of horrific knives that we are looking to reduce in number, ban and control through legislation, but the basic impulsive act of picking up a kitchen knife is also a significant crime. There is evidence that a knife attack would have less impact if the end of the knife was rounded, and we have worked with manufacturers and others who are introducing that kind of knife.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
Where psychopaths are concerned, deterrence is unlikely to work, but I was interested to hear an expert from the Internet Watch Foundation, who was interviewed on Times Radio this morning, say that people who commune on the internet with those who supply them with knives could instantly bring together red flags and warn people, if they wanted to. Is it part of the Minister’s strategy to try to arrange for that? As for others, am I right in thinking that a very high proportion of people who commit knife crimes are detected? If so, surely a campaign saying, “If you commit knife crime, you will almost certainly be caught” could act as a real deterrent to those capable of being deterred.
Sarah Jones
Yes, the right hon. Gentleman is right that a very high proportion of people who commit knife offences are detected and charged. How we influence people who may want to pick up a knife is an interesting and difficult question. We are investing a small amount of money in trialling some communication techniques. A lot of money has been spent on the violence against women and girls campaign, which many people will have seen; it tries to educate men on violence and how to behave. We are going to do some testing on which messages might work, and which might not, to try to target people who might pick up a knife.
The right hon. Gentleman’s first question was about the sale of knives online, and whether retailers can detect issues that should be raised. The National Knife Crime Centre, which was launched a couple of weeks ago and has £1.7 million in Government funding, has a team of police officers who will investigate the sale of knives online. We are introducing legislation about buying knives in bulk; sadly, people buy, for example, 300 knives, and then sell them in their communities. Retailers will have an obligation to tell the police if people buy in bulk. We will be able to see the patterns and intervene at the right time.
Claire Hazelgrove (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Lab)
A family and my whole community have been left reeling, following the fatal stabbing of Jamie Collins, a 21-year-old student at the University of the West of England, last week in Filton. Jamie has been named by police today, following the arrest of another young man. I am sure that the thoughts of the whole House are with Jamie’s loved ones, as are my thoughts, at this unimaginably difficult time. I have listened to the Minister’s statement with interest. How will the new knife crime plan seek to reduce youth knife crime specifically, so that fewer families have to face the impossible, and so that we can ensure that young people have the safe and bright future that they deserve?
Sarah Jones
All our condolences go to Jamie’s family at this incredibly difficult time. I know that the community in Filton will be reeling, and that my hon. Friend will play her role in bringing people together to come to terms with what has happened. It is catastrophic when someone loses their life at such a young age.
Through the action plan, which I commend—[Interruption.] I am not supposed to hold things up, am I? My point, in holding up the document, was to show that the action plan is substantial; it has a lot in it to ensure that young people do not get involved in crime in the first place and to tackle the challenge if they do. DCMS is leading on our Young Futures hubs: 50 youth centres across areas that are impacted particularly by knife crime. The hubs will bring together lots of different services for young people in one place so that they can be supported.
We are also doing more on interventions for young people if they are found to be in possession of a knife. We are backing the violence reduction units with £66 million, and they are doing a range of evidenced interventions to try to make sure that young people step away from crime. There is a whole plan of activities to get them out of crime and to prevent crime from happening in the first place, and I hope that my hon. Friend’s community will see the effects.
Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)
I had the opportunity to go out with the local police in my constituency on an operation to combat youth crime. One thing I found most distressing was the liberal ownership and unthinking use of knives among teenagers, which I know the police in my constituency are desperate to sort out. Following the Government’s consultation on knife sales, will the Minister reassure my constituents, the police and the public that the Government will put forward a knife licensing scheme, whereby all knife retailers, including online, bricks-and-mortar and private sellers, must be registered to sell any kind of knife in order to prevent attacks from taking place?
Sarah Jones
We are already putting in place a range of interventions through the Crime and Policing Bill—which is going through Parliament and which we are debating this afternoon—to strengthen age verification for knives, and to ensure that online companies have a duty to remove violent content and knife sale content, and are doing more to do so. As the hon. Lady says, we have also consulted on whether we should have a licensing scheme. We are looking through that at the moment and deciding where we go. The campaign has been led by Pooja Kanda, the mother of Ronan Kanda, who died; she has been campaigning on this issue ever since. We are certainly very sympathetic, but we are the stage of looking at the consultation and seeing what a workable licensing scheme would look like.
Jim McMahon (Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)
If we want to end the scourge of knife crime, we have to tackle supply, demand, enforcement, education and culture. Oldham has seen some of Greater Manchester’s highest numbers of section 60 stop-and-search areas, and there is often a clear pattern of gang activity, resulting in children carrying knives and other weapons. Petty postcode wars can escalate from online bullying to on-street attacks with serious injury and loss of life. I welcome the announcement of the Young Futures hubs, but given the overwhelming evidence of youth knife crime in Oldham and the cross-border activity in neighbouring Manchester, which has been selected for one of the new hubs, can Oldham be urgently considered as the programme rolls out?
Sarah Jones
We are working with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport on where the Young Futures hubs will be, but they will be in the areas most affected by knife crime. There is a whole range of other interventions, which I hope will support my hon. Friend’s community to bring down knife crime overall. It will not just be the Young Futures hubs; many more interventions in our strategy are also designed to support. Greater Manchester has a big investment in addressing county lines, with which he will probably be very familiar. That has been incredibly successful and has got more successful every year that it has been in play. We are funding that this year. Hundreds of knives are being taken off our streets, and thousands of young children are being safeguarded as a result.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
It was around this time last year that I led the Backbench Business debate in the Chamber on preventing knife crime among children and young people, so I welcome the measures announced by the Minister and hope that they have a huge impact, reducing the use of knives by young people. I want to touch on two points in her announcement.
When it comes to banning zombie knives, we know that they and ninja swords account for less than 4% of all fatal stabbings. Screwdrivers account for more fatal stabbings, and household kitchen knives account for over half of all those stabbings. Given how easily accessible they are, do the Government have any steps in place? I appreciate that stopping access to kitchen knives is an impossible task, given that everybody in this Chamber has them at home, but are the Government considering any measures to dissuade people from using kitchen knives in this way? Furthermore, we know that social media has a huge influence on children, creating the fear that leads to them carrying a knife. Does the Minister have any steps to address that?
Sarah Jones
I thank the hon. Gentleman for welcoming the strategy and for the work he has done. He is absolutely right: people commit knife crime offences with all different kinds of knives. Some of the knives that have been banned have a particularly pernicious impact, given the damage they do to people’s bodies. We are putting in place a whole raft of interventions to ensure there is more control over the sale of all types of knives. These includes the age verification checks in the Crime and Policing Bill, and interventions on the sale of knives generally: making sure that young people are not buying knives, and putting in place a duty on companies to report if people buy in bulk. My hon. Friend the Member for Hammersmith and Chiswick (Andy Slaughter) also mentioned the work that campaigners are doing on the design of knives to stop them being so impactful.
The hon. Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty) is absolutely right about social media. In the Bill, we are putting more onus on social media companies to do more, with a duty to report the sale of knives that are illegal. There is a lot more to be done with regard to very serious violent content online. This Government—including the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones)—have done a lot of work on this issue and are doing a huge amount to address porn, child sexual exploitation and violence against women and girls, but there is another piece of work to be done with the companies to ensure that all violent content is removed.
Lewis Atkinson (Sunderland Central) (Lab)
My family sadly knows the devastating consequences of knife crime. As the Government launch their welcome action plan today, I think of my cousin David Charlton, who was killed with a knife in 2012. Reducing knife crime is a moral imperative, so that there are fewer families like David’s or indeed like the family of Connor Brown, whose bereaved parents have done excellent work in tackling knife crime in Sunderland and the north-east and were recently recognised with MBEs for that work. Their approach has focused on education, so will the Minister say a little more about the plan’s commitment to update the curriculum from September so that every child receives knife violence prevention education in school? Will she support the involvement of bereaved families where they want to be part of the delivery of that curriculum?
Sarah Jones
May I say how sorry I am to hear about the death of my hon. Friend’s relative? What a tragedy that is, not just for the immediate family, but for the wider communities in which people live.
Education is key, and I have worked very hard on this raft of measures with the Department for Education. As my hon. Friend says, there is new guidance to schools on violence prevention, which will help to educate young people. Just a couple of weeks ago, I was with a bereaved parent who is going into schools and helping to teach young people about the reality of knife crime and what happens. That is a very important part of the picture. We are targeting in particular 250 schools in areas where there are very high concentrations of knife crime; we will be giving them more support so that they can access the services they need. We are very joined up with the Department for Education on this action plan.
Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)
Will the Minister speak to Sadiq Khan and ask him to get a grip on the knife crime epidemic that is plaguing London? Can we increase the stop-and-search powers of the Met police so that they can actually do their job and provide the enforcement that people across London are asking for? My husband was attacked by someone with a knife while he was caring for his mother-in-law, and one of our wonderful members of staff in the Tea Room was attacked in Brixton by someone with a knife just last week. This is a problem across London. My residents want to feel safe. Will the Minister do something to stop the knife crime epidemic that is plaguing London?
Sarah Jones
Can I start by saying that I am very sorry that somebody from the Tea Room was attacked last week? I had not been aware of that, and I will find out more about it. I am also very sorry to hear about the hon. Lady’s husband.
The growing narrative around London is just wrong. It has been debunked by lots of sensible people in lots of ways, so I will not go into all the details, but we know that the Mayor of London has invested more in policing than at any time before. Stop and search is an important tool, and the Mayor of London and the police in London use it; across the country, there are about 14,000 searches per year where a weapon is found, which is a high number. Stop and search is used effectively, and its use actually went down every year when Boris Johnson was Mayor of London. It is better to use effective stop and search, which is what we are doing—it is an important tool. Only last week, the Mayor of London announced that he is going to be opening a youth club in every single London borough, which will help to make sure that young people have somewhere to go and something to do. I hope the hon. Lady welcomes that.
Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)
I welcome the serious action that this Government are taking to tackle knife crime. My constituent Tracy set up Changes Are Made following the fatal stabbing of her grandson Cameron. Tracy’s ambition is to get a youth hub set up in our local area, and she has already spoken to almost 1,000 young people in schools across Bournemouth and Poole. Some 62% of those young people have said that better education is the best way to prevent knife crime, so can the Minister please assure me that equipping young people with the knowledge they need is part of our strategy, and that areas such as my constituency will be part of our plan for support?
Sarah Jones
I assure my hon. Friend that every part of the country, including Bournemouth, will be part of our action plan. We are making interventions across the whole country, as well as very targeted interventions where knife crime is particularly acute. I have already outlined our interventions in schools, whether that is support for the schools where the problem is most acute, or the overall interventions to make sure schools are fulfilling new guidance on violence prevention. Lots of brilliant people—my hon. Friend spoke about Tracy—are going into our schools and sending really powerful messages to our young people. I absolutely support that work, and a lot of our violence reduction units provide funding for those kinds of interventions.
Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)
While I of course welcome the statement and any attempt to reduce and tackle knife crime, does the Minister not agree that without saturation stop and search, and without immediate custody of anyone found in possession of a knife without a valid reason, the rest is just white noise?
Sarah Jones
I welcome the hon. Lady’s welcoming of the statement—it is appreciated.
Stop and search is a really important tool. I am not entirely sure what “saturation stop and search” is, but if we stopped and searched everybody, all our police would spend all their time stopping and searching people to no particular end. Stop and search has to be evidence-based and targeted, and that is what the police are doing. We support that. We want more intelligence-led stop and search. It is a good thing, but anyone who thinks that it is the only answer misunderstands the problem. We have to prevent crime from happening in the first place, as well as to tackle the perpetrators who are already involved and make sure we address reoffending. Doing one intervention without all the rest is not going to work, which is why our action plan involves multiple Government Departments, lots of funding, and lots of support from the Prime Minister down.
Mohammad Yasin (Bedford) (Lab)
Bedfordshire police welcomes the Government’s plan to refer all child knife possession cases to youth justice services, building on its work with the NHS, schools, charities and community groups to discourage under-16s from carrying knives. Can the Minister outline how the new national co-ordination unit will crack down on illegal online knife sales in order to strengthen such local partnerships, which are working to prevent young people from having knives in the first place?
Sarah Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for his question and pay tribute to the police in Bedfordshire, who I know are doing a really good job.
Among all the agencies he talked about, the NHS has a really important role to play. Of course, we put youth workers into most of our A&Es, so that if a young person who has been stabbed comes in, we have some chance of intervening with them to get them out of the cycle of violence they are involved in. The brilliant investigative police officers at the new National Knife Crime Centre will be investigating the sale of knives online. That will be a focused piece of policing work, and the Government are providing £1.7 million for it. Those officers will look at the sale of knives online and go after the people who are selling them illegally. Increasingly, we are seeing young people in the grey market buying knives in bulk and selling them to each other. We are going to make that very difficult for people to do, but where it does happen—where knives are coming in from countries that they should not be coming from, where age verification checks are not being done, and where companies are making money in a way that is not legal—we will come down on them like a ton of bricks.
Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)
Sadly, we have had several stabbings in Yeovil, which has led to growing local anxiety. My constituents keep telling me that they want more visible local policing, but south Somerset is so often overlooked that locals have all but given up on change. They are worried that it is not going to happen, so can the Minister tell my constituents when they will see proper funding for more visible community policing and accessible youth services in rural south Somerset?
Sarah Jones
I want to reassure the hon. Member’s constituents in Yeovil that I understand their concern. Neighbourhood policing has been decimated over recent years, which has had a real impact. It is why we have seen shocking rises in things like shop theft and antisocial behaviour—the things that have not been tackled because the police were not physically present on our streets. We are putting that right. We have already put 3,000 more police on our streets in our neighbourhoods—an 18% rise from what we inherited when we entered government—and we will continue to do so. We believe that the right place for our police officers and PCSOs is out on our streets, making sure they are tackling the epidemic of everyday crime, and that is what we will be doing.
Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her statement, and welcome the Government’s plan to halve knife crime in a decade. In my constituency we have seen far too many lives taken as a result of knife crime—indeed, just last month, another young life was lost when a 25-year-old was killed. As such, it is really important that the Government are seeking to tackle the root causes, investing in youth services as well as preventive services. Already in my constituency, though, we have some fantastic organisations doing incredible work, such as Carney’s Community. The Minister’s predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham (Dame Diana Johnson), agreed to visit Carney’s to see some of the work it is doing and how it is seeking to deter young people from a life of violence and crime. Will the Minister honour that commitment and join me in a visit to that organisation in my constituency?
Sarah Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for her question—how sorry I am that a 25-year-old lost their life recently. My constituency and that of my hon. Friend are not too far away from each other, and we have faced similar challenges. Of course, I am very happy to fulfil any commitment that my predecessor made, and I would very much like to see what is happening in my hon. Friend’s constituency.
Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
I thank the Minister for her statement and welcome the Government’s plan to halve knife crime in a decade. Unfortunately, though, knife crime is not limited to London or city centres; in Dewsbury and Batley, knife crime is higher than the national average, and violent crime—which includes knife crime—makes up the largest share of reported crimes. In just the past few weeks in my constituency, we have seen a number of deeply concerning incidents, including reports of a machete being used in a street fight on 10 April, a 15-year-old boy being stabbed the same day, and a knife-related assault in the town centre earlier that week. These are not isolated incidents; they are a worrying pattern that is causing real fear. Will the Minister set out what immediate, targeted action her Department is or will be taking in areas experiencing clusters of knife crime, such as Dewsbury and Batley, and how quickly residents will be able to see a tangible, positive impact?
Sarah Jones
Our knife crime concentrations fund of £26 million will be targeted at areas where there is a high concentration of knife crime. It is quite extraordinary: from the state-of-the-art mapping on police-recorded knife crime that we have done, we can see that all of our knife crime happens in less than 2.5% of England and Wales, so targeting resources at those areas is obviously the right thing to do. That does not mean that we do not also have to worry about other areas outside that 2.5%, which is why we are investing in neighbourhood policing and supporting our children across the country through interventions in schools. It is why we are funding things like efforts to tackle county lines, which impact the whole of the country even if they start in cities. We are making sure that we are targeting all parts of the country while also using the bulk of our resources where the highest numbers of crimes happen.
Several hon. Members rose—
Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
I welcome the publication of this strategy, and I pay tribute to the Minister for her strong commitment over many years to this area of policy and the depth of her thinking on it. In my constituency, we have seen far too many horrific tragedies. Out of those tragedies, however, has come some truly exceptional work in response from the community and from our grassroots youth-led organisations, in providing services that support young people. Those services provide positive opportunities for young people, help the community to come to terms with the trauma they have experienced and set young people back on a positive track. However, those organisations tell me that they struggle to access long-term sustainable funding. What is the Minister doing as part of this strategy to ensure that our youth organisations can keep the lights on and do their important work as part of the infrastructure of services that we need to tackle this problem?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend and I take the same approach, and knife crime is such an important issue in our constituencies. It is front and centre of everything that we do and think about. She is right to say that from tragedies come exceptional people doing exceptional things, and those people need support. She is also right to ask the question about long-term sustainable funding. The funding on youth justice interventions is long-term, and our local authorities have now got long-term funding, too. The funding for our violence reduction units has been for just this year, but I very much hear the call that long-term funding helps those organisations to plan much better for the future.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
I welcome the Minister’s statement, and I send my deepest sympathy to the families of everyone who has been affected, especially the family of Khaleed Oladipo, a 20-year-old young man who was stabbed in my constituency just a few weeks ago and sadly lost his life. I also pay tribute to grassroots organisations and individuals with street experience, such as Ditch the Knife, for the vital work that they do. I am glad that the Minister is aware of the work being done by De Montfort University on round-bladed knives, because in 2025 alone 95 lives were lost to kitchen knives. Will she commit to ensuring that grassroots organisation and those with real-life street experience are empowered to play a greater role in delivering lifesaving work?
Sarah Jones
I express my condolences over the death of the man in the hon. Member’s constituency. Grassroots organisations are incredibly important and we have done a lot of work, as have the violence reduction units, in making sure that things are evidence-based, so that we know they are having an impact and are working. The Youth Endowment Fund has done a whole raft of work looking at what does and does not work, so that we know that and fund it appropriately. I hope that he can be reassured that we will continue to support, through violence reduction units and other vehicles, those local grassroots organisations to make sure that they are having the impact we need them to have.
Rebecca Long Bailey (Salford) (Lab)
I welcome the Minister’s comments, but she will know that youth charities have described knife crime as a public health issue linked to cuts in youth services. Will she therefore outline how this strategy addresses those structural drivers in areas that will not receive one of the 50 Young Futures hubs, including access to youth provision, mental health support and family services? Will she meet me to discuss how the brilliant Salford Youth Zone can play its part in the Government’s strategy and receive the additional resources that it needs to deliver the Government’s plans?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The decimation of our youth services that we saw over the past 15 or so years, because they are not a statutory function for local authorities, has been catastrophic. We all know the impact of that. We are rebuilding infrastructure that has been torn away, and that is a challenge. As she says, we are introducing 50 youth hubs. The Mayor of London announced a youth centre for every borough in London, and other mayors across the country are doing what they can with their funding to make sure we are putting these services back. There is a huge push in the Department for Education and the Department of Health and Social Care to make sure that we have got people supporting our kids’ mental health in schools. There is a whole raft of interventions, but I am happy to talk to her about what Salford youth club is doing.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)
In Luton South and South Bedfordshire, we know all too well the devastating impact of knife crime, so I welcome our Government’s ambitious plan to halve it over the next decade, and in particular the emphasis on supporting young people and youth services. The Luton Youth Partnership Service is doing excellent targeted early-intervention work locally. Will the Government collaborate with existing programmes that focus on multi-agency partnerships to ensure that best practice is built on and expanded?
Sarah Jones
I am interested in what the Luton Youth Partnership Service is doing, and perhaps my hon. Friend and I can have a chat about that at some point. We are not trying to reinvent the wheel, but rather support the organisations that already exist. There are some gaps that we are trying to fill. For example, we are running a whole range of pilots across the country where we are intervening with young people who have been arrested but not charged; a lot of those people slipped through the net. We are doing a lot of work in that space, but we do not want to reinvent what is already working. I am happy to talk to my hon. Friend more about her partnership.
Ms Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)
I know that the Minister, like me, has had conversations with a parent who has lost a loved one. As an MP, they break your heart. I think particularly today of the mother of Josh McKay, who was murdered in my constituency a few years ago. He was a young man with his whole life ahead of him and a young family. I also thank the Minister for her open acknowledgment of the value of voluntary and community groups such as Street Fathers, Project Zero, Spark2Life and Break Tha Cycle, which do fantastic work in my community with our young people. May I press her on something? She talks powerfully about the importance of making school a safe place, but she will know of the concerns many of us have about the unilateral decision to withdraw school safety officers in my constituency. Headteachers tried to raise that concern. What confidence can she give us that those officers will return? They were such an important part of our fabric of supporting our young people to be safe.
Sarah Jones
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the work that she does in her constituency, and I send my condolences to Josh’s family, who will still be reeling after their loss. I agree with her that organisations such as Break Tha Cycle and Street Fathers do incredibly important work that we need to support. The target from this Government is that we should have a massive increase in our neighbourhood police officers, and we expect those officers to have a role going into schools and building relationships. We know that those relationships can be powerful. With those neighbourhood officers, we are trying to have consistency and to professionalise the neighbourhood route, so that people want to stay in it, rather than moving on up through the ranks and moving away from it. We want to have some continuity. We are also working to ensure that they are not abstracted, which is the other challenge that we have, particularly in large cities. When we have our proper cohort of neighbourhood officers, those people can be involved in their local schools, as we would expect them to be.
Natasha Irons (Croydon East) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her tireless work and campaigning on this issue, both in this place and in our community of Croydon. I know that this moral mission is personal to her, but given her experience, does she agree that tackling knife crime requires a whole-system approach bringing together policing, schools, health and communities? Can she outline how this plan strengthens the partnerships at a local level in communities like ours in Croydon?
Sarah Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for her kind words, and I know that we tackle this issue together in Croydon. The point of this package of interventions is not just to stop kids getting involved in crime, but to make sure that we have got the right justice system and the right policing system, while stopping repeat offenders. A whole raft of interventions will directly impact on Croydon, which has a really good violence reduction unit that is working hard, and we want to support all the local organisations there. Our increase in neighbourhood policing will also significantly help. In Croydon, we also have live facial recognition, too, which is an interesting and powerful intervention in tackling crime. We are consulting at the moment on its legal basis.
John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)
I welcome the Labour Government’s focus on knife crime. One courageous family in my constituency lost their beloved boy, Kory, who was stabbed to death by a 13-year-old boy. Kory’s family and I have asked the Scottish Government and Glasgow city council to confirm that the council has thoroughly reviewed all their dealings with the 13-year-old child convicted of killing Kory. That review is essential so that lessons are learned to prevent future tragedies. However, it is also essential to ensure that the rehabilitation of the child convicted of killing Kory is underpinned by a thorough understanding of that child’s background. The Scottish Government and Glasgow city council absolutely refuse to confirm that a thorough case review has taken place. Does the Minister agree that when children commit serious crimes, it is essential that thorough case reviews are carried out?
Sarah Jones
What a horrific thing it is that has happened in my hon. Friend’s community—the murder of a child by a 13-year-old child. Of course we need to understand what has happened. I completely agree with my hon. Friend about the need to ensure that we always learn the lessons and that proper reviews are in place, and the framework is there to do that. While responsibility sits with the Scottish Government and local partners in this case, I cannot but agree wholeheartedly with what my hon. Friend has said.
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
Derby is a city that unites to tackle the toughest challenges. When more co-ordination has been needed in relation to knife crime involving young people, school leaders, the council and Derbyshire constabulary have been around the table to strengthen that joined-up response locally. Local organisations such as Safe and Sound also do crucial work with our young people. Does the Minister agree that tackling knife crime requires a partnership response that brings together communities, the police, schools and health authorities, and can she say a little about how the Government’s plan will strengthen those local partnerships?
Sarah Jones
I thank my hon. Friend for the work that she is doing in bringing together local organisations to help ensure that we are tackling these issues. A raft of interventions in the plan will help local organisations to do the work that needs to be done, and we are introducing the biggest police reform in 200 years, which involves work relating to prevention and how community safety partnerships work locally. We have committed ourselves to reviewing that whole landscape to ensure that rather than people duplicating work, sitting in different meetings and doing different things, everyone is coming together with a single plan to tackle violence.
Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)
Like many other Members on both sides of the House, I am often struck by the courage and bravery of bereaved families who have lost loved ones to knife crime. Last year I spoke to a father who had lost his son, and who is dedicated to improving life and seeing positive change in other communities to ensure that no one else suffers the grief that he has suffered. How best can he and others like him play their part in delivering this action plan?
Sarah Jones
I never cease to be amazed by how incredibly resilient people are in their ability to suffer such loss and then come forward and campaign to ensure that it does not happen again. There are a number of different ways in which people can get involved—for instance, through the work of violence reduction units and local violence reduction plans. I am sure I can give my hon. Friend a list of organisations with which her constituent could potentially get involved. We need as many people as possible to help in this regard, because what is needed is a community-led and community-driven response.
Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
I regularly raise the need for more resources for frontline policing in Cleveland. We have a small population but high deprivation, and the police funding formula does not take account of the severity of crime in our region—including knife crime, the prevalence of which is among the highest in the country. I welcome the 48 new police personnel who have begun neighbourhood roles over the last year, but what more can we do to get more resources to the frontline and make our streets safe again?
Sarah Jones
Cleveland police is one of the forces that we talk to regularly, because, as my hon. Friend says, the current police funding formula is not fit for purpose. It is very old, and it needs reform. We are reforming the whole structure of policing, and as part of that we will review the formula to bring it up to date and make it fit for purpose. Although I have no answer for my hon. Friend now, the question of the formula bears heavily on my mind, and we are doing a great deal of work on it in the Department.
Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)
I welcome the 8% reduction in knife crime and the increase in neighbourhood policing, which has seen a named officer in every ward of Hartlepool, but the Minister is right to say—and my constituents would agree—that it is not enough. Frontline officers tell me that they are taken off the street for far too long because they have to travel to Middlesbrough owing to the closure of our custody suite by the Conservative party. Given that the funding formula is broken and unfairly punishes Cleveland, can the Minister commit herself to reviewing it so that we can receive the funding we need to reopen that custody suite for my town?
Sarah Jones
I have spoken to forces in areas across the country where the distance that has to be travelled just to get to a custody suite is a disincentive to arrests, which is absolutely not the approach that we want to see. The challenges that we face are great, but we are reviewing the funding formula and will be establishing a fairer formula. The police estate has not received the investment that it should have received for a very long time. Our priority is to get police out into our communities, but we need to look at the estate as well.
Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)
In Derby and Derbyshire, 71% of habitual knife carriers are aged 25 or under. Does the Minister agree that, in Derby and throughout the country, we need to provide a tailored support package so that we can break the cycle of young people’s involvement in knife crime and keep our communities safe?
Sarah Jones
Knife crime is horrific in all its forms, but there is something uniquely horrific about young people picking up knives and using them against other young people. There is a raft of interventions that we need to make and we are doing that through our action plan, but while the progress that we have seen so far is to be welcomed, it is not enough. Only when we reach our target and fulfil our ambition of halving knife crime will we know that we are actually making a difference and giving a future to those young people.