Asked by: Lord Farmer (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hanson of Flint on 25 February (HL5010), what plans they have to extend the Palace of Westminster controlled area created initially by the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 so that the section of pavement adjoining both the Great George Street government offices and the section of the A302 that forms the north side of Parliament Square, rather than only the vehicular access points within that area, is subject to the same restrictions on amplified noise as the rest of Parliament Square.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government keeps its public order legislation under constant review and where gaps are identified we will seek to address them.
Asked by: Lord Farmer (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to introduce legislation to extend the Palace of Westminster controlled area created by section 143 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 to include (1) the section of the A302 which forms the north side of Parliament Square, and (2) the public areas which adjoin.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Through section 76 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 (PCSC Act 2022), the previous Government amended section 142A of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 to expand the “controlled area” of the Palace of Westminster to include the vehicular access points to the Parliamentary Estate. The amendment also added obstructing the passage of a vehicle into or out of the Parliamentary Estate to the list of prohibited activities.
The aim of the amendments was to prevent the impediment of Parliamentarians’ vehicular access to the Parliamentary Estate via vehicular entrances. The scope of the amendment was determined in consultation with the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and other key partners. The PCSC Act 2022 will be subject to post-legislative scrutiny between April 2025 and April 2027. We will carefully consider the findings of that review and should gaps in the legislation be identified, we will seek to address them.
Asked by: Lord Farmer (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, with regard to the map on page 11 of the guidance issued by the Home Office in March 2023 on provisions of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 relating to Parliament Square and the areas surrounding the Palace of Westminster, why the section of the A302 forming the north side of Parliament Square was not included in the controlled area.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Through section 76 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 (PCSC Act 2022), the previous Government amended section 142A of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 to expand the “controlled area” of the Palace of Westminster to include the vehicular access points to the Parliamentary Estate. The amendment also added obstructing the passage of a vehicle into or out of the Parliamentary Estate to the list of prohibited activities.
The aim of the amendments was to prevent the impediment of Parliamentarians’ vehicular access to the Parliamentary Estate via vehicular entrances. The scope of the amendment was determined in consultation with the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and other key partners. The PCSC Act 2022 will be subject to post-legislative scrutiny between April 2025 and April 2027. We will carefully consider the findings of that review and should gaps in the legislation be identified, we will seek to address them.
Asked by: Lord Farmer (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to review the effectiveness of existing legal provisions relating to the management of disruptive activities in the Palace of Westminster controlled area, including section 143 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Through section 76 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 (PCSC Act 2022), the previous Government amended section 142A of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 to expand the “controlled area” of the Palace of Westminster to include the vehicular access points to the Parliamentary Estate. The amendment also added obstructing the passage of a vehicle into or out of the Parliamentary Estate to the list of prohibited activities.
The aim of the amendments was to prevent the impediment of Parliamentarians’ vehicular access to the Parliamentary Estate via vehicular entrances. The scope of the amendment was determined in consultation with the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and other key partners. The PCSC Act 2022 will be subject to post-legislative scrutiny between April 2025 and April 2027. We will carefully consider the findings of that review and should gaps in the legislation be identified, we will seek to address them.
Asked by: Michael Fabricant (Conservative - Lichfield)
Question
To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the House of Commons Commission, what steps are being taken by the Commission to ensure that Members and their staff are not (a) harassed, (b) obstructed, (c) shouted at, or (d) intimidated by professional agitators in the proximity of the Palace of Westminster; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Charles Walker
The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) is working with the Parliamentary Security Department to identify Members and staff who have reported the behaviour. This includes identifying those who are able and willing to provide a signed statement which with a statutory declaration can be used for criminal justice purposes. Officers are assessing each occasion that we are aware of, taking into account behaviour; the current law; and the latest guidance on protest from case law. This has taken time. Some witnesses do not want to give statements or are unwilling to go to court; without such testimony it makes any legal action very unlikely. In addition, some behaviour does not constitute a criminal offence when viewed in isolation; without witness statements, building a persuasive case around persistent behaviour is very difficult.
The Parliamentary Liaison and Investigation (PLaIT) are considering all options once they have identified what statements can be obtained, and assessing the evidence provided against the relevant legislation. PLaIT will work in consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), who are the ultimate decision maker on whether to prosecute and what for. It is worth noting that hearsay evidence is inadmissible in court, therefore statements need to be gathered from the principal witness, which outline the impact and can be tested in court. Even if a police officer witnessed the event, there would still need to be a victim statement which evidences the offences and impact.
There is a long history of protest outside Parliament and a number of pieces of statute legislation have been put in place to moderate protest activity. Article 9, 10 and 11 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the freedom of thought, expression and assembly/association, and these rights mean that protest legislation remains one of the most contested in the courts; the resulting case law provides an ever changing interpretation of the laws. Therefore the use of legislation, especially new legislation, which interferes in the rights to protest needs to be carefully considered, be proportionate and likely to succeed.
Asked by: Diane Abbott (Labour - Hackney North and Stoke Newington)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many officers are in the Parliamentary Liaison and Investigation Team; and who the head of that team is.
Answered by Kit Malthouse
The Metropolitan Police Service Parliamentary Liaison and Investigation Team (PLaIT) is made up of seven members of staff in total, including the Head of PLaIT. We are unable to give further details on the Head of the team, at this time; however, all Members’ of Parliament are able to make direct contact with PLaIT and the Head of PLaIT through dedicated, known communication channels.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question
To ask the hon. Member for Perth and North Perthshire, representing the House of Commons Commission, if the Commission will publish the (a) dates and (b) changes that have been made to policing arrangements in the vicinity of the parliamentary estate in the last 10 years in relation to (i) demonstrations and (ii) the (A) obstruction, (B) abuse and (C) intimidation of hon. Members at entrances to the Palace of Westminster; and what steps the Commission plans to take with (1) City of Westminster local authority, (2) the Greater London Authority and (3) the Metropolitan Police to ensure the safety of (x) hon. Members, (y) parliamentary staff and (z) other people entering and exiting the parliamentary estate.
Answered by Pete Wishart - SNP Deputy Westminster Leader
The Parliamentary Security Department (PSD) has a Special Services Agreement for provision of policing on the Parliamentary Estate; external policing is a matter for the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The House of Commons Commission cannot therefore provide the requested information pertaining to policing arrangements in the vicinity of the Parliamentary Estate in the last 10 years.
PSD is in frequent communication with the MPS to assess expected protest activity and other events in the surrounding area that may impact access to and/or the safety of Parliament and those working or visiting here. During extended and heightened protest activity, for example around the debates on Brexit, PSD has worked with the MPS and with other parties such as broadcasters to protect Members, staff and the public. PSD also issues advice to Members and other passholders around personal security, including any specific guidance around ongoing events.
PSD and other Parliamentary officials also liaise with Westminster City Council (WCC), the Greater London Authority (GLA), the MPS and others on issues of safety and security in the nearby area. Parliament has supported the Parliament Square Streetscape Project, which is led jointly by the GLA and WCC and with the involvement of the MPS, to consider the feasibility of improvements to the Streetscape around the Palace of Westminster.
Asked by: Lord Palmer (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what are the average daily costs to Parliament of any additional Parliamentary security personnel who have been required to deal with the demonstrators near to the Palace of Westminster since 23 June 2016.
Answered by Lord McFall of Alcluith
There have been no additional costs to Parliament. The additional security staff fall into two categories, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and private security provision for the broadcasters. The resources for the police officers who are part of the wider MPS response to Brexit do not fall within the contractual arrangement between MPS and Parliament, therefore Parliament is not paying any extra for policing these protests. Private security provision for the broadcasters is contracted by various broadcasters on Abingdon Green, which Parliament does not pay for.
Asked by: Greg Knight (Conservative - East Yorkshire)
Question
To ask the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington, representing the House of Commons Commission, whether the Commission has made an assessment of the adequacy of security in the Palace of Westminster as a result of the number of unaccompanied non-passholders accessing the Parliamentary estate in order to use refreshment facilities; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Tom Brake
The House authorities, in conjunction with the police, assess all Parliamentary activity each week. This assessment is based on risk and considers all events, including banqueting, committees, meetings and other Parliamentary business. Security provision is based on risk and threat and comprises many different actions which we cannot disclose in full.
Unaccompanied non-passholders accessing the Parliamentary estate in order to use refreshment facilities are restricted to a limited number of areas. These areas, and routes to and from the entrances and exits to the estate, are carefully controlled by security and other House staff to minimise the risk of non-passholders accessing other parts of the estate. We encourage all Members and staff to challenge any unaccompanied non-passholders who are found in a restricted area and to alert security staff to their presence.
All non-passholders are subject to search and screening measures before entering the estate and may not bring onto the estate prohibited items. Further information about these measures can be found on the Parliamentary website: https://www.parliament.uk/visiting/access/security/.
Asked by: Christian Matheson (Independent - City of Chester)
Question
To ask the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington, representing the House of Commons Commission, how many (a) members, (b) members' staff and (c) other pass holders have been reported to the Serjeant at Arms by security officers or police officers for failure to wear or failure to present on request their Palace of Westminster Security Pass in each of the last five years.
Answered by Tom Brake
The Serjeant at Arms Office does receive emails and phone calls on the subject of failure to wear a Security Pass but the Office does not make a record of these or hold statistics.