The statement made by Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, on 30 April 2024.
This is a shocking incident. My thoughts are with those affected and their families.
I’d like to thank the emergency services for their ongoing response, and pay tribute to the extraordinary bravery shown by police on the scene. Such violence has no place on our streets.
The speech made by James Cleverly, the Home Secretary, in the House of Commons on 7 February 2024.
Thank you. I’m trying to work out whether the applause is for my attendance or for the announcement of the money.
First of all, thank you all. It’s great to have the opportunity to speak to you all. I hope that those who know me, and some of you who have known me for quite some time, will have explained my credentials to those who’ve been maybe not known me for quite so long. I’m a big fan of the police and crime commissioner model. I was an advocate for it before it was cool. Back before it was legislation, and of course, I’ve come from my own background in police governance from the time that I was at City Hall in London.
You are the voice of the local communities. When it comes to the governance of policing laws with our policing model, being of the community, for community from the community, having that golden thread of community accountability to the police forces that serve them, I think is incredibly important. And I also think it’s important that we maintain this pattern of dialogue, and that not only do I get to speak and you get to listen, which is of course always my favourite model of communication, but you also get to speak and I promise that I will listen.
So the situation we find ourselves in the headlines can sometimes give the impression that we’re in uniquely dark and difficult times. But when we compare the situation with the end of September 2023, to the year ending December 2019, as we look back over those couple of years, we each have seen some really positive figures.
So for example, hospital admissions, following an assault with a sharp object, which is the most objective measure of youth knife crime and violence, was down by 25%. And these are not figures you can fudge. That’s real. Homicides are down by 16%, neighbourhood crime down by 24%, 35% (fall) in domestic burglary, and an 18% fall in victim related crime. This is stuff that people in communities feel. This is what has an impact upon them. And those figures are heading in the right direction. But we will recognise that if you personally are a victim of crime, speaking about a general reduction is no solace, and that’s why it is so important that we cannot ever lose sight of the importance of the individual, of the victim, when we talk about those overall numbers.
And I’m absolutely clear that the job of the Home Secretary, the job of the Home Office, I suspect, you will, at least in part agree with me on this, is about reassurance as well as the practicalities. It is really important that we ensure not only that people are safe, but that they also feel safe. Because, and I mentioned this, I think in the very first speech that I made as Home Secretary, because when people feel safe, they go out, they engage in their local communities, they volunteer, they live a fuller life than they would otherwise do. So of course trying to create an effect on people’s lives, but the fear of crime also has a corrosive effect. It limits people’s opportunity to live the best life they can lead.
And that’s why I want to be able to look into the eyes of people around the country wherever they may be and know that they are feeling safe. I said so at the National Policing Board that I chaired recently, and this of course means as well as driving down those figures, it is about visible policing – and it is about the policing of visible crime crimes.
High harm crimes are of course also incredibly important, but the public are also concerned about things like shoplifting. And sadly, in conversations I’ve had with members my own family and my friends, it’s still the case that far, far too many women and girls do not feel safe when they are out in the public domain and in a society such as ours, a modern society, that is unacceptable, and we absolutely have to prioritise the work that we do to address that.
So I want to see major improvements in the quality of investigations. It’s a core function of policing. Because again, we know the far too many people report that the information that they provide to the police does not in their mind get appropriately acted on. So a key aim for this year for me is to increase the percentage of reported crimes that result in a successful outcome, because sadly on average only 8% of victim-based crime in England and Wales results in a successful outcome. Sadly, this has declined, and there is much, much, more to learn. And there is variation of course between forces, and fixing this I believe very strongly, more than anything else is central to build the general confidence of the public in policing.
And so, back to basics is a bit of a cliché phrase from politicians. So, this is about going back to the core functions. Core policing, that core investigatory set of skills. Of course, that can be amplified, accelerated and supported with the use of cutting-edge technology, like retrospective and indeed live facial recognition software, which in the trials that I’ve seen the results of this had a dramatic effect, and we need to make sure all forces are operating at their full potential.
And one of the reasons why I want to strengthen the role of PCCs, is that you, with your closest relationships and your intimate knowledge of the forces that you’re responsible for, are best placed at a local level, to drive forward a focus on that core policing functionality. And I know that you want to see increased safety and confidence in our neighbourhoods just as much as I do. This is, I don’t believe, me pushing you to do anything you don’t naturally want to do. And so we are looking for alliances and to get a commitment not just from the political level but of course from all the Chief Constables around the country to ensure that they pursue every reasonable line of enquiry, they attend home burglaries, they deliver on the commitments made by the Retail Crime Action Plan, all these things will be important steps in the right direction.
And when I discussed this at the recent National Policing Board just last week, what I got was very, very supportive and very, very committed responses and it was great to hear that the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police was able to run through a list of results, which was in large part driven by that commitment to core policing. So I’m more confident than ever this is actually the right approach. And it’s also what the people we serve expect of us, it is what they want us to focus on. And so, in terms of tackling things like car theft, home theft, criminal damage, shoplifting, we do need to make sure we stay focused on the this and of course, the invisible crimes, those high harm crimes, are absolutely key, but those visible crimes – we must not lose sight of the impact they have on communities.
When I first spoke my first public utterances as Home Secretary, I think of saying there is no such thing as minor crime – it’s a phrase that I despise and I think that implying that somehow there’s criminality which the police take less seriously or we take less seriously is something that we should avoid in all circumstances, for the reasons I said about the criminal behaviour that people see and feel most acutely in their communities.
Now, I mentioned about the commitment I feel, particularly for women and girls, and it is incredibly important that alongside the tackling of that visible crime, that we dramatically improve the victims experience of the justice system for women and girls. You will be well aware of course of Operation Soteria, which is now being implemented in all 43 police forces in England and Wales. Government is ensuring that 2000 officers receive specialist training on the investigation of rape by April this year.
And our actions are about supporting the actions you’re taking locally. To help improve the way that teams operate, are treated and to ensure that more rapists are arrested, prosecuted and put behind bars. His Majesty’s Inspectorate has found sadly victims are not regularly updated during the investigation at certain important points. And of course, this must change. The Victims’ Code of Practice will outline the minimum levels of support a victim of crime should expect from a local force and from their local Crown Prosecution Service. But that is a floor not a ceiling. That is the minimum, not what we should be aiming for.
So everything that we do hinges on the broader confidence of the British public in the whole criminal justice system, and I’ve made the point that whilst the headline figures have come now, sadly, public confidence has not gone up. Part of that reason is because of a number of high profile and terrible failures in professional conduct by police officers, and for every headline grabbing incident, sadly, there are a number of others, less public, less high profile (incidents) where conduct has fallen short of what we expect. And inevitably, this has shaken, and certainly in some instances, shattered public confidence in policing.
Again, I said when I was appointed that I will always seek to praise publicly, the people that keep us safe. But part of that contract is that I expect leaders in policing to do the right thing and demonstrate a commitment to reform – a deep seated commitment to reform and a complete commitment to professional standards.
And that is why the government is giving police leaders enhanced tools, enhanced powers, but also an enhanced expectation that they do the right thing and lead their forces robustly. Once again, you as a group of people have a pivotal role in ensuring that police leaders hold their officers to account and that they in turn are held to account if they fail to do so. Just last week the families of Barnaby Webber, Grace O’Malley Kumar and Ian Coates visited the Prime Minister and had the chance to meet with him, and they raised serious questions about the events leading up to the tragic killings of their loved ones. It’s actually the right place to share that the Nottinghamshire police have referred themselves to the IOPC and I pay tribute to Caroline, the Nottinghamshire PCC, for commissioning a comprehensive College of Policing review into what happened.
We have to be willing to learn painful lessons when situations like this occur. Part one of the Angiolini Inquiry is expected to report in the coming months and policing must absolutely take into consideration its findings, just as I will. I think I mentioned this again when I first spoke to you just up the road in my first week on the job, that one of the first roles I performed in the London Assembly whilst I was a member of the Metropolitan Police Authority as it was then, was on the professional standards committee. So I know first-hand just how critical it is to remove from the force those police officers whose integrity and behaviour are unacceptable.
And I am still to this day committed that those unfit to wear the uniform must be removed, but that those who have proven to be innocent need to be swiftly exonerated. The government is delivering changes to the misconduct, vetting and performance system. So we’re helping police leaders grip this issue, giving them more control to act over those who fail vetting or fall short of requirements of required standards. And we know that in this room, that there are a group of people who are probably more angry about bad coppers than almost anybody else, outside those in uniform themselves, and equally I would suggest the only people perhaps who are more angry about bad coppers are good coppers. So we have to support the good coppers in doing the right thing. And that’s why we agreed to fund the development. We’ve agreed to fund the development of the system for policing, which provides forces with a timely alerting solution, so they can act speedily on any concerning intelligence about officers or police staff.
And as I said, critical to public confidence is people seeing the police and seeing crime being dealt with; improving the visibility of police in a very targeted way, to deter criminals and ensure that communities feel confident. So I’m grateful to everyone who’s contributed to the autumn 2023 returns on visibility and especially to the APCC for coordinating the contributions. I wouldn’t say to the police chief, I expect them to give me hard evidence that they are prioritising the neighbourhood policing that is demanded of them.
So with regard to hotspots and hotspot policing, I promised I would listen to you. We published an ambitious anti-social behaviour action plan in March 2023. The government pilot of antisocial behaviour hotspot responses has been, I’m pleased to say, a success, with additional patrolling, delivering on those promised outcomes. We’ve also provided GRIP funding to police forces in areas with the highest levels of serious violence. But coming back to the PCCs and given the overlap between ASB [antisocial behaviour] hotspots activity, and the GRIP serious violence fund, we will combine the 2 funding streams for a wider rollout to territorial forces across England and Wales in 2024 to 2025. In total funding available will be over £66 million, and each PCC area will receive at least £1 million each.
Now, of course, I am sure that you will have been lobbied by your police officers, you will be lobbying me no doubt, about the police funding settlement in 2024 to 2025. We’ve listened to the forces about financial demands they face and giving police the resources they need to protect the public is of course a priority for us. And that’s why for the coming settlements for 2024 to 2025, the money available to PCCs will increase by up to £922.2 million, and there’s been an increase in the total settlement the more than 30% in cash terms since 2019 to 2020. And of course that is to support the uplift in police numbers.
So having delivered a way to recruit 20,000 police officers: thank you very much for that. I look forward to working with you and your chief constables to ensure that those numbers are maintained. There are now 149,000 officers in England and Wales, higher than the pre-uplift peak of 2010. And of course the funding is there to stay, to maintain those office numbers, to ensure that they are on the beat, to ensure that they are supported.
Finally, I wanted to say something directed towards you as a cohort, as well as the police forces that you work with. I said I’m a big fan of PCCs, of the PCC model, and I want to support you in that role. And as we discussed when I first stood up, I’m very much aware that you are increasingly visible high-profile individuals. And that is why I’m very, very happy to give additional money to help support your personal security, and to protect you in the role that you do. The security minister is continuing to work on cross government work to protect the security of all elected officials, including yourselves, and I’m very grateful for Katy Bourne who gave the APCCs engagement on this. I really hope it does make a difference; that additional million pounds of support is something that matters. I know it matters to you. And it matters because I want to protect your role and to protect you as individuals.
So let’s continue working together. Let’s continue serving the people who elect us. Let’s make sure that we focus resources on the things that people care most about. And let’s ensure that when we look back on this forthcoming year, not only do we see an ongoing reduction in crime, we see an increase in the confidence of policing the country.
Thank you very much.
The speech made by Alex Chalk, the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, in Washington, the United States, on 31 January 2024.
Friends, ladies and gentlemen.
It is a huge pleasure to be here in Washington DC and an honour to address this distinguished audience.
When Britain’s great novelist, Charles Dickens, who of course you all know, visited the United States in 1842, he wrote that on the occasions he encountered his fellow Brits here, the British displayed, and I quote ‘an amount of insolent conceit and cool assumption of superiority, quite monstrous to behold.’ I want to be clear that I am not intending to repeat that!
I’ll do so not least as an admirer of America, and a humble student of American history at university. It was there I was first introduced to the defining principle, first set out by John Adams, of America as a ‘nation of laws, not of men’. And also as a barrister – i.e. attorney myself – of the inalienable right of citizens to be defended in court however unpopular their cause, also indelibly demonstrated by John Adams in his famous defence of British soldiers in the eighteenth century.
The US today is, of course, a beacon of the values that our two countries demonstrate in the world – of democracy, of diplomacy and of deference to the international rule of law, and that’s what I want to focus on today: on the importance of the rule of law, the existential threats it faces, and how together we can – and indeed we must – face down these threats and emerge stronger.
What do I mean by the rule of law in the international context? The idea that all nations are bound by common rules and principles that govern the way we interact with each other, no matter our size or power. And it’s underpinned by mutual consent and agreement, peaceful resolution of disputes, and regard for international institutions.
My central argument is that we need to restate that these are not quaint notions to get dewy-eyed over, or trite phrases to trot out in seminars; rather they can be the guarantors of freedom, security and prosperity for all our people.
And it’s worth pointing out that the order has brought about an extraordinary growth in international trade – indeed, the volume of world trade has multiplied roughly 45 times since 1950, while worldwide living standards have almost tripled. So this is no tedious law lecture. It’s food in citizens’ stomachs.
But this is now under threat. The truth is we are in a global contest of ideas, a contest between rule of law nations like ours and those who offer an authoritarian alternative, a solution that says ‘might is always right’. And it means that a global post-war consensus, which we assumed was unshakeable now needs shoring up. But rather than letting complacency reign, we must reinforce the rule of law foundations on which it was built.
We don’t need a history lesson to remind ourselves how the international rules-based international order came into being in the long shadow cast by World War II. What’s important is that it lit the way towards a new era: one based on mutual consent and common obligation… where states could resolve their disputes peacefully, act with restraint, and hold each other to account for their actions. It allowed us to achieve a depth of international co-operation that would have been unfathomable just a few short years before.
And this was properly expressed in the late George Bush senior’s visionary 1990 address to Congress following the fall of the Berlin Wall – which I was reminding myself of before I came here to America. As that authoritarian regime crumbled, he set out a vision of the world where in his words: ‘ the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak’.
But the world is very different today. The accord they worked so hard to build is not just fraying at the edges, it is threatening to break down altogether due to the actions of international actors – such as Russia and Iran. Many believed – and this is important – that it had a remorseless momentum… that it would inevitably draw rising powers into its orbit… that its future would grow and was guaranteed. I believe the illusion and assumption that nations would automatically see the benefits of the Rules Based International Order has been eroded. But why? Why has it been eroded?
The rule of law is being attacked on three fronts, contributing to this current crisis of consensus.
First, the agreements that have helped secure the world’s stability and success since 1945 are no longer respected. By ‘those agreements’ I am referring to the legally recognised borders that have been the guardian of peace over decades. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is the starkest but not the only demonstration. And of course, it’s from a country, Russia, which after all is the successor state to the Soviet Union which signed and for a time broadly abided by arms reduction treaties for the benefit of all humankind.
And looking further afield, when Hamas carried out armed incursions into Israel, butchering over a thousand innocent men, women and children in their homes and taking approximately 250 more as hostages, it was an unprecedented, and wholly unlawful assault.
Amid this growing normalisation of illegality, of states disregarding borders and flouting international law, hostile geopolitical spheres of influence and indeed axes are being formed and strengthened in direct opposition to the Rules Based International Order. Recent assaults on commercial cargo ships in the Red Sea by the Hamas-supporting Houthis are just one example of these deadly alliances in action. And why have the Houthis been able to wreak so much havoc in the Red Sea? Because they are backed by agents of chaos in Iran.
And all this geopolitical unrest brings me to the second threat to the rules-based order. The reality is that this unstable geopolitical landscape is making middle ground and non-aligned states feel caught in the crossfire of conflicts for which they bear no responsibility. They understandably fear the repercussions, and some are beginning to equivocate. Desperate to avoid the costs of dispute and conflict, states are left unsure which way to turn to seek reassurance, stability, and protection.
And we must ask ourselves whether sustained instability of the type we are seeing risks making states like these feel they have no choice but to enter into alliances which undermine the Rules Based International Order. These alliances are pursuing a zero-sum outcome through fear, rather than mutual prosperity through shared values. They not only undermine the rules based order, but could shift the balance of power so the contest of ideas about how we should be governed – whether through the rules-based system as we cleave to, or through the chaos preferred by our competitors – is lost. So it is imperative that we ensure that non-aligned states and rising powers make the right choice.
And what of the poorest and most vulnerable countries? This brings me to the third risk I think we must consider. Despite huge economic advances in the Global South enabled by the Rules-Based International Order, many of the poorest countries are struggling to protect their citizens from hunger, the effects of climate change and the impact of increased populations. That in turn can pull them into the orbit of authoritarian nations who offer them a quick fix.
While rule of law underpins prosperity, its absence feeds poverty, insecurity and instability. And for citizens, this leaves many feeling they have no choice but to leave their home country and seek better opportunities elsewhere in the world. This has led to record levels of migratory movements, and fuelled illegal migration. It is clear that unmanaged illegal migration disregards borders and is putting unacceptable pressure on the national systems of rules-based countries like ours – as countries whose sovereign legislatures believe in, and consciously have chosen to be part of, the order I refer too. The actions of criminal gangs smuggling people across borders brings those very rules into disrepute, particularly if they are perceived to afford, perversely, an unfair advantage to those who break the rules rather than those who abide by them.
For rule of law countries in Europe, we are experiencing an influx of illegal migration. In the UK, that manifests as a steady stream of small boats across the English Channel bringing illegal migrants into our country. And in 2023, we saw a 36% reduction in the number of small boat arrivals compared to the year before, but we must continue to go further. Because we see dangerous tactics used by Organised Criminal Gangs to facilitate crossings and people who put their lives in the hands of criminal gangs. Too many perish. I know tragedies are also happening at your southern border.
So, what does all this mean for the rule of law, and, crucially, how we strengthen it?
Well as Thomas Paine put it in his rallying cry of 1776, “in America the law is king” – now those were heavily loaded words at the time. It meant, among other things, that the law is supreme. And if the law is supreme, it must have power, and if it must have power, it must therefore be respected. Put another way, it must be enforced.
That means ensuring accountability, it means consequences. And it means bearing down on those who commit international crimes, until justice is served.
And we can be proud of the leadership our two nations have shown. Together, we have, along with the European Union, established the Atrocity Crimes Advisory Group, to support Ukraine’s Prosecutor General with funding and expertise in the domestic investigation and prosecution of more than 120,000 alleged conflict related crimes.
In 2022 the UK led a state party referral to expedite the International Criminal Court’s investigation into the situation in Ukraine, and we continue to support the ICC so it has the resources it needs to carry out its independent investigations. We welcome the recent legal changes here that have enabled America to assist the ICC’s investigation into the situation in Ukraine.
And we continue to fight international terrorism in all its contexts. The UK and US were right to stand up to the aggression in the Red Sea by carrying out air strikes on strategic Houthi targets in Yemen, and the international community clearly accepts that it was the correct course of action in the circumstances.
So, amid the contest of ideas, and conflicting narratives, it is incumbent on all of us – the UK, the US and our allies in the G7 and NATO – to show that the rules-based international order works and it is worth upholding.
While others cause chaos, as part of the International Rules-Based Order – as nations who believe in the rule of law – it is our legal systems that are the engine room for prosperity across the globe, supporting trade the world over. English common law and US common law are the basis for no less than 27 percent and 20 percent of the world’s legal systems respectively.
However, both international and domestic law must evolve if they are to meet the challenges posed by insecurity, and to win what I’ve called ‘the global contest of ideas’. Because, as Thomas Paine also famously said, “a state without the means of some change is without the means of its conservation.”
In the UK, we are making clear once and for all that it is Parliament that should decide who comes to our country, not international criminal gangs. Through landmark emergency legislation, we will control our borders, deter people taking perilous journeys across the channel, and help end the continuous legal challenges filling our courts. We are a humane, welcoming nation but it’s fair that everyone plays by the rules.
Our legally binding removal treaty with Rwanda makes absolutely clear that individuals relocated will not be returned to a country where they might be placed in danger.
But above all, the principle of relocating people to another country to have their asylum claims processed is lawful – the UK High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court too have found it to be so. Indeed, the UN Refugee Agency itself has its own scheme for refugees in Rwanda, albeit not through treaty.
And look, the unique genius of the common law, of course, is its flexibility – its readiness to adapt and respond to societal changes and perspectives. As the UK Government has made clear, we need some of that same spirit when it comes to the challenge of uncontrolled migration, and the evolution of the rules-based system as a whole.
As countries that believe in the rule of law, it’s crucial for us to demonstrate that it works for citizens in our own countries. For our justice systems that means that while we update them to make them fit for the 21st century, we must do so in a way which strengthens the values and principles on which they are built.
Access to justice is a key part of that – probably the single biggest reason I came into politics – and the current era of rapidly changing technology is opening up new possibilities for improvement all the time. For criminal and civil justice, we must ensure that citizens can continue to access justice in ways that work for them today. And there are a number of important ways we can do this.
First, by making sure our legal systems adapt to a changing world – updating our legal frameworks to take account of advancing technology, and fostering environments in which our legal professionals are properly equipped to practise the law both now and in a more technologically driven future.
Second, by showing our communities and victims that criminal justice works – so that justice is not just done, but seen to be done. Whether that’s the worst offenders being imprisoned for longer, or those at the lower end of the scale repaying their debt to the communities they’ve wronged.
Third, by harnessing new technology to ensure that the order of the Court is properly enforced. In England and Wales, GPS and alcohol monitoring tags mean we can deliver tough community sentences, avoiding short, costly stints in prison which research shows do little to reduce reoffending. I’m looking forward to visiting New York this week to see similar projects in action.
Fourth, by developing digital tools to improve how individuals and businesses can access the law in ways that work for them, opening up early legal advice and support so they can, where appropriate, settle disputes outside of court.
Fifth and finally, by keeping pace with advancing methods of delivery, such as transformational technologies like generative AI, and fostering innovation and the growth and adoption of lawtech – so that we can maintain the attractiveness as destinations for global businesses that are a boon to both our economies.
In each area, there are opportunities; to improve justice for our citizens and to demonstrate our commitment to the rule of law; to show that we believe in its ability to make our societies fairer and allow them to flourish further; to show that we can evolve and adapt while our opponents remain rigid and dogmatic. These are some of the most powerful ways that we can make the case for the rules-based order.
So look, as others have said before me, the relationship between our two nations is not just special – it is essential. Because when we stand together in the face of the chaos that our opponents seek to create… when we pursue accountability for the wrongdoing that others wreak on their neighbours… we will win the argument for the international order that our predecessors worked so hard to build and which has served the world so well.
To end where I began, with Charles Dickens. As Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher observed when she visited Washington in 1981, Dickens was right to say that the people here are ‘…hard to deceive, prompt to act, lions in energy.’ Those are the qualities we need, you and us – as we fiercely defend the rule of law and make the case for a more secure and more prosperous future in the world.
Thank you.
The statement made by Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, on 11 November 2023.
I condemn the violent, wholly unacceptable scenes we have seen today from the EDL and associated groups and Hamas sympathisers attending the National March for Palestine. The despicable actions of a minority of people undermine those who have chosen to express their views peacefully.
Remembrance weekend is a time for us to come together as a nation and remember those who fought and died for our freedoms. What we have seen today does not defend the honour of our Armed Forces, but utterly disrespects them.
That is true for EDL thugs attacking police officers and trespassing on the Cenotaph, and it is true for those singing antisemitic chants and brandishing pro-Hamas signs and clothing on today’s protest. The fear and intimidation the Jewish Community have experienced over the weekend is deplorable.
All criminality must be met with the full and swift force of the law. That is what I told the Met Police Commissioner on Wednesday, that is what they are accountable for and that is what I expect.
I will be meeting the Met Police Commissioner in the coming days.
The text of the Supreme Court decision on sending asylum seekers to Rwanda, published on 15 November 2023.
Judgement (in .pdf format)
The speech made by Suella Braverman, the Home Secretary, to the Police Federation on 11 October 2023.
It is an honour to join you today.
Let me start by saying there is no greater privilege as Home Secretary than working with the heroic men and women of our police.
And it is always deeply sobering – and moving – to hear the roll call of officers who have fallen in the line of duty in the past year.
Words cannot do justice to the debt we owe them, nor to how keenly we feel for their colleagues and loved ones.
And as Steve mentioned, I have personally been incredibly moved by attending the National Police Memorial Day in Cardiff only a few weeks ago, and also hosting the nominees for the Police Bravery Awards in Downing Street in London earlier this year.
Those heroes will be forever cherished.
I support your campaign for a medal for heroes. There is a consensus across government that this needs to happen – and I hope we will be able to announce something very soon.
It’s my job to enable you to do your jobs. That’s why my colleague the Policing Minister Chris Philp and I have taken the scissors to red tape. We listened when you said that you were spending too much time filling in forms. And I’m pleased to be working with the NPCC on reforming the rules.
By changing the rules around how crime is recorded, we could free up around 443,000 hours that could be put to better use.
There was no need to record two crimes when dealing with stalking, harassment, and controlling or coercive behaviour.
Nor to record Section 5 Public Order crimes when, on too many occasions, officers arrived only to find an empty street and no disorder.
It was right for bureaucratic reasons – and in the cause of free speech – to ensure that a malicious communication crime will be recorded only if a criminal threshold has clearly been reached, and not just when someone claims to be offended.
Now, I’m not fighting my campaign against political correctness in policing only for the sake of the law-abiding majority who want to see officers patrolling the streets, not policing pronouns on Twitter.
I also know that that’s what the majority of you signed up for, too.
Recruiting more than 20,000 additional officers and having a record number of officers in England and Wales is just the start.
But you need clarity from political leaders and I could not be clearer: I believe in the Peelian Principles of policing, I believe in investigating every crime, and I believe in keeping the public safe by catching criminals.
Anything that distracts from this is unwelcome – whether that’s enforcing non-existent blasphemy laws, unnecessarily recording a non-crime hate incident or joining in with political demonstrations.
Now, I understand that you as officers must make difficult operational decisions. But the public expects more than just a crime number.
They want to see the police taking visible action in communities and thoroughly investigating crime.
I am therefore delighted that the police have agreed to follow all reasonable lines of enquiry for all crime types.
And when I visited Greater Manchester Police, I saw how Chief Constable Steve Watson transformed that force by following that approach.
So I expect to see significant improvements in the way police approach crimes like phone theft, car theft, shoplifting, and criminal damage – in order to solve more crimes and restore public confidence in local policing.
Crime investigations should not be screened out solely on the basis that they are perceived as “minor” and all crimes merit investigation where there is a reasonable line of enquiry to follow up.
I’m also pleased that the police have all committed to attending the scene of every domestic burglary.
It’s a terrible crime which causes misery and fear for victims.
Nor must we ignore the havoc wreaked by anti-social behaviour, and the government’s action plan takes the fight to perpetrators, including through the dispensation of immediate justice.
And I was pleased to visit Essex police and Derbyshire police to see the rollout of some of the pilots.
Neighbourhood policing is the bedrock of keeping the public safe and making sure they feel safe too.
We must never forget that the fear of crime inhibits people hugely and diminishes the ability of communities to flourish.
So we need to continue to build trust between the police and the public. It is crucial that the police are accessible and accountable to communities.
I am grateful to PCCs and Chief Constables throughout England and Wales for sharing with me their plans to improve confidence in local policing and police visibility, and I will digest all this and look forward to receiving the results of these plans next March.
We also listened when you said that officers were having to spend too much time taking responsibility for people suffering mental health crises.
Make no mistake, mental health care really matters. This is about getting the right professionals to undertake the right tasks.
July saw the announcement of the new National Partnership Agreement, which will see a ‘Right Care, Right Person’ model rolled out throughout England – having been thoroughly achieved in Humberside.
Humberside Police estimate that this system has saved them over 1,400 hours per month of police time, and similar results across the English forces could save around one million hours.
The police will only be expected to attend mental health incidents if there is a real and immediate risk of serious harm or where there may be criminal activity.
Because, the truth is anyone suffering a mental health crisis needs the right support in the most appropriate setting. That is not a police cell.
Meanwhile, the Public Order Act has given the police greater powers and legal clarity for combatting disruptive protests, which have caused such chaos and eaten up so much police time and money.
Now, I will always back tried and tested ways of driving down crime.
We have trialled serious violence reduction orders, which allow the police to stop and search those with convictions for knife crime, to see if they are carrying a weapon.
Earlier this year, I saw for myself how well this is working in Merseyside.
And this government has made it easier than ever before for the police to make legitimate use of their stop and search powers.
At the same time, we have made the use of such powers more transparent and accountable.
And so, following a consultation earlier this year, the government will introduce a ban on certain types of large knives such as zombie-style knives and machetes. We will legislate when parliamentary time allows.
And from a personal perspective, having met knife crime campaigners in several forces, for example in Hertfordshire, I have seen the impact that knife legislation can have on saving lives.
Now technology is vital to enable you to achieve operational success.
Whether it is in Kent, where they are pioneering the use of technology to support domestic abuse victims, or in South Wales police through the use of facial recognition technology.
And I want to ensure that you have the best technology available.
Taser is a valuable tool for the police, and I have received a request from police leaders to approve a new Taser device, the T10, for use in the UK.
I want you to have the very best kit available, and so I hope to be able to approve the T10 after testing by scientists next year.
My officials will also continue to review markets to identify any new suppliers and ensure the best technology and the best value for money.
Now since March 2010, neighbourhood crime including burglary, robbery, and vehicle-related thefts are down by 51 per cent and violent crime down by 46 per cent.
So we, collectively, are making real progress in tackling high-harm crimes, and I thank you for your work. But there are always tragic reminders that a life can be snatched away in an instant.
So as part of the government’s commitment to tackle homicide, I will work with the police this winter to put particular focus on the prevention of homicides involving men aged over 25 killed in public.
Because, too often we have heard about a group of friends on a night out over Christmas ending in tragedy, with an argument escalating into a one-punch homicide.
We are investing in the police’s national communications campaign to raise awareness of the danger of this appalling phenomenon and in local police-led activity to make pubs, other licensed premises, and the night-time economy safer this winter.
Now another atrocious crime is rape. Getting police officers with the right skills is critical in the effort to progress and effectively manage cases.
Operation Soteria has highlighted the importance of specialist knowledge.
The National Operating Model is now being implemented by all police forces in England and Wales. This innovative approach has brought about real change in the pioneering force, Avon and Somerset.
It has given officers better tools to improve their decision-making processes, and I have heard first-hand from those supporting victims locally how Chief Constable Sarah Crew’s force is ensuring victims’ needs and rights are front and centre.
2,000 police investigators will receive new specialist training in rape and sexual offences by next April. And it will be compulsory for all new recruits to undertake rape and sexual offences training.
Rape is one of those crimes that make your job incredibly demanding emotionally and psychologically.
It cannot be repeated often enough that you do a job that makes unique – and enormous – demands upon you, and I am determined that government does all it can to support you.
The Police Covenant is this country’s promise to you and to your families that we will do right by you. Its creation was a vital step, but it is only a starting point. Supporting police officers is an ongoing project that requires constant vigilance, and I promise that I will always listen to you very carefully.
We are grateful to the Federation for your support of the National Policing Board, championing police welfare and other frontline issues.
Police Treatment Centres play a vital role in providing essential help to those of you who suffer physical or mental injury as a result of your service.
The Federation has raised concerns with the way Police Treatment Centres are being funded, and we have asked the National Police Wellbeing Service to conduct a review of the PTCs, to understand the demand on this service and how to best support and utilise it.
It is perfectly understandable that you are worried about levels of fatigue in policing and its effect on your wellbeing.
Long, irregular, and uncertain hours doing an exceptionally demanding job are inevitably challenging – but that doesn’t mean we should just accept that it will take a terrible toll.
Police officers are so admirable precisely because you are human beings and not robots.
I am interested in the Phase 2 of the fatigue project, led by the National Police Wellbeing Service in partnership with Liverpool John Moores University.
It will be incredibly helpful to see the results, with 10 to 12 forces due to take part.
I am very grateful to the volunteers – officers from a number of ‘high-fatigue’ front line roles, such as investigators, response, and firearm teams.
The government is funding this project as part of the Police Covenant. It uses the latest biometric technology anonymously to capture fatigue levels and deliver an expert-led, 120-day programme to support officers with fatigue recovery.
It is a unique research project, not just in UK policing, but in the world, and we are already seeing significant improvements in those involved in the study, with improved sleep, reduced fatigue, and better recovery.
Likewise, as part of our Police Covenant, next month will see the launch of the first national family support package through Oscar Kilo, the National Police Wellbeing Service.
It includes a range of advice and practical tips for family health, nutrition, and sleep – as well as a book that helps to explain to children what policing is all about.
I am very grateful to the Police Federation for your input into this work.
The demands placed on police officers are unique. That’s why the support for you must be bespoke.
Mental health matters just as much as physical health.
Indeed, mental ill health can, tragically, claim lives – as some of you know all too well.
And I am very pleased to be able to announce that we will provide additional funding to set up a 24/7 Mental Health Crisis Support Line for current and former members of the police workforce.
There are employee assistance programmes in a number of forces, with telephone counselling available, but there is no national 24 hour, 7 day a week suicide prevention line. That needs to change.
Fire and Ambulance have recently established their own 24/7 crisis lines. The police need and deserve no less.
So as I said at the Conservative Party Conference earlier this month, I want to ensure that when police are called upon to use force or conduct pursuits in the line of duty, officers are able to use their powers with legal certainty and clarity.
That is why I have announced a review, to report to me by the end of the year, to ensure that the legal and operational frameworks in which they operate are robust and command the confidence of officers and the public.
I want you to know that I have heard your concerns that you are not being treated fairly, and that processes overlap and take too long.
Steve, you mentioned pay.
I was very pleased that we were able to give police officers a 7 per cent pay rise.
We are in a tough economic climate but prioritising a rise for some of the most selfless, outstanding professionals among us was absolutely right.
Decent police officers suffer hugely when a minority fall short of the standards required, and in recent years, some have fallen spectacularly short.
The culture in policing does need significantly to improve. That is one of the areas of focus of Part 2 of the Angiolini Inquiry. The National Centre for Police Leadership, being developed by the College of Policing, is another big step forward.
Now, I know that every responsible police officer accepts that they must be held accountable for their actions.
It was right to take action to make it easier for chief constables to remove officers who are not up to the job, right for the public and right for the majority of officers who do the job bravely and well – and who need to able to rely on their colleagues.
Nor does our duty to you end when you leave the force. The last thing I want is for you to be left adrift.
In order to help you transition out of policing when the time is right for you and your family, the College of Policing has developed a leavers toolkit, to be launched later this year.
It will provide practical support such as training and guidance on CV writing and interview skills.
That said, your chiefs have the option to bring back officers after you have retired, under the NPCC Retire and rejoin guidance.
Leveraging talent and expertise back into our police force is highly desirable. I encourage all chiefs to think carefully about the balance of their workforce and make sure they are making use of this option to retain the experience and skills the force needs.
You have chosen a job that is never easy. But it is also immensely worthwhile. Indeed, it is essential – the consequences of not having a world-class police force are too terrible to contemplate.
And so my final message is a simple one: thank you so much for everything that you do.
The speech made by Yvette Cooper, the Shadow Home Secretary, in Liverpool on 10 October 2023.
Conference, every one of us in this hall will have stories from friends, families or neighbours about the violence and abuse that too many women face.
My great, great grandmother was attacked by her husband.
First when she was pregnant. The report says he struck and kicked her so she could not sit or lie in bed.
Then he attacked her with a poker. In front of her daughter.
The case went to court. The magistrates bound him over to keep the peace.
But you know the most shocking thing about that story?
That is more protection from the police and courts than many domestic abuse victims get today.
And it was over 100 years ago.
Conference we cannot stand by and let our daughters face the same abuse as our grandmothers. This has to change.
With us this morning is Nour Norris.
Her niece Raneem Oudeh – faced abuse, stalking, threats to kill from her ex-partner.
Repeatedly she asked the police for help.
But nothing was done. On the night Raneem and her mother Khaola were murdered they called 999 four times. But no one came.
I am determined no woman should ever be ignored and abandoned in this devastating way.
You know we’ve talked about change for years, but I am sick and tired of women who face abuse and violence being failed – generation after generation.
Sick and tired of the most serious perpetrators getting away with it.
Sick and tired of women still feeling worried on the streets, saying to friends “text me when you get home”.
When the first women’s safety march in Leeds was nearly 50 years ago.
Enough is enough, we will not stand for this any more.
So Conference, the next Labour Government will put rape investigation units in every force, domestic abuse experts in every 999 call centre.
We will require police forces to use tactics normally reserved for organised crime or terrorist investigations.
To identify and go after the most dangerous repeat abusers and rapists and get them off our streets.
Know this. If you abuse and hurt women, under a Labour Government the police will be after you, because everyone has the right to live in freedom from fear.
And who better to lead the fight against crime than someone who spent years pursuing criminals and terrorists and standing up for victims – the person we pledge to make the next Labour Prime Minister, Keir Starmer.
From Labour, this week, you get serious plans to change our country.
From the Tories, last week, what were they on?
And the chaos just gets worse.
We’ve had five Tory Prime Ministers in seven years – and seven Tory Home Secretaries.
Suella Braverman is literally the only person who could make you want to bring back Priti Patel.
A Home Secretary more interested in going after Elton John than going after criminals.
I mean seriously? Well I guess that’s why they call them the Blues.
Labour believes security is the first duty of any Government.
Security is the bedrock of opportunity.
Families don’t thrive if they don’t feel safe.
Security means knowing someone will be there for you if things go wrong, that laws will be respected and enforced.
And it means strong communities – where people pull together instead of turning on each other.
Because when communities fracture, antisocial behaviour grows and organized crime and extremists step in.
But instead of standing up for security, the Tories have done the opposite.
That feeling we have that nothing works and everything is broken.
A brittle Britain, where we face the future with foreboding.
They have taken a wrecking ball to the criminal justice system, so 90% of crimes now go unsolved.
More criminals let off. More victims let down.
Criminals today are less than half as likely to be caught as they were under the last Labour Government.
That is the scale of the collapse in law and order under this Tory Government.
Criminals laugh at the law, communities pay the price.
Conference this isn’t an accident.
It is the result of deliberate Tory choice.
A choice to cut police from our streets, a choice to undermine respect for the law and for standards in public life, a choice to chase headlines not solutions, and a shameful choice to ramp up the rhetoric and pit people against each other rather than bringing communities together.
Weak on crime, weak on its causes, weakening our security.
A reckless Tory Home Secretary. A hopeless Tory Government. They need to go.
Labour’s task in Government will be to restore respect and rebuild our security – for our nation: at our borders, on our streets, and in our homes.
That starts with defending our national security.
Labour will work tirelessly with our intelligence and security agencies to defend our country from fast changing threats be they from terrorists, organised criminals or other states who seek to do us harm.
And Conference, we have seen the devastating and barbaric terrorist attacks in Israel this week.
As David Lammy has said “terrorism can never, never be justified”.
And let us be clear.
Here in the UK, we will work with the police, with the Community Security Trust, with the Government because there is no place in Britain for the promotion of proscribed terror groups like Hamas.
There is no place in Britain for antisemitic hate.
Conference, delivering security for our communities also means securing our borders.
We want to see strong border security and a properly controlled and managed asylum system so the UK does our bit to help those fleeing persecution and conflict while those who are not refugees are swiftly returned.
That is what Labour believes in.
Under the Tories we have none of that.
Criminal gangs are making a mockery of our border security and the asylum system is in total chaos.
The taxpayer spending an astronomical £8m a day on hotels.
Returns of failed asylum seekers down by 70%.
And £140million cheques already sent to Rwanda – even though they’ve sent more Home Secretaries there than asylum seekers.
Time and again all the Tories offer is gimmicks and no grip.
Labour will deploy hundreds more police and investigators to go after the smuggler and trafficking gangs who undermine our border security and put lives at risk.
And to pursue their supply chains. To stop the boats before they reach the French coast.
And we will clear the backlog, end the use of asylum hotels, save the taxpayer £2 billion and fix this Tory chaos.
But Conference, we’ve seen a Tory Home Secretary target and blame LGBT+ refugees to distract from her mess.
This is less than 2% of UK asylum applications, at a time when Uganda and other countries threaten gay people with the death penalty.
That is shameful and it demeans her office.
Labour will never scapegoat people because of who they are and who they love.
And conference, we will rebuild security here on our streets.
Our town centres should be the beating heart of our communities.
But instead, we’ve got local shops chaining fabric conditioner to the shelves, putting security tags on packs of cheese and butter to fend off organised gang raids.
An epidemic of shoplifting and violence against shop workers.
A law brought in by the Tories means shop thefts under £200 aren’t investigated even if the same gang comes back time and again.
So Conference, we will end the £200 rule to tackle the shoplifting gangs.
Bring in Respect Orders to ban repeat offenders from town centres.
And we’ll restore neighbourhood policing – 13,000 more neighbourhood police and PCSOs back on our streets.
Guaranteed patrols in the heart of our towns.
And conference we will stand with USDAW, the Co-op, Tesco, small convenience stores with a new law and tougher sentences for attacks on our shopworkers.
Everyone has the right to feel safe at work.
And Conference it falls to us to rebuild confidence in British policing.
Turning around the collapse in prosecutions, recruiting detectives so that more complex crimes, like fraud, are solved, reforming policing with new powers for the inspectorate if police forces fail, with firm action to tackle racism, and new vetting and misconduct rules to keep standards high.
If officers shame their uniform or abuse their position, they will be quickly out.
But for the tens of thousands of officers who strain every sinew, to keep the rest of us safe, we will back you.
And we will be proud to introduce a bravery medal for police officers, firefighters and emergency service workers who lose their lives in the line of duty.
We owe them our thanks for keeping us safe.
Conference, more than anything else, we need to keep our children safe.
Last year Keir and I met with a grieving mum in Hartlepool who showed us the video she kept on her phone of her cradling her teenage son in his hospital bed, singing to him as he lay dying from a knife wound.
It was one of the hardest things I have done in this job.
Families who feel like they have lost their future.
But who are calling for us to help them save other children’s lives.
Knife crime has gone up by 70% in eight years – some of the steepest increases in towns and suburbs.
Yet far too little is done, and a generation is being failed.
We must not fail them any more.
Too often when teenagers say they don’t feel safe, no one listens.
Too often when they start to struggle with mental health, or go off the rails. Or are groomed by criminal gangs, nothing is done.
Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime.
We said it, we mean it, that means we have to act.
So Labour will bring in new laws to crack down on dangerous knife sales and to stop gangs exploiting children.
But we also need to step in early.
25 years ago, I was one of the Labour Ministers responsible for Sure Start.
Bringing communities and services together to help families with the very youngest children.
Conference I am determined that the next Labour Government will do the same for our teenagers.
That’s why I am announcing today a new ten-year programme bringing together services and communities to support for young people.
New youth hubs, with both mental health workers and youth workers, to tackle the crisis in youth mental health, to give teenagers the best start in life, to stop the knife crime that is killing our children.
Imagine it – communities coming together with that same awesome capacity to transform lives.
We did it in Government before. That’s what Labour in Government can do again.
Conference this is Labour’s mission.
To halve serious violence, to put police back on the beat, to restore respect for the rule of law, to keep our children safe.
Labour, the true party of law and order. Giving our children their future back. Giving our country its future back.
That is what the next Labour Government will do.
Thank you.
The speech made by Alex Chalk, the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, in Manchester on 3 October 2023.
Goodness, conference.
Thank you and thank you Victoria for that kind introduction. I’m pleased that she gave my name, Alex Chalk.
I’m a little sensitive about it because it wasn’t so long ago that I knocked on a door in Cheltenham, the door opened, this lady said “Oh yeah, I know who you are. You might be better than your brother, but we don’t want David Miliband either,” she said.
Total disaster; I told CCHQ, they said “Don’t worry, we’ll ask the Mayor of London to come down”.
Now ladies and gentlemen, initially, everything went so well. He got out of the car and was 100% on-message. “Chalk for Cheltenham!” “Chalk for Cheltenham!” he was saying.
But as he paused to meet everyone, there was an enterprising journalist from the local BBC who spotted his opportunity. Recognising, conference, that I might not have been the only person he had come to support that day, he sidled up and put the microphone in Boris’ face.
“So, Mayor, just for the listeners of BBC Radio Gloucestershire; can you remind us please, what is the name of the person you have come to support?”
Well conference, I have to tell you now, the name that came back was not mine. The name that came back was a very prominent estate agent who had been advertising heavily on the London Road coming into Cheltenham.
These are the pitfalls of being a politician.
It is a privilege to be addressing you today as Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice.
First, because I am, as Victoria just indicated, above all a barrister (albeit one on a career break) but most of all because when it comes to justice, we the British, have a history of which we can be immensely proud.
From Magna Carta in 1215 to the Bill of Rights in 1688, this country has made a special contribution to the rule of law.
Businesses across the globe choose our law to govern their contracts. They choose our courts to settle their disputes. Why? Because of the skill of our lawyers and the excellence of our judges.
It means we have the largest legal sector in Europe, and the second largest in the world. More than 200 overseas law firms have set up offices here, from over 40 jurisdictions. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the energetic minister Mike Freer has visited every one of them.
This success matters, conference, for all sorts of reasons, but chief among them is that it drives opportunity.
Many of us in this room came into politics and chose the Conservative Party because we believe to our core in creating life chances for young people who may not have had the easiest start in life but are prepared to work hard and do the right thing.
Unlocking potential and enabling people to go as far as their talents will take them is the British dream – and legal careers make them a reality.
Now, I’m proud too, because our strong justice sector says something about our instincts as a nation for fairness.
This is the country that in the face of Putin’s illegal full-scale invasion did not hesitate. We appreciated instinctively that borders matter, that the international rules-based order counts for something, and that might is not always right.
And it’s why, on top of being such a major donor of military equipment, this Government is supporting the International Criminal Court with funding, with legal expertise to bring war criminals to justice – something spearheaded by my predecessor, Dominic Raab.
And our instinct for fairness means we’ve opened our hearts and our homes to Ukrainians, to Honk Kongers, Afghan interpreters who served alongside our armed forces, people who’ve arrived legally. But, conference, when it comes to illegal migration, although we in Britain have warm hearts, we seek a secure front door.
It is not fair on the British people, and nor, by the way, is it fair on those very migrants who have played by the rules, that illegal entrants should seek to jump the queue.
Because just as the rule of law means that no one is above the law, so it also requires that there are consequences for those who break it. And so, whilst Labour flail around with absolutely no solution, we have a clear, long-term plan that is robust, yes – but fair too.
And we can deliver it within our overarching legal obligations.
Now conference, I want to talk about our courts – civil, family and criminal.
Covid might be receding into history, but as I know from speaking to my counterparts from France to the United States to Japan, justice systems across the world are still dealing with the consequences.
Now, our magistrates’ courts, which remember, deals with around 90% of all crime, have rebounded strongly.
As for the Crown Court, the jury system is particularly vulnerable to a pandemic. A gang trial with five defendants in the dock could easily mean 35 people in a single courtroom. So, the flow of those trials inevitably slowed.
Now, in the white heat of the pandemic, there were those who said “scrap jury trials altogether.” They said replace them with a single judge deciding guilt or innocence in those most serious of cases.
They said hundreds of years of history, and the bedrock of our fundamental freedoms should be swept away.
Conference, what a travesty that would have been. As someone who has prosecuted murders, rapes, terrorist bomb plots and gun crime, I knew that would mean destroying something of inestimable value to our country.
So, we made the tough call. We stuck with jury trials, a decision in the national interest, and in the interests of justice.
But it does mean that caseloads in the Crown Court are higher than they were. And as a result, there are now 6,000 more people on remand in custody than there were pre-Covid. That presents a real challenge.
So, to drive forward the recovery we have kept open Nightingale Courts, we have recruited over 1,000 judges and tribunal members, and we’re recruiting 1,000 more. We have massively expanded the budget to upgrade and modernise our courts and tribunals.
And we are investing up to an additional £141 million a year for the barristers and solicitors whose important work ensures the guilty are convicted, the innocent walk free and the public are protected.
And conference, we are committed as a party, and as a government, to making the long-term decisions that put the national interest first.
That’s why we are rolling out the largest prison expansion programme since the Victorian era.
Thanks to this Prime Minister, when he was Chancellor, and led by the exceptional Prisons Minister Damian Hinds, we have brought online over 5,000 more places – in brand new prisons like HMP Fosse Way, with more on the way. Modern, secure, decent prisons with rehabilitation at their core.
And we’re expanding and refurbishing existing prisons and hiring thousands more prison officers. And I can tell you today conference that we also intend to look at the Norwegian example and explore renting overseas capacity.
But we must be candid too – prison costs money. A lot of money. Not only does society suffer the crime in the first place, but it also suffers the punishment to the tune of around £46,000 a year per adult male prisoner.
Now we make no apologies for locking up the most dangerous offenders for longer where that is necessary to protect the public. And that is why we have extended the use of whole life orders, so that in more cases life really does mean life.
But it’s also why our plan to break the cycle of reoffending is absolutely critical, because all but the most dangerous offenders will be released one day. Frankly, there are people wasting their lives going in and out of prison, at enormous cost to the taxpayer.
So, we are rolling out accommodation provision for prison leavers, to keep them off the streets and out of trouble in those critical early weeks. We have brought business expertise into over 90 prisons across the country to provide job opportunities and help prisoners gain the skills they need to hold down a job, pay taxes, and become a contributing member of society.
And just look, conference, at the progress we’ve made: Since 2010, reoffending has dropped from 32% to 24%; In the last two years the percentage of offenders in employment six months post-release has more than doubled; Since 2010, violent crime and burglary is down by over 40%.
That is how we secure justice.
And conference, we are absolutely committed to protecting women and girls. We are the Party that: Outlawed stalking – a crime disproportionately suffered by women; That created the offence of ‘coercive or controlling behaviour’ – it wasn’t even a crime before; We passed the first ever Domestic Abuse Act; We outlawed revenge porn and cyberflashing; We created a new offence of non-fatal strangulation; We clamped down on the cowardly ‘rough sex gone wrong’ defence; We unlocked and funded hundreds of Independent Sexual Violence Advisors to support victims and we set up a 24/7 Rape Support Helpline; as well as doubling grants for Rape Support Centres.
All this we do and more.
In fact, we have quadrupled funding for victim support services since 2010. Four times more money for victims’ services under the Conservatives.
And when it comes to rape prosecution, there is of course more to do, but there are important facts that shouldn’t be forgotten:
First, more adult rape cases are being prosecuted now than when Labour were in power.
Second, the conviction rate for all rape is higher.
Third, the average sentence is longer – 43% longer.
Fourth, the amount of the sentence that must be served behind bars is greater.
Because Labour say they want to protect the public – but literally do the opposite, even launching campaigns to block the deportation of dangerous foreign criminals.
Take one offender: he thrust a broken bottle into a man’s face leaving him scarred for life – a ‘horrifying attack’ in the words of the police. His Labour MP, a serving member of the Shadow Cabinet no less, tried to stop the flight.
He was in good company. Because Keir Starmer demanded that ‘…all future charter flights must be suspended’. No principles, no judgement, no clue.
I have to say conference, when you look at the leader of the opposition, he just reminds me of a kind of living cushion, he just bears the impression of the last person who sat on him. But anyway, that’s another issue.
We will go further to support victims, conference.
Our Victims and Prisoners Bill, being piloted through the Commons by the skilful Victims Minister Ed Argar and through the Lords by the highly respected Lord Bellamy, and, indeed, aided and abetted by our brilliant PPSs, Laura Farris and Aaron Bell, remember those names conference, they will bolster victims’ rights further, giving new roles to our Police and Crime Commissioners to oversee how agencies deliver for victims.
And we are giving judges the power to compel offenders to attend their sentencing hearing. Those who’ve robbed innocence, betrayed trust and shattered lives should be in court to face up to the damage they have done. They should be there to hear society’s condemnation ringing in their ears.
And today I want to right another injustice.
I am clear that if a father murders the mother of his children, he should expect to lose his parental rights. That’s why today I can announce that we will legislate to suspend those rights from those who murder their partners.
So, we will enact Jade’s Law, named after Jade Ward who was tragically murdered by her husband and whose children and their grandparents are now subject to attempts to exert control by the perpetrator from behind bars.
No family should have to go through this, and thanks to their efforts we will protect children and families by making their law a reality.
So, conference, I started speaking to you this afternoon about pride.
Let us take pride in what our country has contributed – probably more than any other to the international rules-based order.
Let us take pride in what we have delivered in government to stand up for victims.
And let us rededicate ourselves today to serve justice, to uphold our values and keep the British people safe. Thank you.
The speech made by Michael Tomlinson, the Solicitor General, on 4 September 2023.
It is a pleasure to be speaking to you today – in this wonderful setting – at what is my first Symposium since being appointed Solicitor General last year.
It is right to say that this event is held in high regard – and indeed, the fact that the Symposium is celebrating its fortieth birthday is a testament to its enduring value in considering the ever-evolving threat we face from economic crime.
And I know that Professor Rider has been at the heart of the Symposium since its foundation. I would like to thank him, and his team, for their work in bringing together such a comprehensive and thought-provoking programme.
I would also like to mention Daniel Zeichner, MP, who spoke about the symposium in parliament recently – and to thank him for his warm welcome to me and his parliamentary colleagues.
Let me start by saying a little more about my own role, which can be something of a mystery – even, on occasion, to my ministerial colleagues!
As Solicitor General for England and Wales, I am one of the UK Government’s three Law Officers. The others are the Attorney General for England and Wales – who is also the Advocate General for Northern Ireland – and the Advocate General for Scotland.
Put broadly, the Attorney General and I have three main roles.
Firstly, we are the Governments’ chief legal advisers.
Secondly, we are responsible for superintending the work of several public bodies, including the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).
And thirdly, we have several public interest functions that we carry out independently of government. This includes, for example, considering whether to refer sentences to the Court of Appeal as unduly lenient; or granting consent to prosecute certain offences, such as cross-border conspiracies or under the Official Secrets Act, applying the established principles of evidential sufficiency and the public interest.
The role the Law Officers is, in many respects, unique. While we are politicians drawn from the ruling party, and are government ministers, we are of course firstly lawyers.
This dual politician-lawyer role has, over the years, given rise to questions related to the focus of this year’s Symposium: “integrity.”
As a Law Officer, much of my role is acting quasi judicially and independently of Government – politics simply does not come into it. When considering whether consent should be granted for a prosecution; whether a sentence is unduly lenient; whether a charitable gift in a will is valid; or whether to institute proceedings for contempt of court.
The public interest function is just that.
But some have questioned, given our commitment to the political objectives of the Government, whether the Law Officers can maintain the integrity that is required to deliver independent, impartial – and potentially unwelcomed – advice to their colleagues.
In fact, a number of previous Attorneys have felt challenged by the role. Sir Patrick Hastings said it was his ‘idea of hell’. Francis Bacon ‘described it as the painfullest task in the realm’
The provision of frank advice, without fear or favour, is fundamental to our role – and that there is enormous value in having at the heart of Government independent lawyers who are trusted by those that they advise – precisely because they are one of them.
Indeed, this is well captured in the very mission of the Attorney General’s Office which sets itself the task of “making law and politics work together at the heart of the UK constitution”.
Perhaps a flipside of integrity is corruption.
While there is no universally accepted definition, it is clear that corruption, in all its forms, has a corrosive effect. It threatens our national security and prosperity – and unchecked, it erodes public confidence in domestic and international institutions – including the rule of law.
And one just needs to look to the international stage and Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine – fuelled by a kleptocratic regime – to see just how devastating its effects can be.
The UK has long been seen as a world leader in dealing with corruption, and we are continuing to take action – for example with economic crimes linked to corruption such as fraud and money laundering.
I know that my noble friend Baroness Penn may expand upon this theme, but let me just mention the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill, which we will be debating and voting on later today in the House of Commons.
This will bear down even further on kleptocrats, criminals, and terrorists who target our economy and will help prevent our corporate structures being abused by corrupt actors.
Let me also mention integrity in the context of our prosecution system and disclosure.
As we all know, effective disclosure is critical to a fair trial and supports public confidence in the administration of justice.
At the same time, the volume of digital material generated in complex case work continues to grow exponentially – particularly in economic crime cases.
This is posing significant challenges for law enforcement.
Indeed, we are now dealing with petabytes – that’s a thousand terabytes – of data in some of our cases.
This highlights the critical importance of ensuring we have a modern disclosure regime, which reflects the realities of our digital age.
And this is why I have personally been working with colleagues across Government to ensure that the current regime supports effective disclosure in complex cases – whether prosecuted by the CPS or the SFO.
This includes looking at the Attorney General’s Guidelines on Disclosure to find ways to reduce the scheduling burden on investigators and prosecutors.
We also announced – as part of the Fraud Strategy we published in May – an independent review of the disclosure regime for cases with large volumes of digital material.
I look forward to continuing this work with many in this room and the independent reviewer on this important piece of work.
It would be remiss of me not to highlight some of the pivotal successes of the SFO and CPS in our fight against corruption.
Just last year, the SFO secured the conviction of Glencore Energy UK Ltd, – and the company was sentenced to pay £280m – the largest corporate sentence imposed in the UK to date.
And I never tire of mentioning SFO’s returns to the taxpayer – especially in front of a Treasury Minister – the SFO brought in nearly 4 times its cost to the taxpayer between 2019/20 and 2022/23, bringing in over £1bn into the Treasury against vote funding of around £280m.
And I would like to take this opportunity to give particular thanks to Lisa Osofsky, the outgoing Director of the SFO, who leaves post at the end of this month. Over her five-year tenure, she has led the charge in delivering some outstanding outcomes and I wish her the all of the best for the future.
The CPS has likewise responded robustly in cases of corruption and illicit finance.
And I know that Adrian Foster, Chief Crown Prosecutor in the CPS Proceeds of Crime Division, will be talking more about this later.
In conclusion, I know there will be much lively discussion and debate this week – and there is much in this impressive programme – and I am grateful to have been invited to be a part of it.
The speech made by Alex Chalk, the Secretary of State for Justice, at the Mansion House in London on 18 July 2023.
My Lord Mayor, Lady Mayoress, my Lord Chief Justice, members of His Majesty’s judiciary, ladies and gentlemen.
Thank you, Lord Chief Justice for your kind words. It is of course a special honour to be speaking to you as Lord Chancellor. But can we all please spare a thought for at least three of your number here who led me at the Bar and are now feeling really, really old…
So much has happened for all of us in the last decade. In 2013, I was at the Bar at 6KBW College Hill. It was a different time entirely; as a busy practitioner I confess I didn’t always pore over every dissenting Court of Appeal judgment; unaccountably, I find them absolutely compelling today.
And it was in 2013 that I was selected as the Conservative candidate for Cheltenham. It wasn’t going terribly well. Door after door was opened by people who said they knew who I was, but added that although I was better than my brother, they weren’t going to vote for David Miliband either. When I fed that back to HQ they came up with what they assured me was a brilliant plan. They would send down the then-Mayor of London to boost my profile. Even then, I was aware that this could be a high-risk strategy.
I thank Lord Burnett for his speech.
The Lord Chief Justice has shown himself ready to serve in so many ways. He attended a Commonwealth conference in 2022. On the second night the hosts announced that the judges would be called to dance by rank, starting with Chief Justices, and starting with England & Wales.
My source tells me that Lord Burnett did not hesitate to get to his feet, to the delight of the hundreds watching on. His Private Secretary still has the footage available in, I am told, clear contravention of a judicial order. There will be an auction at the end of the evening.
Few in peacetime have been tested as Lord Burnett was. He showed leadership to help keep the courts open during Covid, in a judgement that was vindicated. He has promoted transparency, in particular broadcasting of sentencing remarks in the Crown Court. He has increased engagement with the public and students. And he has championed modernisation, digitisation, diversity and recruitment.
MPs and peers of all parties hold him in the highest regard. Parliament, his profession and indeed the nation owe him a debt of gratitude and wish him well for whatever comes next.
I want also to thank those of you who sat during the pandemic.
You did so despite the fact that many of you, I’m sure, will have come under pressure from concerned friends and family not to come into court, not to put yourselves at risk. ‘Why you?’ they will have said; to which the only answer was that fate put you there, at that unique moment of jeopardy for our justice system and yours was the task to do.
Thank you for all you did. Covid has a long tail when it comes to the courts, and plainly there are still significant pressures as the system heals – from family law (public and private) to the employment tribunal. But let us remember that those pressures would have been immeasurably greater without your efforts.
I want to turn to some other points, and I’m pleased to say that No.10 were so delighted that I was attending this event that they even helped me draft this part of speech. So, turning to our five priorities…
I recently visited Japan for the G7 Justice Ministers Conference. It was immediately clear just how strong the relationship is between the UK and Japan, and the importance that is attached by that country and indeed the ASEAN countries (from Malaysia to Singapore) to our playing our part in the Indo-Pacific.
Now, that importance isn’t wholly or even mainly underpinned by the strong and growing military and industrial alliance through our collaboration with Japan on the Global Combat Air Programme – important though that is. Instead, absolutely at the heart of our offer to the Indo-Pacific and indeed to the world is our strong legal capabilities and tradition of upholding the rule of law – as demonstrated by Japan’s enthusiasm to single out the UK to sign a memorandum of cooperation on law and justice, including on our legal sectors.
Because it is well understood internationally that our country has historically contributed a great deal, perhaps more than any other, to the development of private international law through the Hague Conventions, with their network of jurisdiction and mutual enforcement arrangements. It is also acknowledged that the UK has the biggest legal sector in Europe, second only worldwide to the United States, a sector that continues to thrive.
And our international counterparts recognise that our common law system enjoys an endless potential for modernisation to respond to the latest trends, technologies and dispute flashpoints. The common law is ancient, yes, and yet relentlessly contemporary.
Against that backdrop, we will of course assert this advantage, we will press for strengthened cooperation and exchange in legal services. That will help grow our economy and generate extraordinary opportunities for young people from this jurisdiction to go as far as their talents will take them – promoting the social mobility agenda which brought me into politics. Thank you to the judiciary, the Bar Council and the Law Society for what you are doing to support this endeavour.
But in truth it’s about more than that. Despite the undoubted commercial opportunities, we will prioritise this agenda because every time we advance a PIL agreement, every time we improve access to a foreign legal market, every time we secure that exchange event between lawyers we strengthen the international rules-based order. In the Indo-Pacific and in the wider world, we must recognise that the argument for the rule of law is far from settled. That part of the world, as well as being the crucible of global economic growth over the coming decades, is also the crucible of competing visions. It is in some ways the epicentre of a global contest. And in that contest, free societies have to demonstrate that the rule of law matters – and ultimately it makes societies safer, and citizens freer and better off.
So we will continue to speak up for the rule of law. We will make clear in the context of Russia’s unlawful full-scale invasion of Ukraine that might is not always right, that the international rules-based order counts for something, and that there are consequences for those who violate recognised borders.
And we are putting resources behind our words. Quite apart from being the second largest provider of military support to Ukraine after the US, we have delivered war crimes investigation training to Ukrainian police on behalf of the ICC, we have provided training for Ukrainian judges led, by Sir Howard Morrison KC, and allocated additional funding to support ICC investigations.
But as well as advocating the rule of law abroad, we must show focus and vigilance to maintain it here at home. Although deep-rooted in our society, it must never be taken for granted. It requires care and effort to keep it in good health – particularly in an era of social media and disinformation which throws up new, dystopian misinformed challenges.
So, the starting-point is to make the case for why it matters – to bring it to life in terms that are accessible to all. In my swearing-in speech I stated that the rule of law, independence of the judiciary and access to justice aren’t quaint, obscure notions to pay lip-service to – but the essential building blocks of a safe, fair and prosperous society – as relevant today as in any year of the modern era.
And what access to justice and independence of the judiciary mean in practice is walking out of court as an advocate or litigant having lost, and knowing deep down that despite your disappointment you have been heard by judges of formidable intellect and unimpeachable integrity. And you have had a full and fair hearing. That is inestimably precious.
So what must we do to nurture it?
Well, in the first place, show respect to its key custodians. The Government is pleased to have been able to accept in full the PRB pay recommendations, including the Senior Salaries Review Body recommendation. In doing so, the Government is sending I hope a clear message about its deep regard for the judiciary, and the value attached to the essential work that you do.
Second, I believe very strongly that we must invest in the infrastructure of the courts estate. The physical condition of the buildings that discharge justice matters. It is difficult to uphold the dignity and authority of the law, important by the way to promote the small matter of compliance with court orders, when there is a bucket catching drips in the corner of the room.
It is equally difficult as a practitioner to feel proud of the profession you have worked hard to join as you open your case to the jury in Isleworth (as I did in the past) and know that all anyone is thinking about is the overwhelming smell of damp in the carpets. (Those have been replaced by the way).
Poor maintenance impacts capacity of course – but it also corrodes morale. And we need that morale, not least to unwind the pressures Covid created. It is only by sustaining and growing pride in the justice system and pride in the legal profession that we will continue to retain the practitioners we need and attract the brightest and the best to join. Every improvement in infrastructure sends out a ripple of confidence, through robing rooms, chambers and into university lecture theatres; and it enhances the overall attractiveness of the profession. Notwithstanding the £185m spent on court maintenance in the last two years, and the extra £38m in the last financial year for redecorations and deep cleans, we can go further. It’s a point I raised on my first day in office. I have prioritised it since, and I look forward to being able to say a little more in due course.
Third, we must be vigilant in clamping down on those who would misuse our courts, absorbing capacity with bogus lawsuits cynically designed to intimidate journalists and campaigners, and stifle freedom of speech. So I am pleased that we have acted through amendments to the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill to create an early dismissal process in respect of spurious SLAPPS which are connected to financial fraud and corruption – the overwhelming majority of actions.
Fourth, we should take every opportunity to promote access to justice. And let me say that legal aid plays an important role in delivering that. So I am pleased that we have published our response to the Legal Aid Means Test Review, which when fully implemented will lead to over six million more people falling within the scope of legal aid.
All this we do and more. As a junior minister in the department, I devised ELSA (Early Legal Support and Advice) as the umbrella term for a suite of proposals to improve access to justice. Politics is the art of the possible, and we won’t get everything done overnight. But I will give it my all.
Fifth, we must abandon for good the outdated complacency that assumes all those who rise to positions of responsibility in our country are experts (or at least experienced) in the inner workings of our constitution. We should dismiss what has come to feel like a conspiracy of romantic hopes that through their education and wider upbringing people somehow acquire osmotically an understanding of the balance of our constitution, the conventions that secure it and – yes – the boundaries.
And yet, this is something that as a society we devote little or no effort to. Despite the fact that new legal practitioners receive ethics training as part of their preparation for practice, for those entering public life there is no such guidance or investment at all. There should be.
And so, with a general election due in the next 18 months, preparations should be made to ensure that Members of the next Parliament and the people they work alongside, are given the assistance and information they require. As the President of the Supreme Court noted earlier this month, and I agree, maintaining the rule of law is a joint responsibility of Parliament and the courts. Far from being a contest for power between the two, we have a shared commitment and we should support each other in delivering it.
And in that spirit we must work together to support the parliamentarians of the future. Precisely how that support is framed will be a matter for discussion and careful thought. But it shouldn’t be put off.
Finally this. I know there are real pressures in the system. I have referred to them already. I know that despite the Magistrates’ Court snapping back fast, the caseload in the Crown Court is high.
That is in part a function of the fact that we didn’t abandon jury trials, even when some suggested we should. That was manifestly the right decision. Because jury trials remain the lamp of our liberties, and the ultimate guarantors of fair trials which enjoy the public’s confidence. But we have to recognise that this had a consequence, and the sheer volume now is at least in part the price we pay for principle.
We will do all we can to help. We have removed the cap on sitting days for two years in a row, ensuring the Crown Court can sit at maximum capacity. We have passed the PCSC Act so that remote hearings can continue, where appropriate. 24 Nightingale courtrooms have been extended beyond March 2023 to provide additional capacity. We expect criminal legal aid spending will increase by approximately £141m per year in a steady state.
We are recruiting up to 1,000 judges across jurisdictions. And we have raised the statutory mandatory retirement age to 75 for judicial office holders, estimated to retain an additional 400 judges and tribunal members.
But I am acutely conscious that it is you and the practitioners that you see in your courts and tribunals that will do more than anyone else to bear down on these volumes, and do so in a way that delivers justice.
So I want to thank you for what you have done, but all that you will do. It is not easy I realise.
We use the adjective ‘world-beating’ sparingly these days. But excessive diffidence is to be avoided too. It is entirely reasonable to point out that we have a judiciary that rightly enjoys enormous respect globally – and not just for the quality of its dance moves. In terms of sheer intellectual horsepower and fundamental fairness it stands out.
And it is underpinned by unswerving professionalism. To serve in our courts, as judge or practitioner, is to follow a vocation – to know that you are part of something extraordinarily precious, something far more important than any one of us. And it means all of us, whether judge, practitioner or Lord Chancellor are united by a common desire to serve, and leave the system of justice in our country stronger for our having been here. That is what you might call, my ‘overriding objective’.
Thank you for your attention. Let me close by offering a toast to our hosts – to the Lord Mayor and Lady Mayoress.
Thank you.