Migration and Economic Development Partnership

Debate between Suella Braverman and Helen Hayes
Thursday 29th June 2023

(10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Helen Hayes Portrait Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

One of my constituents has applied for his wife and daughter to come to the UK from Afghanistan, where their human rights as a woman and a girl are being denied by the Taliban on a daily basis. The Home Office refused their applications, but a court disagreed and ruled that they should be allowed to come. My constituent is distraught that the Home Secretary is choosing to appeal, seeking to stop this family fleeing persecution and being reunited in the UK via a safe and legal route. Why does she think it is a justifiable use of taxpayers’ money to keep challenging the decisions of our courts, as she has announced today she will do in relation to the inhumane and failed Rwanda scheme, rather than taking responsibility for the failures on her watch?

Suella Braverman Portrait Suella Braverman
- View Speech - Hansard - -

What is inhumane, I am afraid, is the Opposition’s stance on this subject. They maintain a principled objection—a ludicrous objection, frankly—to our measures, which will save lives, which are humanitarian at core and which will break the people-smuggling gangs. The fact that they continue to oppose those humanitarian measures is beyond me and frankly not in keeping with the tradition of the Labour party.

Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse: Report

Debate between Suella Braverman and Helen Hayes
Monday 22nd May 2023

(11 months, 1 week ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Suella Braverman Portrait Suella Braverman
- View Speech - Hansard - -

May I put on record my sympathies to the family of the hon. Gentleman’s constituents? When it comes to the child protection authority, we absolutely agree that we need a sharper focus on improving practice in child protection and ensuring that we are all playing our part to keep children safe. Since the inquiry reported, the Department for Education, in responding to the care review, has set out a bold vision for reform of social care and child protections—“Stable Homes, Built on Love”—and the Government are confident that those reforms will deliver the intention behind the inquiry’s recommendation for a new child protection authority.

Helen Hayes Portrait Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Can I put on record my tribute to my constituents who gave evidence to IICSA? They relived their trauma so that changes can be made in future and they are among the most courageous people I know.

One of the recommendations from IICSA’s final report is for the introduction of arrangements for the registration of staff working in care roles in children’s homes, including secure children’s homes. This is an obvious practical recommendation that would make a material difference to the safety of children living in local authority care, but it was originally recommended in 2018 and there was really no excuse for the Government not to act at that time to implement it. Since that time, children have continued to suffer abuse and neglect in children’s homes, including those run by the Hesley Group in Doncaster and the Calcot homes in Oxfordshire. Can I ask the Home Secretary why she waited five years to act and can she update the House on the timescale for implementing this very important recommendation?

Suella Braverman Portrait Suella Braverman
- View Speech - Hansard - -

We accept the meaning and significance of recommendation 7, to which the hon. Member refers, on the registration of staff working in care roles in children’s homes. We are exploring the proposals to introduce professional registration of the residential childcare workforce as part of the “Stable Homes, Built on Love” strategy—key and landmark reforms to our care system. But we recognise the important contribution of the residential childcare workforce in caring for some of the most vulnerable children in our society, and the importance of ensuring that they have the skills required to safeguard, support and care for those children. We are backing them with investment and reform.

Metropolitan Police: Casey Review

Debate between Suella Braverman and Helen Hayes
Tuesday 21st March 2023

(1 year, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Suella Braverman Portrait Suella Braverman
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I am very glad that the Met has an increased, record number of police officers. Many of them will be deployed on the frontline to neighbourhood policing teams, so we will have an increase in response. The turnaround plan specifically addresses how the Met will improve its neighbourhood policing response through better powers and quicker responses from the response team, ensuring that antisocial behaviour is dealt with. That is a priority for both the Met and myself.

Helen Hayes Portrait Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

For many of my constituents, reading Baroness Casey’s report will be the first time that their experiences of policing have been validated and vindicated. The same cannot be said for the Home Secretary’s response. It is hard to overstate the frustration and betrayal that so many Londoners have felt when they have raised concerns with the police and have been met with a stone wall of defensiveness, excuses and denial. Among many, many issues that Baroness Casey highlights are serious problems with transparency and accountability. My experience in raising complaints about two very serious matters of police conduct is that there is no accountability because the IOPC will refer complaints back to the Met to be investigated, and internal investigations simply cannot deliver. What will the Home Secretary do to resolve the situation in which the police mark their own homework and there is no accountability or change?

Suella Braverman Portrait Suella Braverman
- View Speech - Hansard - -

As Baroness Casey’s report made clear, primary accountability sits with the Mayor of London. It is for the Mayor, rather than the inspectorate or any other body, to hold the commissioner directly to account for taking the rigorous action needed to address concerns. It was frankly shocking to read that the Mayor has not chaired a board for several years. I am very glad that he has now agreed to start discharging his role appropriately, but it is clear that governance and accountability need to improve. That is why that constituted a significant element of the report.

Police Conduct and David Carrick

Debate between Suella Braverman and Helen Hayes
Tuesday 17th January 2023

(1 year, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Suella Braverman Portrait Suella Braverman
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I agree wholeheartedly with my hon. Friend. As Baroness Casey identified in her interim review at the end of last year, the misconduct process takes too long. Officers and staff do not have confidence in the process. Allegations relating to sexual misconduct and other discriminatory behaviour are less likely than other misconduct allegations to result in a case-to-answer decision. There is a real need for action to take place. That is why we will come up with proposals on the back of the review I have announced today.

Helen Hayes Portrait Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

When Sarah Everard was abducted from a street in London not far from my constituency and brutally murdered by a serving police officer with a history of predatory behaviour, the then deputy commissioner of the Metropolitan police said there was zero tolerance of misogyny in the Met. The appalling crimes of David Carrick show that that was clearly not the case. The current commissioner says that there are between 800 and 1,000 officers currently under investigation for abuse. Can I ask the Home Secretary, because she has not answered this question so far today, what she is doing to ensure that there are actually consequences and accountability for the enablers in police forces up and down the country who protect abusers and allow them to continue their activities under the cover of their warrant card? Dealing with that issue is an essential prerequisite for zero tolerance to mean anything at all.

Suella Braverman Portrait Suella Braverman
- View Speech - Hansard - -

The action that needs to be taken has been set out incredibly widely and comprehensively in several reports. That action includes increasing the minimum standards for pre-employment checks; establishing better processes for assessing, analysing and managing the risks relating to vetting decisions, corruption investigations and information security; improving the quality and consistency of decision making when it comes to vetting; and extending the scope of the law relating to the police complaint and misconduct procedures. There is a very clear plan of action that is necessary among chief constables, the College of Policing and the NPCC, and the Home Office is monitoring and taking action where necessary.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Suella Braverman and Helen Hayes
Thursday 19th July 2018

(5 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Suella Braverman Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (Suella Braverman)
- Hansard - -

I assure my hon. Friend that I share his and the Environment Secretary’s view that, once we leave the EU, we will be able to control access to our waters by non-UK registered vessels, which will be a matter for negotiation. Access to markets for fish products will be agreed as part of our future economic partnership, just as with other goods and food products.

Helen Hayes Portrait Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

T3. I understand that the Secretary of State, as a member of the campaign committee of Vote Leave—the campaign committee met weekly, according to Vote Leave’s website, to agree the leave campaign’s strategy—may not want to comment on this week’s findings of the Electoral Commission until he has spoken to the police, who are investigating those findings, so I ask him this hypothetical question instead. In a situation in which an organisation has been found to have lied about its spending and to have broken UK law in order to secure a narrow referendum victory, what does he believe the consequences should be?