Anna McMorrin
MP for Cardiff North · Labour · United Kingdom
“I am sure that the hon. Member will agree that there are always lessons to be learned in this place, but we recognise that more needs to be done on second homes and short-term lets. The UK Government will consider a wide range of evidence on the issue, including learning from other parts of the UK.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely agree with my hon. Friend. The Prime Minister’s announcement to give everyone a route off the streets by Christmas comes with a £442 million boost in funding and a landmark summit to bring everyone together to end rough sleeping.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for her important question. She is absolutely right: these are challenging times right across the country. Wildfires are a stark reminder for us to take care of our environment as we face the ongoing challenges of our changing climate, and we need to mitigate the effects of more summers like this.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are listening closely to farmers, as we always have. We have announced more to protect family farms. We have changed the allowance for the 100% rate of relief, increasing it from £1 million to £2.5 million. That gets the balance right between supporting farms and businesses, fixing the public finances and funding our public services.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Housing is a devolved matter in Wales, but we know that people are struggling with the affordability of everyday life. That is why easing the burden on the cost of living is our priority. We have taken immediate action by removing VAT from energy bills from 1 October, giving millions of households breathing space this winter.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Farming is central to Wales’s economy and rural communities, and we are steadfast in our support for farmers. That is why I regularly meet and speak to farmers and their unions, visiting farms and agricultural shows across the country, including the Royal Welsh show this summer.”
House of Commons2 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
1,339 held · 1,332 searchable for Anna McMorrin. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“I thank the Minister for his reply. I accept his assurance that where it is in the public interest, declaring major incidents will be within the scope of the Secretary of State’s discretion. If I am wrong in that, perhaps he will intervene. I am grateful to him for putting that on record. I would us to find a way to keep the focus on where there is a significant public interest—for example, when a relatively small number of people have died or suffered harm but the circumstances suggest serious systemic failings on the part of a public body. In those circumstances it would be in the public interest and lessons can be learned for the future. I hope we can move forward, as the Minister has given the assurance that an incident would be included, if that was in the public interest. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Most of my comments about my amendments still stand. It is incredibly important that we bear in mind the words of Lord Wills, who said that a different approach is needed. He quoted the Justice Secretary’s comment that “victims must be treated not as mere spectators of the criminal justice system, but as core participants in it.” —[ Official Report , 15 May 2023; Vol. 732, c. 583.] At present, as Lord Wills says, “the Bill gives the Secretary of State unfettered powers”. –– [ Official Report, Victims and Prisoners Public Bill Committee, 22 June 2023; c. 91, Q176.] I hope that we can work together to improve the clause as the Minister suggests.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If that is not assured, the position is valueless, as it will be perceived as the Government merely extending their control over the investigatory landscape. In the evidence sessions, we heard the Right Rev. James Jones state how crucial the independence of the advocate is. When asked if he believed whether the Bill provided enough independence, he answered: “I am afraid I do not.” –– [ Official Report, Victims and Prisoners Public Bill Committee, 22 June 2023; c. 87, Q168.] I welcome the Government’s initiative and determination to continue to listen to various parties as they shape this appointment. However, I do not think that the independence is sufficiently guaranteed by the Bill as it stands. I echo the concerns expressed by the Right Rev. James Jones, and I hope that the Minister will heed them accordingly in his response.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I said earlier, clauses 24 to 26 provide unfettered discretion to the Secretary of State—not only on whether to appoint an advocate following a major disaster, but on who the advocate is and how they will be resourced. That removes any semblance of independence from the advocate, who is instructed by and answers to the Secretary of State and not those most affected. The issue of independence is a central concern for the many bereaved families and survivors. It is critical that support provided to families is operationally and functionally independent of Government, to allay families’ concerns about cover-ups, collusions and evasive practices, much of which we have heard detailed this morning.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 24, in clause 25, page 20, line 4, at end insert— “(4A) During their appointment the independent public advocate shall sit within the Ministry of Justice for administrative purposes, but shall be independent with respect to its functioning and decision-making processes, and discharge of its statutory duties.” This amendment would clarify the functional and operational independence of the advocate. I thank Inquest, Hillsborough Law Now and Justice for working with me on the amendment. I also pay tribute to Ken Sutton, secretary to the Hillsborough Independent Panel. He has worked with me through the whole of part 2 of the Bill, on this amendment and others. I pay tribute to his work and support.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful to the Minister for his words of initial support for the wording in the amendment, and for his willingness to work with us as we move forward on ensuring the independence of the advocate. As the Bill is currently drafted, that independence is by no means assured. I am grateful to hear that the Minister is willing to work with me, and look forward to that. On that basis, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I endorse the words of my right hon. Friend, who has spelled out in great detail the importance of having access to the correct data, and not just in the immediate aftermath. We must learn the lessons from what happened at Hillsborough, and ensure that in future there is access to important data and information.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is so important that the function and operational scope of the independent advocate is strong and clear, so that they can carry out their role to get to the bottom and the truth of an incident. We must ensure that we learn lessons from Hillsborough and the review panel that followed. At present, there is simply nothing independent about the advocate, but I appreciate the fact that the Minister is willing to work with us to ensure that we tighten up the wording, so that they are more independent and the Bill is as robust as possible.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have no objection in principle to the appointment of multiple independent advocates for the same major incident, therefore creating a panel. However, will the Minister clarify the context in which that panel would operate? Importantly, would it be the same as the Hillsborough Independent Panel—granted the same powers—or would it still be open to Government interference? Will he set that out in his response?”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to support absolutely what my right hon. Friend the Member for Garston and Halewood says about the amendments. They are about getting to the truth of what happened, and ensuring there is true transparency and freedom of information. Bereaved families should see justice straightaway; they should not have to go through what many other families have tragically gone through.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They simply wish to state their personal details on their child’s death certificate as a final step in their grief and to officially register them as dead. I am sure the Minister will understand that and what it means for parents to record the deaths of their loved ones, and I hope he will agree to the new clause. The Government prolonged Chloe’s and Liam’s parents’ grief; all those parents want is for their children’s legacy to be that no other family goes through what they did ever again.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Now that the deaths of Chloe and Liam are officially registered, the families must request a copy of the death certificates from the registry office in Manchester. If the Government were genuinely concerned about causing distress to families, that step would not be in place either. In the latest correspondence from the Government to the hon. Member on this matter in March, which I have a copy of here, Lord Murray set out what happens when the coroner records the death after an inquest has taken place. He said, “This ensures that the inquest and registration details fully align, while also removing exposure to any risk of outside interference or alteration.” That is heartless and an insult to those families who have lost loved ones. Bereaved families have no intention or wish to alter the findings of the inquest and the coroner.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If a child dies in a common circumstance, such as due to a health condition, their parent can personally register their death. However, if they die in a major incident, their parents are denied that last official act. We understand that not all relatives would want to register the death of a loved one, as in most cases an interim death certificate is given soon after the incident for funeral arrangements, but we advocate giving families the choice. The Government stated in letters to my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields that it may be too distressing for relatives to register the deaths, but in normal circumstances a relative has no choice but to personally register the death.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Ministers stated that the changes would be against public policy and would make the framework less effective. However, the changes could be narrow and targeted towards only a small set of circumstances, such as after a mass casualty event, as outlined in new clause 1. As the inquiry has now drawn to a close with the final report complete, it is with great sadness that I can confirm those two children’s deaths were registered just last week. Their parents travelled to Manchester to be present at the death registration, but current legislation prevented them from doing it themselves. The heartbreaking reality for those families is that time simply ran out for them as they fought the Government on this minor legislative change. A cruel and unfair two-tier system for death registration is in place.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On Wednesday 22 February 2023, both my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields and my right hon. Friend the Member for Garston and Halewood met the Home Office Minister, Lord Murray of Blidworth, and the Justice Minister, the hon. Member for Finchley and Golders Green, alongside the bereaved families. During that meeting, however, both the Members and the victims’ families were told that no legislative change would be explored, despite the Government expressing their commitment to “look at options to change the law in the longer term” in a letter just one month earlier. The families had waited almost a year for answers. They had travelled to Westminster at their own expense to meet Ministers, only to find the Government had changed their mind. They felt misled, patronised and let down, and they still do to this day.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Corby, and now the Justice Minister, the hon. Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Mike Freer), is dealing with this issue. There was also a month in which my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields was faced with complete radio silence from all Ministers involved because of the constant conveyor belt of new Ministers coming in and out, with no listed responsibilities. To top it off, the main responsibility for this matter was moved from the Home Office to the Ministry of Justice and no one informed any of those involved. I am sure that the Minister agrees that this oversight is not acceptable, especially when dealing with such a tragic and sensitive case. I hope he will take a co-operative approach to new clause 1 and finally resolve the issue for the sake of the families involved.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This issue was first raised in the main Chamber on 1 March 2022—a year and four months ago. The Government had ample time to make the relevant changes to the legislation before the death registrations for those killed in the Manchester Arena attack needed to take place, but as usual they have been too slow to react, despite the previous Justice Minister, the hon. Member for Corby (Tom Pursglove), making promises to look “at this issue with the utmost priority”. —[ Official Report , 25 May 2022; Vol. 715, c. 396.] Since March last year, my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields has had several meetings with many different Ministers due to the constant chaos and churn of the Government. First, it was the hon. Member for Corby, and then the hon. Member for Clwyd South (Simon Baynes). Then it was back to the hon.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is every parent’s worst nightmare, but after sitting through agonising hours of the public inquiry, the families were told that the registration of their precious children’s deaths would not be done by them, but by a stranger. That is what began the campaign. Chloe’s and Liam’s parents understandably feel that they have been denied this final act for their children, stripping them of a vital step in the grieving process. Under the Births and Deaths Registration Acts 1926 and 1953, which lie with the Home Office, and the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, which lies with the Ministry of Justice, it is standard practice for a coroner to register deaths involving an inquest or inquiry. For the past year, the families have been campaigning to amend the legislation to allow grieving relatives the choice to register the death of a loved one.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“She and her staff have campaigned tirelessly on this issue, and her strong advocacy in this place for bereaved families has brought them a lot of comfort. Some of the constituents of my right hon. Friend the Member for Garston and Halewood also tragically died in the same attack, and she has been heavily involved in the campaign, so I look forward to hearing her comments shortly. On 22 May 2017, 22 people were murdered in the Manchester Arena terror attack. Two constituents of my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields were among them: Chloe Ann Rutherford, aged 17, and Liam Thomas Allen Curry, aged 19. Both were just teenagers.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will speak to clauses 27 and 28 before moving on to new clause 1. Although the list of functions in clause 27 is welcome, I would like the Minister to assure me that the functions listed are non-exhaustive, and to ensure that the list is not designed to be applied in a rigid way. I appreciate that clause 28 is designed to make the independent public advocate party to relevant information in relation to inquests. However, I would like the Minister to clarify that the independent public advocate will be allowed to participate properly in an inquest where the family involved want that to happen. It is a privilege to speak to new clause 1, which was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mrs Lewell-Buck).”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I understand the points that the Minister is making about the legal wording, but this is such a deeply rooted issue. He refers to a small number of families, but the impact goes far wider. I wonder whether he could seek to find a form of legal language that would allow the change to take place, or whether we could work together on the new clause to ensure that it takes place, so that the families can register the deaths.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(5C) The Secretary of State shall lay before Parliament any reports received under (1) and (2) within 14 days of receipt, and where appropriate, refer the content to relevant Parliamentary committees.” This amendment would require a public advocate to provide reports to the Secretary of State about relevant events and to report if, in their opinion, public authorities or public servants have not complied with the duty of candour in NC3.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 25, in clause 29, page 22, line 15, at end insert— “(5A) An advocate must provide periodic reports, at least annually, to the Secretary of State, regarding relevant events and occurrences. (5B) In any case where an advocate is of the opinion that the duty under section [ major incidents: duty of candour ] has not been discharged, and the matter has not been effectively resolved, a report shall be sent to the Secretary of State as soon as possible.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“James Jones concluded that South Yorkshire police’s “repeated failure to fully and unequivocally accept the findings of independent inquiries and reviews has undoubtedly caused pain to the bereaved families”. During the evidence sessions, when asked if a duty of candour should be extended to include public servants, the Right Rev. James Jones answered: “Yes, I think that there should be a duty of candour on all public officials. Anybody who accepts public office should bind themselves according to their own conscience to speak with candour and not to dissemble when called upon to give the truth and an account of what has happened.” –– [ Official Report, Victims and Prisoners Public Bill Committee, 22 June 2023; c. 90, Q173.]”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It causes additional suffering to bereaved persons, creates undue delay to inquests and inquiries, undermines public trust and confidence in the police, and undermines a fundamental purpose of inquests and inquiries, which is to understand what happened and to prevent recurrence. Establishing a statutory duty of candour when major incidents occur would go some way to addressing those issues. Justice’s report, “When Things Go Wrong: the response of the justice system”, found that in both inquests and inquiries, “lack of candour and institutional defensiveness on the part of State and corporate interested persons and core participants are invariably cited as a cause of further suffering and a barrier to accountability”. In his Government-commissioned report on the experiences of the Hillsborough families, the Right Rev.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Again, I want to mention INQUEST, Hillsborough Law Now and Justice, the organisations working with me on these provisions. There is an urgent need to introduce a duty of candour for those from across the public services, such as policing, health, social care, and housing, when a major incident occurs. A duty of candour would place a legal requirement on organisations to approach public scrutiny, including inquiries and inquests into state-related deaths, in a candid and transparent manner. The duty would enable public servants and others delivering state services to carry out their role diligently, while also empowering them to flag dangerous practices that risk lives. Institutional defensiveness has been found to be a pervasive issue in inquests and public inquiries; we heard about that today.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It would compel co-operation with proceedings, inquiries and investigations, dismantling the culture of colleague protection—for example, in the police service. I am sure the Minister is aware that my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer) has committed a Labour Government to introducing a Hillsborough law. That would place a duty of candour on all public bodies, and those delivering state services, going through inquests or investigations. I am sure the Minister will understand the compelling reason for strengthening the Bill, and will voice his support for the amendment and new clause.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A statutory duty of candour would significantly enhance participation in inquiries by bereaved people and survivors, as it would ensure that a public body’s position was clear from the outset, and so limit the possibility of evasiveness. The duty would also direct the investigation to the most important matters at an early stage, which would strengthen the ability of the inquiry or investigation to reach the truth without undue delay. By requiring openness and transparency, a statutory duty of candour would assist in bringing about a culture change in how state bodies approach inquests and inquiries. It would give confidence to members of an organisation who wanted to fully assist proceedings, inquiries and investigations, but who experienced pressure from their colleagues not to do so.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Failure to make full disclosure and act transparently can lead to lengthy delays as the investigation or inquiry grapples with identifying and resolving the issues in dispute, at a cost to public funds and public safety. A recent example is the Daniel Morgan independent panel, which was refused proper access to HOLMES, the Home Office large major enquiry system, by the Metropolitan Police Service over seven years. The panel needed access to HOLMES to review the investigations of Daniel Morgan’s murder, but the lengthy negotiations on the panel’s access led to major delays to its work. The delays added to the panel’s costs and caused unnecessary distress to Daniel Morgan’s family, and the panel concluded that the MPS was “determined not to permit access to the HOLMES system”.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A 1989 briefing to the Prime Minister’s office on the interim Taylor report on the Hillsborough disaster noted that “senior officers involved sought to duck all responsibility when giving evidence to the Inquiry”. It went on to say: “The defensive—and at times close to deceitful—behaviour by the senior officers in South Yorkshire sounds depressingly familiar. Too many senior policemen seem to lack the capacity or character to perceive and admit faults in their organisation.” A statutory duty of candour would compel co-operation, and so enable major incident inquests and inquiries to fulfil their function of reaching the truth, so that they can make pertinent recommendations that address what went wrong and identify learning for the future.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right. A lack of candour frustrates the fundamental purpose of inquests and inquiries, as we heard in the evidence sessions. Candour is essential if we are to reach the truth and learn from mistakes, so that similar tragedies do not occur in the future. Public bodies such as the police have consistently approached inquests and inquiries as though they were litigation. They have failed to make admissions, and often failed to fully disclose the extent of their knowledge surrounding fatal events. For example, South Yorkshire police have been repeatedly criticised for their institutional defensiveness in respect of the awful Hillsborough tragedy in 1989.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am disappointed by the response on the amendment, new clause 3 and the request of my right hon. Friend the Member for Garston and Halewood for a response to the report that was published in 2017—more than six years have gone by since then. I hope that the Minister can guarantee that response before the end of the Committee; that gives him an extra week.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Although I am disappointed, I will not press the amendment to a vote. I hope that we will continue discussion of the importance of the duty of candour, and ensure that it is a core element of the Bill. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn .”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“91, Q176.] The failure to address concerns expressed about the independence of the supposedly independent public advocate demonstrates that lessons are not being learned from Hillsborough. When the next major incident occurs—which, unfortunately, it will—we will be discussing not legal terminology, but human tragedy. I hope the Minister heeds our calls and ensures genuine independence for the independent public advocate.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are going back to the whole question of trust. The responsibility to report to Parliament should, at the very least, encourage a feedback loop that ensures that Government conduct can, through the fact-finding process and in its aftermath, be properly scrutinised by the legislature and, more generally, the public. That will not happen if the clause is left unamended. During our evidence sessions, Lord Wills echoed my concerns and stated: “As I understand the Government’s proposals, the independent public advocate will not have the right enjoyed by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, for example, to be an independent office that has the right to produce reports on its own initiative.” –– [ Official Report, Victims and Prisoners Public Bill Committee, 22 June 2023; c.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This clause states that the Secretary of State can require the advocate to produce a report on the investigation processes, but that the report can be redacted by the Secretary of State on public interest grounds. The amendment seeks to rectify that. Yet again, a provision of the Bill is undermining the independence and transparency of the IPA’s role. This is another example of the Government suggesting that they believe in an independent body, but then restricting it in a way that completely contradicts that notion. Redacting the work of the supposedly independent IPA is hopeless. We cannot subject someone’s work to redaction while claiming that they have independence. Why does the Minister think that the public will trust the Government to redact the IPA’s work in a way that does not serve their own interests?”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 23, in clause 29, page 22, line 18, leave out paragraph (a). This amendment would remove the Secretary of State’s ability to omit material in the advocate’s report if they believe it is contrary to the public interest . I think this is my last amendment; I am grateful to the Committee. The amendment, similarly to my previous amendments, seeks to ensure the independence of the independent public advocate. Again, I give my deep thanks to Ken Sutton, secretary to the Hillsborough Independent Panel, for his continued support and work on these issues. The fact that the independence of the independent public advocate is being debated should be a worry for us all. The clause relates to the reporting process for the advocate.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am disappointed because I think the amendment would really strengthen the Bill, as would amendment 79 tabled by my right hon. Friend the Member for Garston and Halewood. The Government may not support this amendment, but why could they not instead subject the IPA to a protocol of disclosure similar to that of the Hillsborough Independent Panel? Can the Minister respond to that now?”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for agreeing to reflect on the issue. On that basis, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I simply say that I think the arguments that I set out in my amendments and new clauses still stand. The clause states that the Secretary of State can require the advocate to produce a report on the investigation processes, but that the report can be redacted by the Secretary of State on public interest grounds. Amendment 23 seeks to rectify that, while amendment 25 and new clause 3 seek to ensure the transparency and openness that the Minister speaks about. They would add not only that additional strength to the Bill but, most importantly, that trust.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Well, I won’t comment on that, Mr Hosie. I would just like to say, very briefly, that I would like the Minister to provide the assurance that the IPA will be granted the authority to be given all the information that they require relevant to their role, and, further to that, that they will be granted the necessary powers to ensure that none of the relevant information is destroyed. That is essential.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have already made my points about this issue. I wish to ensure that the IPA is granted the authority to receive all the information they need. I hope the Minister will continue to work with us to get that right. Question put and agreed to . Clause 30, as amended, accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 31 Guidance for independent public advocates Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for expanding on the guidance for an independent public advocate. My remaining concern with the clause is the potential for the Secretary of State to use the guidance to restrict the powers and remit of the IPA. Will the Minister assure me that that will not be the case?”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That dilutes and undermines the importance of other crime types. Fraud is the UK’s most prevalent crime type.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I understand that the Domestic Abuse Commissioner is still waiting for a response to their “Safety Before Status” report five months after the deadline. Can the Minister explain why the Government do not believe it is necessary to respect the powers of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner and respond to such a pivotal report? Can he reassure all of us here that exactly the same practice will not just happen again to the Victims’ Commissioner?”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“During the evidence sessions, Dame Vera raised her concerns about the efficacy of the data that will be available to the commissioner for the purposes of their report—something that I have also raised in debates on earlier amendments. Will the Minister outline how a future Victims’ Commissioner, when appointed, will receive the appropriate data and information to allow for independent scrutiny? The Bill at present fails to do that. The Victims’ Commissioner’s powers under clause 16 do not go far enough in ensuring that victims have a steady, reliable voice that criminal justice agencies and the Government must listen to. Granting agencies the duty to respond to the commissioner’s recommendations is a welcome first step, but how will the Government ensure that agencies respond and comply?”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for addressing the clause. As I have already outlined, regarding my previous amendments that would have strengthened the powers and authority of the Victims’ Commissioner, we fully support the function of a robust and independent Victims’ Commissioner. We first asked for a provision to grant the commissioner a statutory duty to prepare and issue a report to lay before Parliament in early 2021, so I am glad that the Government have finally caught up and heeded our calls. We believe that victims’ rights should be a parliamentary responsibility, and I am pleased that the report will not just go to the Secretary of State.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is imperative that a formal consultative role is established as only some inspectorates routinely consult the Victims’ Commissioner. I welcome this provision, but would like to see that point emphasised.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is clear from my previous amendments to the Bill on expanding the powers of the Victims’ Commissioner that the commissioner should be widely consulted for the majority of matters in the victims code. I am pleased that the Government have accepted the recommendation following pre-legislative scrutiny by the Justice Committee to place a duty on criminal justice inspectorates to consult the commissioner when developing their work programmes and frameworks to drive improvements, because it is the victims’ experiences and what they go through that matter. My right hon. Friend the Member for Garston and Halewood was absolutely right when she emphasised, as the Select Committee set out, that the inspectorates need the levers to act when these issues are pointed out.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Finally, it is worth noting that the ombudsman service is not well known among victims of crime, so how will the Government increase its visibility?”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗