← LEADERSHIP TERMINAL

UK PARLIAMENT · SITTING

Jess Asato

MP for Lowestoft · Labour · United Kingdom

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I wholeheartedly congratulate the hon. Member for Twickenham on bringing forward this Bill to close a clear legislative gap on child-like sexual abuse dolls, and I welcome the Government’s support.”

House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“That can be text, but it can also involve visual, cartoon-like characters that narrate and reinforce the scenario. These are not isolated text exchanges; they create an immersive environment in which a user can interact with a child avatar and rehearse abusive scenarios.”

House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“They are referred to by multiple members of the Pornography Harms Coalition, which includes CEASE, Barnardo’s, Rape Crisis and the Internet Watch Foundation, among many others, as digital sexual abuse dolls.”

House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“However, it is unclear what counts as a sexualised chatbot, how the ban will be enforced and what exemptions apply. It protects only under-18s, so it does nothing about an adult using a chatbot that generates written child sexual abuse scenarios.”

House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“The Bureau of Investigative Journalism found that character.ai users could interact with characters such as “Bestie Epstein”, based on the prolific paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Under UK law, child sexual abuse material is unlawful whether it is real, AI-generated, synthetic or a hybrid.”

House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“That was prompted by a case reported in The Guardian of Emily, a pseudonym, whose father fantasised about, and described in detail in an online chatroom, raping and sexually abusing her as a child.”

House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

The complete record

260 held · 250 searchable for Jess Asato. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 5.

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.

  1. “New mums and dads in my constituency tell me that one of the things they worry about most is whether they can afford the childcare that they need to be able to go back to work. That is why it is great that parents will be able to save up to £7,500 a year on nursery fees, thanks to this Labour Government. Does the Prime Minister agree that not only is investing in childcare important for tackling the cost of living crisis, but it will help to remove barriers to deciding to have children in the first place?”

    House of Commons3 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  2. “I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. Does she agree that, having created the ban on non-fatal strangulation in pornography, the Government now also need to ban depictions in pornography that encourage a sexual interest in children—so-called paedophilic-adjacent porn—as well as depictions of step-family incest?”

    House of Commons2 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  3. “We know that timely access to mental health support is crucial. Earlier this month, the Education Committee released its report on children’s social care, which recommended that the Government establish mental health teams that are co-located between child and adolescent mental health services —CAMHS—and children’s social care, so that looked-after children can access specialist mental health support more easily. Will the Minister share any assessment that the Department has made of this recommendation?”

    House of Commons21 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  4. “I thank my hon. Friend for her statement. Like her, I pay tribute to the care leavers who spoke to us, often sharing deeply traumatic stories of their journey through the care system. Their corporate parent is ultimately the state, and we as its custodians must bear the responsibility of ensuring that we support children in care as if they are our own. Does my hon. Friend agree that that is why the Committee’s recommendation that the Government should implement a national care leaver offer is so important, and that doing so would guarantee a consistent approach across local authorities?”

    House of Commons10 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  5. “I urge the Government to see this as a children’s health issue and, in the interests of children’s wellbeing, use the legislative opportunity presented by the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill—which is currently being considered in the other place—to end it.”

    House of Commons10 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  6. “It is simply unacceptable in 2025 that children have less protection from assault and battery than adults do, particularly when it has such poor health implications —for example, research from the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health has found that children who are physically punished are up to 2.3 times more likely to experience mental health problems. That is why 77% of healthcare professionals and 14 public health organisations want to see the law in this area changed. Following the lead of over 60 countries around the world, including Scotland and Wales, we must remove the reasonable punishment defence, which continues to allow children to be harmed.”

    House of Commons10 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  7. “I hope the Government will continue to look at the growing evidence that links access to social media and addictive smartphones with children’s poor mental health, but their commitment to roll out mental health support teams to all schools and colleges by 2029-30 is hugely welcome. I am glad that the 10-year health plan that the Health Secretary set out a week ago begins an important shift towards prevention and early intervention, and I welcome the plan’s aim to “end the obesity epidemic”. I remain concerned that the ban on advertising unhealthy food and drink will mean that brands can continue to advertise so long as they do not explicitly identify their unhealthy products, and I hope that the Government will consider how to deal with that issue. Finally, I will speak to the physical punishment of children.”

    House of Commons10 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  8. “As such, one of the most effective ways to tackle poor child health is to reduce the number of children living in poverty—something that the last Labour Government did to great effect. That record will be built on by this Government’s forthcoming child poverty strategy, which I hope will set out clear and bold targets, alongside a path to reaching those targets. As has been mentioned, one of the biggest health crises facing children today is mental health. Some 85% of children and young people’s mental health services report that they are struggling to keep up with demand.”

    House of Commons10 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  9. “I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) for securing this important debate. One of the most frequent issues raised with me in Lowestoft is dentistry, and the situation is particularly acute for children. As we have heard, one in four five-year-olds experience tooth decay, and preventable tooth decay remains one of the top reasons for hospital admission. That is why the Government’s roll-out of supervised teeth brushing in our most deprived areas and the inclusion of dental services in the roll-out of family hubs are so welcome. Children from deprived areas are almost three times more likely to have dental decay than those from less deprived areas. One in three children in my constituency of Lowestoft are in relative poverty—a poverty that is linked to, and compounds, health problems.”

    House of Commons10 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  10. “I hugely welcome the NHS 10-year plan, and its recognition that victims of domestic abuse are more likely to experience worse NHS access and worse outcomes, and will die younger. Domestic abuse costs the NHS £2.3 billion a year. Will the Secretary of State agree to work with Standing Together and other domestic abuse charities to ensure that the NHS treats domestic abuse as the public health emergency that it is?”

    House of Commons3 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  11. “He was sexually abused by a family friend and never received any real support for what he went through, and court backlogs mean that the criminal case is still ongoing. He spends longer and longer watching social media influencers paid by assisted dying companies to advocate for what they call a peaceful end to life. He begins to starve, and doctors withdraw treatment because they claim nothing more can be done. You get a call only a few months after his 18th birthday to tell you that your brother has opted for an assisted death.”

    House of Commons20 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  12. “You could see her health deteriorating, but he often stopped her from going to the doctor or reaching out to friends. One day, you get a call from your dad to say, “She’s dead. She got an assisted death.” You worry that she took her life, not because of her illness, but because it was the only way out from the abuse. You fear that your dad made her do it, but there was no chance for you to tell anyone about your concerns, and there is no automatic requirement for an investigation by a coroner. Would you ever be able to prove his malign control now that she is gone? Imagine that you have a brother who has struggled with an eating disorder ever since he entered secondary school.”

    House of Commons20 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  13. “We must recognise that if we advance this Bill yet further today, there will be unintended and undesirable consequences, and it is the Bill in front of us that we are voting on today—not the principle, or a distant promise that the other place might fix the holes, but what we know is in, and not in, this legislation. I would like to briefly illustrate the reasons why I believe this Bill will create harm for families across our country. Imagine the scenario of your mother. You were there when Dad used to belittle her. In public, it was jokes putting her down, but in the house, you would hear him say that she was worthless and ugly and would be better off dead. You got out of there as soon as you could, but she would never leave—she loved him, and could not see a life for herself outside of his control.”

    House of Commons20 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  14. “I did not start this process opposed to the idea of assisted dying, but having worked in the field of domestic abuse, I found myself increasingly concerned about how this Bill would impact on those who are most vulnerable to coercion and abuse. As a Labour MP, I reflected on why I joined the Labour party. It was because of our commitment to protecting the vulnerable and fighting for equality, suspicious of individualism and narrow notions of choice that turn a blind eye to the impact of that choice on others. If I could legislate to create a Bill just for me, I would be tempted by these measures, but I believe my role as an MP is to legislate in the best interests of those who have no voice, whose choices are often limited by poverty, the patriarchy, racism, trauma, ill health, and state and societal failure.”

    House of Commons20 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  15. “There is so much life left to live after a terminal diagnosis. We should not relinquish our bonds, duties and responsibilities towards each other as fellow human beings. I urge colleagues to reject this Bill.”

    House of Commons20 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  16. “A prominent campaigner in favour of this Bill said: “Even if a few grannies get bullied into it, isn’t that a price worth paying for all the people who could die with dignity?” Please, we must not settle for this. In a system designed to end life, there can be no room for doubt or human error. Coercion and abuse are real—they happen all around us all the time, whether or not we want to see them, as does feeling like a burden. Perceiving yourself as a burden is a common phenomenon associated with having a terminal illness, one that often leads to a desire to die. This Bill allows that feeling of being a burden—to those closest to you, and to society more broadly—to be acted on, rather than treated. Research has found that doctors wrongly predict how long terminally ill people have to live in over half of cases.”

    House of Commons20 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  17. “No, thank you. I am sorry, but we have to make time for others. We know from other jurisdictions that it is disproportionately older and disabled people who would access assisted dying. These are two of the groups most vulnerable to abuse or coercion, particularly by strangers through financial abuse and cuckooing. Coercion is not just a risk with this legislation, but a certainty. There are 2.3 million victims of domestic abuse in the UK. Even if this Bill implemented gold-standard training—we do not know that it will—professionals will not be able to identify everyone. It is sadly inevitable that if the Bill passes, it is the most vulnerable people in our society who will experience wrongful deaths.”

    House of Commons20 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  18. “New clause 105 would ensure that pornography websites accessed from the UK must verify the age and consent of every individual featured on their site and, crucially, enable individuals featured in pornography to withdraw their consent to its publication at any time. I look forward to working with the Government and colleagues across the House to tackle the harmful impacts of this multibillion-pound industry.”

    House of Commons18 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  19. “Finally, it is important to remember that the acts of sexual violence I have spoken about today are perpetrated against real women and girls. This is not acting or performing. Women are often forced or coerced into this industry, and, once in it, even the most famous pornography performers are exploited. For example, Kate was trafficked from the UK to the pornography industry in America, where she suffered horrendous abuse and was forced to take part in dangerous and degrading sex acts on film. The consequences of what she endured have stayed with her despite her escaping the industry. The truth is, there is no way of knowing whether the women who appear in pornography have given their consent, or whether they are even adults.”

    House of Commons18 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  20. “In a society where many of us have blended families, it is simply not right that step-daddy/daughter pornography is legal, no matter whether the actor is over 18 or not. New clause 103 would ensure that what is illegal offline is illegal online. We must also ensure that all illegal pornographic content is regulated equally online, regardless of where that content is hosted. Duties under the Online Safety Act to combat illegal content apply only to pornography websites that host user-to-user interactions or user-generated content, and pornography websites that host only commercially produced pornography are exempt from illegal duties. We must not allow that to continue. New clause 104 would ensure that all pornography sites must adhere to illegal content duties.”

    House of Commons18 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  21. “It is clear that we need stronger regulation. Offline, we have been regulating pornographic content since the Video Recordings Act 1984, which specifically prohibits offline content that the British Board of Film Classification would find unsuitable, yet our online regulation has not kept pace. Of particular concern is content that depicts sexual activity with children. Known as “teen porn” or “incest porn”, this content features young-looking performers made to look under age through use of props such as stuffed toys, lollipops and school uniforms. Such content normalises children as objects of sexual desire and drives the demand for child sexual abuse material. Pornography producers have got around the ban on incest material by promoting porn videos in which there is step-incest.”

    House of Commons18 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  22. “Although the judge said Morton had strangled Hannah ‘without warning or permission’, Morton claimed he began to lightly strangle Hannah…before more forcefully strangling her.” Women and girls are paying the price of both an industry that seeks to profit from the most violent kinds of content and laws that are not fit for purpose. Despite the clear evidence of a direct connection between viewing strangulation content in mainstream pornography and undertaking such acts, the law requires the removal of this type of pornographic content only if the threshold of “life-threatening” is clearly met. New clause 102 would ban pornographic content depicting all strangulation and, with the requirement in the Online Safety Act 2023 to remove illegal content, would place a duty on platforms to remove strangulation videos or face sanction.”

    House of Commons18 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  23. “I truly believe that regulating violent online pornography, which is viewed by nearly 40% of men once a week in the UK, will make a clear impact on that commitment. As the hon. Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage) has already powerfully argued, sexual strangulation is one of the most frequently found acts across all categories on mainstream pornography sites. Despite its dangers, it is portrayed as perfectly safe and a normal part of sex. In a Google search, CEASE found 30 million videos immediately for “choke her” porn. I want to share the story of Hannah, who met her killer, James Morton, on the day she died. Morton “was reported as being obsessed with strangulation, frequently watching porn featuring strangulation of women.”

    House of Commons18 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  24. “I rise to speak to new clauses 102 to 105 in my name. First, I thank the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones) for her engagement on the issues I am about to discuss, and I pay tribute to UK Feminista, which runs the all-party parliamentary group on commercial sexual exploitation, to CEASE—the Centre to End All Sexual Exploitation—and to Barnardo’s for its steadfast campaign on tackling violence against women and girls, and the protection of children. My new clauses reflect the recommendations of the very thorough recent review conducted for the Government by Baroness Gabby Bertin into online pornography. I am so proud that this Labour Government have made a commitment to halve violence against women and girls.”

    House of Commons18 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  25. “I recognise that the situation facing my hon. Friend’s constituent is awful, but we are here today to balance such situations with the choices of people who may not be loved as dearly as him. Our concerns would be about the fact that many of these killings could be mercy killings, and if there is no recourse to the coroner, some people may be taking their own lives under coercion and pressure that may never be discovered, because the full law will not be applied.”

    House of Commons13 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  26. “I thank my hon. Friend and I recognise the time constraints. On the issue of vulnerable groups, she may know that a letter has been sent about eating disorders but the spokesperson for the Bill’s sponsor dismissed it, saying that the concerns raised were old news. Does she agree that there is a problem with the way the Bill is being run, as so often the concerns and evidence presented by groups have been dismissed out of hand?”

    House of Commons13 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  27. “Last weekend my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) posted on X a story of two older people who wanted to die together, and who had found doctors to sign off their assisted death. Is my hon. Friend concerned that this debate might be romanticising suicide pacts given that, as we know, there are mercy killings, which are, unfortunately, actual deaths? Does he share the fears of the Government’s suicide adviser that the Bill will undermine suicide prevention efforts?”

    House of Commons13 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  28. “A family court judge who would have made decisions in relation to many abused children was recently found guilty by the High Court of abusing their own adopted children. Does the Minister agree that protecting the anonymity of members of the judiciary who have abused their children, particularly when it relates so intimately to their own work in court, risks undermining public trust in our legal system?”

    House of Commons3 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  29. “Does the Lord Chancellor agree that the voluntary and community sector can play a vital role in supporting offenders to rehabilitate and gain vital employment and housing? Organisations such as Pathways Care Farm and Access Community Trust in my constituency have helped to prevent t reoffending.”

    House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  30. “First, we know that victims of domestic abuse and sexual violence are faced with a postcode lottery when it comes to accessing specialist support. They are left at the mercy of the various budgetary decisions made by each area’s police and crime commissioner, local authority and health bodies.”

    House of Commons20 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  31. “I also pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley (Anneliese Midgley), and to Cheryl and her family for their fight for justice. Having worked with both adult and child victims of traumatic abuse, I was glad to stand last year on a manifesto that committed to reforming the system to put the needs of victims first, and to ensure they get the support they need and deserve. This Bill is part of that mission. I am pleased that it strengthens victims’ rights, forces offenders to attend sentencing hearings, and empowers the Victims’ Commissioner to do more to stand up for victims and hold public bodies to account where there are failings. Nevertheless, there are three areas in which I believe we should go further and faster.”

    House of Commons20 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  32. “I hope that the Government are willing to work with me, and with others, to tighten that aspect, among others that I have mentioned, as the Bill progresses through the House.”

    House of Commons20 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  33. “There are mothers who must face picking up the pieces after the sexual abuse of their child, and families who have to support domestic abuse victims as they fight for justice. We should look to include them in the scope of the support available to victims, because the impact of abuse does not just harm the primary victim, but can destroy the victim’s family too. Finally, I recognise that we must not risk a very welcome step forward with potential legal challenges, but I believe we ought to look again having at a stricter definition for the purpose of depriving people of parental responsibility, especially where there is a risk to the child. Many will simply not comprehend how the serious sexual abuse of a child is compatible with the right to family life. What about the child’s right to live a life free from harm?”

    House of Commons20 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  34. “A new statutory duty would also allow us to create parity with the accommodation-based services that were introduced by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, so that community-based services are given the same legislative protection. Secondly, I believe that the parents and carers of victims of serious sexual and violent crimes also require support as third-party victims. A campaign on this issue has been led by Cath Pickles, the chief executive officer of Restitute, an amazing local charity that supports third-party victims. These crimes fracture families and support networks, and those who are left to care for primary victims often develop their own mental health issues and may even have to give up work.”

    House of Commons20 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  35. “In 2022, only 7% of victims who wanted their perpetrator to receive support to change their behaviour and stop reoffending were able to get that, and recent research undertaken by the Domestic Abuse Commissioner has found that 27% of services are having to turn away child victims from vital support due to a lack of capacity. For those reasons, I believe this legislation needs to include a statutory duty to commission specialist domestic abuse and sexual violence services based in the community for both adult and child victims. It is a stain on our nation that victims of the most unimaginable trauma do not have a right to support after abuse.”

    House of Commons20 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  36. “I believe that all police and crime commissioners ought to fund those services—hopefully the Minister can respond to that point. It is clearly outrageous that any victim of sexual violence should be left without any service at all. Where specialist domestic abuse services do exist, they are faced with a deeply precarious financial situation that is severely hampering the ability of victims to access the support they need. Fewer than half of victims and survivors are able to access the community-based support they want. Without that support, some victims may be unable to leave domestic abuse perpetrators, or may return to them when they find it too difficult to escape their controlling behaviour.”

    House of Commons20 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  37. “Will my hon. Friend distance herself from the correspondence from Dame Esther Rantzen, who accused those of us who have concerns about the Bill of having undeclared religious beliefs? Many colleagues found that distasteful and disrespectful.”

    House of Commons16 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  38. “The right hon. Member mentioned that the person is autonomous and should be protected from inquiries about them, but what if they are not autonomous because they are being coercively controlled by a partner? What if that partner has prevented them from reaching out to their family to let them know that they are going to take an assisted death? Would it not be a great safeguard to ensure that the panel and all the doctors around them had ascertained that the family had been told?”

    House of Commons16 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  39. “The shadow Minister says that we are debating those amendments today, but we have not actually been able to hear from all those who have tabled those amendments. Nine Members who have tabled amendments have not been called to speak, so how can we call this a debate when we have not even heard why they are proposing their amendments in the first place?”

    House of Commons16 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  40. “I thank the Minister for his response. I have been contacted by a constituent who is concerned for his poorly elderly father, who requires cryotherapy. That service used to be offered at his local GP, avoiding a difficult trip to our local hospital, which would have a deleterious impact on his father’s already poor health. Given the Government’s focus on moving more health services into the community and people’s homes as part of our public service reform agenda, does my right hon. Friend agree that cryotherapy services should be considered as part of that welcome shift?”

    House of Commons24 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  41. “We need to act now to ban physical punishment, so we can ensure that children can grow up free from abuse and harm, something I know is a priority for this Government and is the purpose of the Bill in front of us. Evidence from other countries shows us that bans work. In Germany, for example, the percentage of young people subjected to physical punishment fell from 30% to 3% after it introduced a ban in 2002. Given that 71% of adults believe that physical punishment is unacceptable, it seems to me that sooner or later we will have to change the law. My challenge with new clause 8 is: why not sooner? Why do we not commit to ending this abuse today? Children will not thank us for waiting. Future generations will not look kindly on our inaction, nor should they. We have the evidence, the power and the time.”

    House of Commons17 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  42. “Instead, changing the law is about giving parents, children and professionals clarity, while improving the toolbox parents have to positively raise their child. New clause 8 removes the ambiguity created by the “reasonable punishment” defence and will allow children and adults to come forward more readily to report abuse. A clearer legal framework also makes it easier for professionals like social workers to do their jobs in the best interests of children. New clause 8 will not, on its own, be able to stop cases like Sara Sharif’s, but it will certainly ensure that the threat of violence many children face will no longer be given the pretence of legal cover. We cannot afford to delay action. The NSPCC has seen a threefold increase in the number of child welfare calls mentioning physical punishment in the past couple of years.”

    House of Commons17 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  43. “We know from research conducted by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health that children who are physically punished are almost three times more likely to experience mental health problems than those who are not. We know that physical punishment of children is linked to substance misuse, antisocial behaviour and slower cognitive development. While the majority of parents do not use physical punishment and its use is declining, more than one in five 10-year-olds have still experienced it. New clause 8 is not about criminalising parents. No one wants to stop a parent from protecting their child who is about to reach for a hot kettle or cross a busy road. Of the many countries that have introduced a ban, there has been no evidence that it has led to an increase in prosecutions.”

    House of Commons17 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  44. “Then when I got to five to 12 years old, it was a tap or a little smack. But now it can be a proper smack, or there was one occasion where she pulled my hair and I fell to the floor and she continuously hit me. I don’t want to get mum in trouble, but I can’t carry on being afraid of her.” Studies have also found that physical punishment leads to higher levels of aggression directed against parents by their children. Violence begets violence, and teaching children from a young age that violence is an acceptable way of channelling stress and frustration has consequences for all of us in society. It also has a pronounced impact on the children themselves.”

    House of Commons17 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  45. “We have a wealth of research to draw on from the last 30 years, and not a single reputable study has found that physical punishment positively impacts children’s development. There is no evidence to show that it improves behaviour in children. The reality is that physical punishment does not establish in a child’s mind a difference between right and wrong; it simply evokes fear—a fear of violence and pain. We know that children who are physically punished are at a far higher risk of experiencing maltreatment and abuse by parents, because over time parents may feel the need to escalate and inflict more and more pain to elicit the same response. A 16-year-old girl told Childline: “When I was younger and misbehaved, my mum gave me a warning and put me on the naughty step.”

    House of Commons17 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  46. “What is the difference between a child growing up in Berwick-upon-Tweed and a child in Bonnyrigg? Scotland and Wales are not alone: 67 countries around the world have already banned physical punishment—Tajikistan last year became the latest—and 27 others have also committed to a ban. There is a global recognition that children deserve better. Indeed, as part of the UK’s commitment to the 16th Sustainable Development Goal, we have already pledged to end all violence against children, and that includes physical punishment in the home. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has stated unequivocally that protection from physical punishment is a basic human right of a child. Physical punishment is not punishment; it is abuse.”

    House of Commons17 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  47. “I rise to speak in support of new clause 8 in my name, which has the support of many colleagues across the House and organisations including the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Barnardo’s, the NSPCC and the Children’s Commissioner for England. I am grateful to the hon. Members for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) and for Woking (Mr Forster) for their comments in today’s debate. New clause 8 would amend section 58 of the Children Act 2004 to remove the “reasonable punishment” defence that permits assault and battery on children by parents and carers. Children in Scotland and Wales already have the same protections as adults when it comes to being hit, but we find ourselves in the peculiar situation where a child growing up just over the border in England has fewer rights. Why should they?”

    House of Commons17 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  48. “I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I am a proud member of the trade unions USDAW, Unison and GMB, and I am also proud to have worked at a domestic abuse charity for six years. That is why I rise today to speak in support of new clause 22, which I have tabled with the support of colleagues from across the House. I am an officer of the all-party parliamentary group on domestic violence and abuse, the secretariat of which is ably provided by Women’s Aid. I have tabled this new clause following evidence presented to the APPG, with the drafting support of the law firm Hogan Lovells.”

    House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  49. “The online world that we are sending our children out into is not a world we would send them out into in real life, and yet this is their real life. Children as young as seven are stumbling across and are currently freely able to access pornographic content online. The Children’s Commissioner found that one key area where children access pornography is, perhaps surprisingly, the social media platform X. Eight in 10 children have encountered violent pornography online by the age of 18, and that is having serious consequences, desensitising young boys and girls and warping their perceptions of healthy sex and relationships.”

    House of Commons7 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  50. “As Jonathan Haidt argues in his book “The Anxious Generation”, childhood has ceased to be play-based and has become phone-based. This simultaneous over-protectiveness offline and under-protectiveness online has created a perfect storm for inhibiting children’s development. For example, we are witnessing a marked increase in referrals for delayed speech and language abilities. There are now pram adaptations for babies and toddlers to watch smartphones, rather than learning from the stimulus of the real world around them. I hope that the chief medical officer’s remit extends to working with early childhood and speech and language organisations to issue guidance for parents in the very early years.”

    House of Commons7 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗