Category: Criminal Justice

  • Chris Philp – 2023 Speech on Police Stations

    Chris Philp – 2023 Speech on Police Stations

    The speech made by Chris Philp, the Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire, in the House of Commons on 10 July 2023.

    Let me start by congratulating my right hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers) on securing this important debate and for speaking with such passion and eloquence on this topic. I agree with her sentiments about how important police stations are for our constituencies and our local communities. I say that having visited Chorley police station just a few days ago, Mr Speaker.

    As my right hon. Friend said, police stations in our local communities are close to the people they serve. They help officers stay in touch with the local community and connected to it. Their ears and eyes are on the ground picking up information, and they can serve local residents. They are also visible and reassure the public that the police are close to where crimes may be committed. It shows that police are available and accessible, and they can often respond to crimes a lot more quickly if they are deploying from a police station close to the local community, rather than one miles and miles away. My right hon. Friend set out a whole number of reasons why police stations as a physical location are so important.

    In relation to police stations in London, I completely agree with my right hon. Friend that Mayor Sadiq Khan should look again at the closure plan he set out in 2017—I think it was for a total of 37 police stations—and reverse it. Some of those closures have happened already; others have not. He demonstrated with his rather opportunistic and cynical U-turn on Uxbridge just a few days ago that he could look at this issue again, and he should. We should keep in mind that decisions on opening and closing police stations are for police and crime commissioners—in London, that is Sadiq Khan—not for the Government. I join my right hon. Friend in calling on the Mayor to reconsider and reverse the swingeing cuts that he announced back in 2017.

    It is worth reminding ourselves as we make that call that plenty of resources are available. The Metropolitan police have the highest funding per capita of any police force in the country by some margin, and that is excluding the national and international capital city grant and the counter-terrorism money they receive. On a straightforward territorial policing basis, the Met gets more per capita than any other police force. It receives some £3.3 billion a year. That figure went up by £102 million this compared to last year.

    It is also worth reminding ourselves that the whole policing system across the country gets £17.2 billion a year, and the part of that spent by police and crime commissioners on local policing—the vast majority of it—went up by £550 million this year compared to last year. So the resources are there, and we expect police and crime commissioners to use them wisely—unlike Mayor Sadiq Khan, who is not doing so.

    This might be a good moment to congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West (Shaun Bailey), who is in the Chamber this evening. His tireless campaign has saved his local police station in Tipton from the planned cuts. I am sure the whole House will want to congratulate him on his successful campaign to overturn a decision originally announced by the police and crime commissioner in the west midlands.

    My right hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet made excellent points about why police stations are so important and why the Met’s decision should be reversed, one of which was about the extra police officers that we have recruited across England and Wales. Across the jurisdiction as a whole, we now have record police numbers—149,572 to be precise, which is 3,500 more than at any other time in the history of policing. The Metropolitan police also have record numbers—about 35,000 more than ever before—and, as she said, they need to be accommodated somewhere.

    It is worth mentioning that the Metropolitan police could have had even more officers—an extra 1,000 officers —if Mayor Sadiq Khan had used all the money that was available. It is a great shame and a great disappointment to me as a London MP, as I am sure it is to colleagues, that he failed to do so. I therefore completely endorse the points my right hon. Friend made about police stations in our community.

    There are some things that can be done to try to mitigate Sadiq Khan’s terrible police station closure plans. In my constituency of Croydon South, we have a fire station in Purley—there is no police station in my constituency—and following some work between the local police and the London Fire Brigade, we have managed to move local patrolling neighbourhood officers into the fire station. They now patrol from the fire station around the neighbouring area, which helps a little towards faster response times. It is also more convenient for officers, and they can share information with the firefighters based there. That is helpful, but it is not as good as having a police station.

    Given the lateness of the hour, I will conclude. I thank my right hon. Friend again for her tireless campaign to save Barnet police station. The Mayor of London has record levels of funding; I only wish that he would use that funding a little more wisely and reverse his shocking closure plans.

  • Theresa Villiers – 2023 Speech on Police Stations

    Theresa Villiers – 2023 Speech on Police Stations

    The speech made by Theresa Villiers, the Conservative MP for Chipping Barnet, in the House of Commons on 10 July 2023.

    The hour is late, but we still have an important issue to discuss this evening: police stations. In November 2017, the Mayor of London announced the closure of a substantial list of police stations around the capital, including Barnet police station. Ever since, I have been campaigning to save it. A key justification given for the Mayor’s decision was that the number of crimes reported at police station front counters has fallen. It is true that the way people report crimes has changed in recent years—it can, of course, now be done by phone or online—but being able to attend a police station front counter and talk to someone face to face is still an option valued by many, especially the elderly or those who may not be comfortable in the digital environment.

    Moreover, police stations perform other vital functions in addition to front counter services. Crucially, they are a place to locate officers, but they also provide facilities such as evidence and equipment storage, police vehicle parking, and custody suites and cells. As such, what is even more worrying than the loss of a front counter is the loss of the physical presence of the police in a particular locality. In the six years since Mayor Khan announced the closure of Barnet police station’s front counter, that police station building has thankfully remained in use by officers, both neighbourhood police and other teams.

    Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)

    Will the right hon. Lady give way?

    Theresa Villiers

    I will.

    Mr Speaker

    I thought you would at least allow the right hon. Member to get under way. I call Jim Shannon.

    Jim Shannon

    Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. The right hon. Lady is right to mention community policing—it is about not just the buildings, but the community officers and the contact with their local communities. She made a very helpful intervention in the debate on the Northern Ireland budget that referred to that issue. I echo her request to ensure that not only the buildings, but the community policing is there, because it is the eyes and ears of the community. It is about making policing better.

    Mr Speaker

    I am sure that the right hon. Member, if given time, would have got to that.

    Theresa Villiers

    I absolutely agree that community policing is vital. As I will explore in my speech, the presence of police stations is an important part of keeping policing close to communities. If we shut them down or retreat into a handful of buildings around the capital, we make it more difficult to deliver genuine community policing. Closing Barnet police station altogether and selling it off for redevelopment would leave officers with nowhere at all in my constituency from which to operate. That would be disastrous, not least because it could mean ward officers having to undertake long and complex journeys to and from the only remaining police station in the borough, which is in Colindale.

    At engagement meetings linked with the 2017 closure announcements, I remember City Hall representatives indicating that one of the reasons police stations were now less important was that officers would be given iPads for processing paperwork, which they could use anywhere. Frankly, it is wholly unrealistic to expect a police officer sitting in Starbucks with an iPad to be an adequate substitute for a functioning police station. Apart from the noted reliability problems with many such devices issued by the Metropolitan police, that approach would violate confidentiality and data protection obligations. There is also the concern that a number of the Met’s IT upgrade programmes have yet to be fully delivered, as highlighted in the Casey report. Moreover, officers would undoubtedly be approached by members of the public, making it harder for them to focus on the work they need to do. Their office time would inevitably become advice surgery time.

    In February last year, I secured a promise from Sophie Linden, the deputy mayor for policing, that Barnet police station’s building would not be disposed of until a base was found for ward police teams that enabled them to reach their areas in 20 minutes by walking or cycling. That was of course welcome, and it amounted to a partial reprieve for the station, but it is not an adequate substitute for a properly functioning police station.

    Mr Louie French (Old Bexley and Sidcup) (Con)

    On this point about the connection with communities, particularly in Greater London, does my right hon. Friend agree that the basic command unit model that the Mayor has adopted since 2018 is having a negative impact on the ability of police to connect with communities, but also to respond to crimes in a timely manner?

    Theresa Villiers

    I am very much aware of the concern felt in many parts of London about the tri-borough policing model, and I think it is important to review it.

    I turn back to the idea that new bases for police officers could be found. There is still real uncertainty about where these would be and what they would involve. The suggestion remains that a new base for police officers could be in a corner of a library or the backroom in a high street shop, but providing a base for police officers is not a straightforward matter. Officers have access to highly sensitive personal data, and they hold evidence from cases for which it is vital that they keep rigorous and reliable records of custody. Moreover, some police equipment is potentially harmful, such as tasers, and it would be dangerous if this kind of kit fell into the wrong hands. Special storage facilities would need to be built in new alternative accommodation. They could not just set up a few lockers in a local library. Flogging off existing police stations could end up being a false economy if multiple new premises for ward teams in different areas need to be bought and fitted up to replace them.

    I also want to highlight the sense of confidence that the presence of a police station gives people—a sense that would be entirely lost in the areas where police stations are currently under threat. For example, the East London Advertiser reported that people felt that police station closures in Tower Hamlets meant that the area felt less safe. Complete loss of the remaining police presence in Chipping Barnet town centre would inevitably leave my constituents feeling more insecure. Serious concerns have been reported to me about crime, thefts and antisocial behaviour in Barnet High Street, including what appears to have been a serious assault that took place recently outside McDonald’s. The sale of the police station and its complete closure would make it harder to grapple with the existing crime issues in the local area.

    These worrying local crime problems were discussed recently at a meeting I attended of the High Barnet police community action panel, under the chairmanship of my constituent Mahender Khari. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to him, and to everyone who chairs or takes part in police action panels in my constituency. They do a vital job. That includes Councillor Jennifer Grocock, who has done excellent and innovative work on making neighbourhood police teams more visible by involving them in Barnet Council’s community safety hubs, which were pioneered by the previous Conservative administration in Barnet.

    I am also worried about the impact of police station closures on the viability of our high streets. We all know that town centres have suffered in recent years for a range of reasons, particularly the big shift to online retail. It has become harder and harder to get footfall to high streets, and I fear that losing police stations could lead to a further hollowing out of our struggling town centres, adding to the list of vacant buildings.

    Richard Foord (Tiverton and Honiton) (LD)

    I thank the right hon. Member for her speech and for giving way. Last November, Devon and Cornwall police launched an online poll using SurveyMonkey, and invited the public in Devon and Cornwall to vote to reopen three front desks out of a list of 44. I was pleased to help promote that poll and to attend the reopening of Tiverton police station—and I hope to attend that of Honiton later this year—but does she think that we should not have to fill in SurveyMonkey polls to get to speak to a human being?

    Theresa Villiers

    The hon. Member makes the important point that much of what we are talking about is the ability of the police to maintain appropriate contacts with members of the public. That distance from members of the public is one of the problems that the Met is grappling with, and I think it is useful to hear his point of view about police stations and police services elsewhere in the country.

    During this difficult era for high streets, we should try to enhance the visible presence of public services, not scale it back. That is another good reason to maintain the police station estate, both in Barnet and in other towns and cities. In her report on the Met, Baroness Casey highlighted that station closures are likely to have affected efficiency, with police spending more time travelling, and longer police response times. Recent research by Elisa Facchetti, published by the Centre for Economic Policy Research, pointed to a correlation between reduction in police stations and poorer crime clear-up rates. That suggests that the capacity to collect the evidence needed to solve crimes might be impeded by police having to travel increased distances, although I acknowledge that many other variables could be relevant, and it is difficult to establish a clear causative link.

    Four important recent developments make this debate very timely, and mean that the Mayor of London should reverse his closure programme. First, the Government have delivered on the Conservative manifesto pledge to recruit 20,000 additional police officers. That means that the Met now has more uniformed officers than at any time in its history—and we need somewhere to put them. That radically changes the situation we faced in 2017, when the Mayor wielded the axe against Barnet police station and others.

    Secondly, Baroness Casey’s damning report on the Met cited the closure of 124 police stations as one of the reasons behind what she describes as “eroded frontline policing”. She concluded that the combined impact of various efficiency measures, including police station closures, had led to

    “a more dispersed and hands-off training experience for new recruits and existing personnel, which gives them less sense of belonging to the Met…greater distances for Response officers and Neighbourhood Policing teams to travel”,

    and

    “fewer points of accessible contact for the public”.

    At a time when culture and conduct at the Met have come under huge scrutiny, we should not persist in making disposals from the police station estate—disposals that are calculated to make officers less connected to one another, more isolated and more distant from the communities they serve.

    David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) (Con)

    My right hon. Friend is making a speech that will entirely resonate with my constituents. Does she agree that the Mayor’s U-turn on the closure of the Uxbridge police station, which serves my constituents, as well as those in Uxbridge and South Ruislip, demonstrates that the argument that there was simply no alternative but to press ahead with the closures no longer holds water? Does it give her a stirring of hope and optimism that other police stations, such as that in Northwood, already closed and disposed of by the Mayor, will be replaced with operational police stations, or that other stations closed by the Mayor will be reopened forthwith?

    Theresa Villiers

    I agree entirely. The Mayor’s U-turn on Uxbridge should be a lifeline for police stations across the capital. That is one of the reasons why I am delighted to have the opportunity to make this speech.

    I come to the third reason why the Mayor should change his approach. As part of the big changes that he is taking forward, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Mark Rowley, has asked his team to carry out a review of the list of police stations earmarked for closure and sell-off. I have made the case strongly for saving Barnet police station in a number of meetings with senior police officers, including Sir Mark. That includes at a meeting in May, at which Sir Mark acknowledged how important it is for the police to be close to the communities they serve. He also accepted that whether physical premises are retained or closed inevitably has an impact on whether officers can genuinely be close to the community.

    I understand that that is one of the reasons why the review, expected to report at the end of the summer, was set up. I sincerely hope that it provides a lifeline for Barnet police station and other communities experiencing the same closure threat. That includes Sidcup, Notting Hill and Wimbledon. My hon. Friends the Members for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French), for Kensington (Felicity Buchan) and for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond) have all fought hard for their local police station, as has my hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds).

    Until a few days ago, the places where police stations were in jeopardy and teetering on the brink of sale and redevelopment included Uxbridge. That brings me to my fourth and final point. Uxbridge was on the same closure list as Barnet in 2017. When the Mayor announced its shut-down, Conservative Hillingdon Council offered to buy the site at the market rate, and to provide a £500,000 revenue contribution and a leaseback arrangement, so that the community could keep its police station and the services it provides. At the time, the Mayor rejected this plan out of hand. Undeterred, Hillingdon Conservatives campaigned energetically to save their police station, led by Councillor Steve Tuckwell, the excellent Conservative candidate in the by-election.

    For years, those efforts fell on deaf ears at City Hall, and then there seemed to be a Damascene conversion. Suddenly, out of the blue, the Mayor announced that he had

    “written to the Met Commissioner saying that the case for now retaining more police station sites across the capital is strong”.

    He is yet to specify exactly which police stations may escape the axe he threatened them with six years ago, but this looks suspiciously like a by-election stunt to take credit for a plan to safeguard the police station put together by Hillingdon Council and Steve Tuckwell. It would be massively cynical if the Mayor’s U-turn were confined just to Uxbridge. I therefore take this opportunity once again to call on Mayor Khan to remove the threat to Barnet police station and confirm that its future is secure, along with other stations under threat around the capital.

    In conclusion, when the plan to close Barnet police station was first floated in 2013, I fought successfully to stop it. I saved our police station back then, and I am doing all I can to save it again. I have raised this issue in Parliament many times, including twice at Prime Minister’s questions. The online version of the petition for this issue, which I presented to Parliament last year, now has more than 1,600 signatures. I assure the House and my constituents in Chipping Barnet that I will continue to do all I can to resist the Mayor’s threat to our local police station so that my constituents are safer and more secure and can have the visible police presence in their local town centre that they rightly believe is so important.

  • Alex Chalk – 2023 Statement on Rape Review Action Plan and Operation Soteria

    Alex Chalk – 2023 Statement on Rape Review Action Plan and Operation Soteria

    The statement made by Alex Chalk, the Lord Chancellor and the Secretary of State for Justice, in the House of Commons on 10 July 2023.

    My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Suella Braverman) and I are pleased to announce that the Government are today publishing a progress report two years on from the publication of the end-to-end rape review action plan. This is the fourth six-monthly progress report on implementation, and demonstrates the Government’s ongoing commitment to be transparent and accountable to the public on our progress in delivering the ambitions of the Rape Review.

    The data in the report provides clear evidence of progress to drive up police referrals, charge rates, and Crown court receipts. We are making sustained progress towards the rape review’s ambition to return volumes of cases being referred to the police, charged by the Crown Prosecution Service, and going to court, to at least 2016 levels. It is well documented that the charge rate and volume of convictions for adult rape dropped drastically after 2016 due to a range of factors, not least a lack of join-up across the system, and the criminal justice system overcorrecting following a small number of high-profile disclosure failures. A return to 2016 levels is ambitious, marking a year where adult rape convictions were 30% higher than in 2010. The latest data shows that we have hit two of our ambitions already, and remain on track to hit the other:

    Adult rape cases referred by the police to the CPS—for either early advice or a charging decision—continue to increase, with 1,079 total police referrals in the fourth quarter of 2022, exceeding our ambition of 766 and up by 134% from the quarterly average in 2019, when the Rape Review was commissioned.

    Adult rape cases charged by the CPS have been increasing, with 472 suspects charged between October and December 2022, close to our ambition of 538 and up by 93% from the quarterly average in 2019.

    The number of adult rape Crown Court receipts continued to increase in the first quarter of 2023 with 605 Crown Court receipts, exceeding our ambition of 553. It is also up by 162% from the quarterly average in 2019.

    And despite the barristers’ strike impacting court action in 2022, adult rape prosecutions continue to rise, up 44% in the last calendar year, almost double what was achieved during 2019, and higher than the volume achieved in 2010.

    Key achievements over the last six months include:

    Introducing the landmark Victims and Prisoners Bill to Parliament in March, bringing forward measures to better serve victims and the public.

    Legislating through the Victims and Prisoners Bill to ensure requests for third party material, such as therapy notes, or medical, educational and social service records are necessary and proportionate.

    Recruiting 20,000 additional police officers, having brought in a net increase of 20,951 officers across England and Wales since the launch of the recruitment campaign in 2019, ensuring the police have the resources available to dedicate capacity to priority issues such as rape.

    A second round of Government funded procurement—with a value of £4.2 million—of technical capability to retrieve digital evidence—when it is the least intrusive means to do so—from mobile phones at a time and place convenient to the victim has been completed and is being deployed to forces.

    The Law Commission publishing its consultation into the use of evidence in trials involving sexual offences.

    Today we are also announcing that through the specialist sexual violence support project, we will ensure that any adult rape victim at Newcastle, Leeds or Snaresbrook Crown court who needs it has the option to remotely observe the sentencing hearing for their case, through video link, subject to judicial agreement. This will give victims the opportunity to see justice done without the distressing experience of attending court alongside the defendant’s family or supporters. This builds on other work to improve the victim experience at court, including legislation to permit the remote observation of sentencing hearings and allowing victims to pre-record their evidence and spare them the trauma of attending court in person.

    Operation Soteria is an ambitious joint Home Office and CPS programme to transform the way that rape investigations and prosecutions are handled and progressed, with a focus on investigating the suspect rather than the victim. Through close collaboration between frontline policing, prosecutors and academics, the programme has developed new national operating models for the investigation and prosecution of rape and serious sexual offences. All police forces in England and Wales have committed to implement this new approach and will be supported to do so by the Home Office, the College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council, who are establishing a joint unit to oversee implementation and monitor progress. In addition, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue has been commissioned to conduct a thematic inspection on forces’ implementation of the model.

    While strong progress has been made, we made clear in our last progress report that the rape review action plan is a start and must remain dynamic and continue responding to the challenges that victims face. We recognise there is still more to do, which is why we are setting out our action plan until December 2024, ensuring we continue to deliver improvements to the criminal justice system’s response to rape.

    These publications form part of the Government’s ambition to ensure access to justice, improve the experience of victims and make our society safer for everyone.

  • Alex Chalk – 2023 Lord Chancellor Swearing-in Speech

    Alex Chalk – 2023 Lord Chancellor Swearing-in Speech

    The speech made by Alex Chalk, the Lord Chancellor, at the Royal Courts of Justice in London on 25 May 2023.

    My lords.

    Thank you to the Lord Chief Justice for that welcome.

    It’s more than I deserve – and it’s more than I’m used to frankly…

    You mentioned my Lord the number of Lord Chancellors. You’ll be aware of course that between 1678 and 1689 there were seven Lord Chief Justices. So we all have our rough patches.

    My Lord, there will be more to say in due course as your retirement draws closer, about your extraordinary career and contribution to the law. For now I hope it can simply be noted that you are held in the highest regard across the House of Commons, including by the Justice Select Committee.

    Members of all political parties would wish me to thank you for your many years of service to the law and latterly to the courts and tribunals. Parliament wishes you well for the next chapter, wherever it may take you.

    It is the greatest pleasure to see so many friends and distinguished colleagues from the Bar here today. Those that have led me, those that I’ve led. I do hope that you were intending to come to this swearing-in and you’ve not stumbled into Court 4 by mistake.

    I always knew my colleagues at the Bar were brilliant lawyers and advocates, literally some of the finest this country has produced. What I hadn’t quite appreciated before I entered Parliament is that they were such expert political pundits too. Over recent years I have been pleased to receive regular political insights from colleagues via text message – although some have included Anglo-Saxon words that I don’t understand…

    Let me put on record my particular thanks to my pupil supervisors from 6 Pump Court where I first became a tenant and 6KBW College Hill (I had to resign my tenancy and undergo a second pupillage, all very complicated…) I want to thank them for instilling in me as a junior barrister the core principles that underpin our legal tradition: in particular that abiding priority of fairness.

    From the very start of my career I did more prosecuting than defending, and I well understood from my very first appearance for the Crown that prosecutors are bound to act as ministers of justice, with an overriding duty to preserve and promote the overall fairness of the proceedings – not simply to win at all costs. But before anyone misunderstands me, and any of our friends in the media present today, let me stress that fair prosecutors are very often the most deadly – and I’m looking at some of them now.

    I remember leading a young barrister from 6KBW in the prosecution of three councillors for election fraud. We were prosecuting, but I couldn’t attend for the cross-examination of D3 as I had an appeal listed in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division. When I came back, I listened to the tape. Once I’d got over the grim realisation that it was considerably more skilful than my cross-examinations of D1 and D2, I was able to appreciate it for what it was – calm, courteous, scrupulously fair…and utterly devastating. All in the finest traditions of the English & Welsh Bar.

    Now, the appeal hearing that kept me away that day took place in this very courtroom.

    I experienced then as I waited for the hearing to be called on that tingle of apprehension that I always did whenever I had to appear in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division. It is a tingle rooted in respect. Respect for the quality of this tribunal; respect for the ruthlessly searching analysis that every advocate knows is to come.

    Candidly, it’s partly too because I lost rather more often than I won in this court. Over time I became increasingly skilled at detecting my doom before it was confirmed. In the case of Soe Thet my spirits lifted as I heard Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers open his ruling to note that I had “argued a difficult case with admirable clarity and eloquence”… before finding against me on every single point. I soon learnt that compliments tend to spell catastrophe.

    But more importantly, a message sunk in about the true meaning of some of the aphorisms that get bandied around – the rule of law, access to justice, independence of the judiciary.

    Because when you appear in this court you soon realise that these aren’t quaint, airy notions to pay lip-service to – but the essential building blocks of a safe, fair and prosperous society.

    What access to justice and independence of the judiciary mean in practice is this: as you walk out of this court having lost, you know deep down that despite your disappointment you have been heard by judges of enormous intellect and unimpeachable integrity. And you have had a full and fair hearing.

    It is difficult to overstate how precious that is.

    And so, as I sit here as your Lord Chancellor with responsibility for our justice system, I am aware of the responsibility I hold. It’s like carrying a Ming vase – ancient, priceless… but also fragile – and doing so whilst walking across a polished floor.

    It would be easy to feel overawed. After all, I’m following in a line that includes some greats (Sir Francis Bacon and Ken, now Baron, Clarke spring to mind).

    But it’s quietly reassuring that there are some absolute howlers in that list.

    Richard Rich who was Lord Chancellor under Edward VI is remembered for being immoral, dishonest, a perjurer and a man “of whom nobody has spoken a good word.”

    I hope I can modestly improve on that.

    So what will this Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State prioritise?

    As the Prime Minister has made clear, this Government will act to protect the public. That includes, of course, working to expand capacity in our justice system.

    We will redouble our efforts, working with the independent judiciary, to manage and reduce the court and tribunal caseload, speeding up access to justice for litigants and victims. In doing so, we will continue to tackle violence against women and girls. Prosecutions for adult rape continue to rise remarkably following some very hard work by counsel, prosecutors, court staff and others; charges are up over 90% percent compared to the quarterly average in 2019 pre-Covid.

    Second, we will progress the Victims and Prisoners Bill, with its emphasis on ensuring entitlements contained within the Victims Code 2020 are promoted and secured.

    Third, we will play our part in operationalising any immigration legislation that Parliament is minded to enact. We will do so whilst being careful to provide individuals with the due process which is the hallmark of our legal system. The rule of law requires that illegality has consequences, but it also requires that individuals have the proper opportunity to make representations in their own cause.

    Fourth, I will work to promote access to justice. As a parliamentary under-secretary of State, I devised a concept called ELSA – Early Legal Support and Advice – and I will be seeking out opportunities to drive that agenda forward. It is access to justice that empowers individuals, strengthens society and bolsters the rule of law.

    I take very seriously the oath that I have sworn today.

    I swear it as someone who sees this very much as a destination job, whatever Quentin Letts might say. That’s important because I believe that occupiers of this sensitive position in our constitution shouldn’t be looking over the political horizon. Nor indeed, should they be looking over their shoulder.

    And, as your Lord Chancellor, I will do everything I can to uphold the judiciary’s hard-won reputation for excellence, integrity and independence.

    But this role is not all about interactions with the judiciary, important though those are. I am responsible for over 90,000 prison officers, probation officers, HMCTS staff, LAA staff and others. And I want to say a few words to them.

    First I want to thank you for what you delivered during the pandemic. You are the ones who ensured that neither our courts nor our tribunals ever closed completely. Thanks to you vulnerable litigants were able to access justice and get the orders they needed to keep them safe. Thanks to you, ours was one of the first – if not the first – jurisdiction to resume jury trials. (We believe in jury trials by the way, even if others seem to be having a bit of a wobble…)

    But perhaps above all that, I want to note the quiet miracle that you delivered in our prisons. Many have already forgotten that at the start of the pandemic, Public Health England and Public Health Wales predicted around 3,000 deaths in custody. In the event the total was less than 300. Every one remains a tragedy for the individual and families involved, but the fact is that there are thousands of people alive today who would not have been if prison officers had not done their duty and come to work – when no doubt concerned family members were begging them not to. The same is true for probation officers who worked hard to manage risk in the community.

    So let me conclude with this.

    One of my predecessors, Francis Bacon, observed that, “if we do not maintain justice, justice will not maintain us.”

    Let us turn to the task ahead. I as Lord Chancellor will do my duty. And I know that all of us, whatever part we play, will join today in committing to maintaining that justice, endeavouring to leave the rule of law in our country stronger for our having been here.

    Those are my submissions.

  • Metropolitan Police – 2023 Statement on Bacari-Bronze O’Garro

    Metropolitan Police – 2023 Statement on Bacari-Bronze O’Garro

    The statement made by the Metropolitan Police on 24 May 2023.

    Understandably there has been extensive comment on this case in the media and on social media.

    Now that an individual has been charged, I would ask that the judicial process be respected and allowed to take its proper course.

  • Chris Philp – 2023 Statement on Policing the Coronation Protests

    Chris Philp – 2023 Statement on Policing the Coronation Protests

    The statement made by Chris Philp, the Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire, in the House of Commons on 9 May 2023.

    The coronation was a once-in-a-generation moment, a moment of national pride and a moment when the eyes of the world were upon us. It was a ceremony with roots over a millennium old, marking a renewed dedication to service by His Majesty the King in this new reign. The coronation went smoothly and without disruption. I thank the 11,500 police officers who were on duty alongside 6,500 military personnel and many civilians.

    Today, Commissioner Mark Rowley has outlined the intelligence picture in the hours leading up to the coronation. It included more than one plot to cause severe disruption by placing activated rape alarms in the path of horses to induce a stampede and a separate plot to douse participants in the procession with paint. That was the context: a once in a generation national moment facing specific intelligence threats about multiple, well-organised plots to disrupt it. The focus of the police was, rightly, on ensuring that the momentous occasion passed safely and without major disruption. That was successful. All plots to disrupt the coronation were foiled by a combination of intelligence work and proactive vigilant policing on the ground. I would like to thank the police and congratulate them on that success.

    At the same time, extensive—[Interruption.] Wait for it. At the same time, extensive planning ensured that protests could take place. That was also successful. Hundreds of protesters exercised their right to peaceful protest, including a large group numbering in the hundreds in and around Trafalgar Square. Where the police reasonably believed they had grounds for arrest, they acted. The latest information is that 64 arrests were made. I will not comment on individual cases or specific decisions, but the arrests included a person wanted for sexual offences, people equipped to commit criminal damage with large quantities of paint, and arrests on suspicion of conspiracy to cause public nuisance, often backed by intelligence. The Met’s update last night included regret—to use its word—that six people arrested could not join the hundreds protesting in Trafalgar Square and nearby. The Met confirmed that those six people have now had their bail cancelled with no further action.

    The police are operationally independent and it is primarily for the Mayor of London to hold the Met to account, but let us be clear: at the weekend officers had to make difficult judgments in fast time, in a highly pressured situation against a threatening intelligence picture. I thank the police for doing that, for delivering a successful a coronation and for enabling safe, peaceful protests.

  • Suella Braverman – 2023 Speech at the Public Safety Foundation [redacted version]

    Suella Braverman – 2023 Speech at the Public Safety Foundation [redacted version]

    The speech made by Suella Braverman, the Home Secretary, on 26 April 2023. This is the redacted version issued by the Government press release which has removed political content. We asked the office of Suella Braverman for the complete text, but they didn’t respond.

    Thank you, Rory for that introduction. You know better than most, from your own experience on the beat, the realities that our brave police officers face when going up against violent thugs and other criminals, and the damage that crime can do to people and communities.

    And that’s why it’s wonderful to be here welcoming the launch of The Public Safety Foundation, an organisation committed to making the UK the safest place to live, work, and raise a family.

    This really is the perfect forum for setting out my ethos for common sense policing.

    Everything that our police officers do should be about fighting crime, catching criminals, and keeping the public safe.

    My mantra at the Home Office is simple: common sense policing.

    Common sense policing means more police on our streets.

    It means better police culture and higher standards.

    It means giving the public confidence that the police are unequivocally on their side, not pandering to politically correct preoccupations.

    It means measuring the police on outputs such as public response times, crimes solved, and criminals captured.

    It means police officers freed up to spend their time on proper police work.

    It means police prioritising the highest harm crimes and those that matter most to the public.

    It means the police making use of powers like stop and search that have proven effective in taking weapons off our streets.

    And above all else, common sense policing means officers maintaining a relentless focus on fighting crime, catching criminals, and keeping the public safe.

    I am going to speak to each of these themes in turn today.

    Firstly, the public wants to see more bobbies on the beat and so do I.

    It is central to common sense policing.

    Everyone who has been part of the government’s Police Uplift Programme should be immensely proud of what we’ve achieved in the last few years.

    […]

    We’ve delivered an additional 20,951 officers into policing over the past three years.

    There are now almost 150,000 police officers across England and Wales. The highest number ever.

    24 forces now have more police officers than they ever had before the programme.

    I am extremely grateful to police chiefs for leading this drive.

    And to those men and women who have signed up: you are now part of a policing family epitomised by bravery, and dedicated to public service and safety.

    As part of the new generation of policing, you will help to raise standards, refocus priorities, and maintain our world-leading place in policing.

    Policing must remain open to the best and the bravest – whether or not they have a degree. And common sense policing means encouraging the recruitment of officers that come from and live in the communities they serve, familiar with local challenges, and familiar to local people.

    That’s why I have widened the pool from which we can recruit, by enabling non-degree holders to be part of policing. It’s not about how many exams you sit or essays you can write – important skills though those are. It’s about common sense, problem-solving, strength- of character and strength of physique.

    20,000 officers is not just a statistic in a press release.

    The uplift is already delivering improved outcomes for policing and the communities they serve.

    All forces now have a named officer and contact information on their websites, meaning our commitment to greater local accountability as set out in the Beating Crime Plan.

    More police, means more flexibility for forces to do what makes sense locally, which goes to the very heart of common sense policing.

    A Police and Crime Commissioner recently explained how the uplift is making a difference in their patch: They said: “Additional officers have been deployed into our more rural communities, which allows response times to lessen and takes pressure off urban-based officers from covering a wider area allowing them to focus on localised crime.”

    In one force, much of uplift has been reinvested in to tackling rape, with the creation of an additional 119 roles.

    Another force has used the uplift to double the size of its knife crime team, boosting its capacity to seize dangerous weapons and keep people safe.

    Recruiting officers is crucial to getting more bobbies on the beat. But retention of existing officers is similarly important.

    Every force must focus on retaining the essential skills and experience of existing officers.

    We are driving forward work to support this, whether that’s through the College of Policing’s Leadership Centre, the NPCC’s Productivity Review, or introducing a statutory Police Covenant, which is already delivering tangible benefits for the police.

    For the first time, new officers are given pre-deployment mental health training to ensure they are able to manage the rigors of frontline policing.

    And welfare standards covering the entire workforce are now assessed as part of the regular force inspection programme.

    It is also vital that policing can offer a pathway back for those who do leave, to ensure that experience doesn’t only ever leave the building.

    Whilst many forces have deployed rejoiner schemes at entry level, I am not convinced that all forces are doing enough to encourage more senior people back into policing.

    There is scope to expand these schemes to focus on key skills gaps using the standards and guidance developed by the College of Policing.

    […]

    This is a great success story. But what will really count is what an expanded police force – this new generation of policing – does next.

    More policing is necessary but not sufficient. Common sense policing must also mean higher standards, better culture, and more effective policing.

    Baroness Casey’s review into the Metropolitan Police makes for harrowing reading.

    As I said in the House of Commons, there have been serious failures of culture and leadership.

    I have the utmost confidence in the Met’s new leadership team. Sir Mark Rowley is right to make the restoration of public confidence in policing his top priority and I will give him every support as he pursues his turnaround plan.

    But I also expect those with direct political accountability for forces – PCC’s in general, and with respect to the Met, the Mayor of London in particular – to properly exercise their oversight functions.

    Baroness Casey’s review will inform the work of Lady Elish Angiolini’s inquiry which will look at broader issues of policing standards and culture.

    Steps have already been taken to ensure that forces tackle weaknesses in their vetting systems. I am currently reviewing the police dismissals process to speed up the removal of those officers who fall short of the high standards expected of them.

    That review is also looking at simplifying the process for dealing with poor performance and ensuring that the system is effective at enabling an officer who fails vetting checks in service to be removed.

    The law-abiding public must be able to know that they can trust any officer they see. Those who are not fit to wear the badge must never do so, and where they are exposed, they must face justice and be driven out of the force.

    I have seen examples of strong leadership transforming police forces up and down the country. So, I’m confident that policing can and will step up.

    Changing the culture doesn’t just mean addressing the sorts of issues that Baroness Casey identified and raising professional standards to the level that the public rightly expect. That is a pre-requisite.

    A common sense culture in policing must also mean that policing understands and reflects public expectations about the police’s proper focus and function.

    For too long, too many in authority have indulged a narrative that crime, rather than being a destructive option chosen by a criminal minority, is an illness to be treated.

    This narrative seeks to diminish individual responsibility and culpability by holding that criminals are themselves victims.

    This modern emphasis on the needs of delinquents, thugs and criminals, however cruel their intentions or damaging their behaviour may be, displaces the old fashioned and just retributive consideration of the criminal events themselves, and of the effect they have on the genuine victims.

    People want their government and their police to be unequivocally on the side of the victims, rather than making excuses for, or distracted by efforts to redeem the perpetrators.

    It’s something I hear a lot. On my travels around the country. On the doorstep. People everywhere tell me they want common sense, good old fashioned criminal justice.

    They want the police to turn up quickly when they’re called.

    They want to know that when a crime is reported it will be properly investigated – and, so I’m glad that all domestic burglaries now receive a police response, as I called for last autumn.

    They want hope that the police might even catch the crooks.

    And they want confidence that when someone is arrested, if they are found guilty, they will be appropriately punished.

    Because without risk of capture or of punishment, without an appropriate cost to those breaking the law, criminals will take advantage.

    That sense of mission must be reflected in police priorities if the police are to retain public confidence.

    Sometimes the police simply need to make better arguments. Most people recognise that smartphone clips of a contested incident circulating on social media only ever tell a fraction of the story. Where appropriate, forces should do more to share body worn video footage. It is vital to public confidence that the police can quickly demonstrate the legitimacy of action to counter spurious claims and trial by social media that may otherwise follow and allow dangerous narratives to take hold.

    Maintaining public confidence, also requires that the police be seen as politically impartial, and unequivocally on the side of the law-abiding majority.

    When police officers stood by as a statue was torn down; when the police were pictured handing cups of tea to protestors engaged in blocking a road; or when police chiefs spend taxpayers’ money that could have been spent fighting crime, on diversity training that promotes contested ideology like critical race theory; the reputation of policing as an institution, is damaged in the eyes of the public.

    Some forces have ‘equality’ teams that have completely abandoned impartiality in favour of taking partisan positions – sometimes even engaging in political argument on Twitter.

    Now I believe in the police. But the policing in which I believe isn’t riven with political correctness, but enshrined in good old-fashioned common sense.

    The perception – however unjustified or unrepresentative – that some police are more interested in virtue signalling, or in protecting the interests of a radical minority engaged in criminality, than they are protecting the rights of the law-abiding majority – is utterly corrosive to public confidence in policing. The police must be more sensitive to this and work harder to counter it.

    If police chiefs approached instilling a culture of political impartiality, with the same dedication which they approach instilling a culture of diversity and inclusion, I have no doubt that public confidence in policing would be materially improved.

    More police, and better police culture, is essential. But positive effects are blunted if the police are not free to properly focus on policing.

    That is why, over the last 6 months, I have led a broad programme of common sense policing reforms to reduce unnecessary and inappropriate burdens on police time.

    Chief amongst those burdens is the amount of time police spend responding to mental health call outs. I am frequently told about officers waiting 10-20 hours with patients who need medical attention. This is an unacceptable use of police time.

    We want frontline officers to be able to focus on fighting crime, and the work they are trained to do. Police officers are not mental health specialists, and the best place for people suffering a mental health crisis is a healthcare setting.

    This includes developing a National Partnership Agreement to ensure health calls are responded to by the most appropriate agency.

    The ‘Right Care Right Person’ approach sets out a threshold to assist police decision-making on responding to incidents. It is founded on the understanding that police should only be responding to health and social care incidents where there is an immediate risk of serious harm or criminality.

    A toolkit to assist forces in their implementation of the Right Care Right Person will be rolled out in the coming months, and guidance for the health sector is also being prepared.

    Whether it’s saving an estimated 400,000 police hours a year by reforming the Home Office Counting Rules (reducing them from 350 pages to almost 50 pages); or reforming the redaction process so officers spend less time stuck behind a computer screen; we are doing all that we can to support forces to ensure their officers spend as much time as possible on the beat.

    But it’s not enough merely to free up more police resource. Common sense policing means acknowledging that police resource is necessarily finite, and that it must therefore be deployed on the things that matter most to the public.

    It’s with this sentiment in mind that I recently introduced a new code of practice on non-crime hate incidents.

    Taking action for hurt feelings is not the job of our police.

    Curbing freedom of expression is not the job of our police.

    Enforcing non-existent blasphemy laws is not the job of our police.

    The new code makes clear that personal data should only be recorded if there is a real risk of significant harm and stresses the importance of giving proper weight to freedom of expression.

    The public want to see the police focussed on the highest harm crimes and those that are priorities to address in their communities.

    They want to see the police tackling violence against women and girls – a key priority to which we’ve committed nearly a quarter of a billion pounds in Home Office and wider government funding through 2025.

    They want to see the police focused on tackling child sexual exploitation which is why we launched a new Grooming Gangs Task Force, introduced mandatory reporting, and will be announcing further measures when responding to the recommendations of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, next month.

    They want to see police cracking down on drugs and associated criminality. I’m proud to say that together with the police, we have done considerable damage to county lines gangs, seizing record amounts of drugs, making 20,000 arrests for drug related offences and disabling 1,600 organised crime gangs since 2021.

    They want to see the police tackling knife crime which is why I’m doubling down on stop and search and launching a public consultation on banning machetes and other large knives that should have no place on our streets but are readily available online.

    They want to see the police treating antisocial behaviour as a priority crime which is why we’ve just published a bold and ambitious action plan to address this blight on communities.

    And they want to see that the police are on their side when it comes to addressing highly disruptive protests which is why we strengthened police powers in this area. This has already supported the arrest of over 750 individuals by the Metropolitan Police alone since October 2022.

    By contrast, the public do not want to see the police turning up to residential addresses to police bad jokes on Twitter.

    And when it comes to delivering on the public’s priorities, common sense policing calls for the use of the most effective tools available, without regard to political correctness.

    Stop and search is a perfect example. It is a critical tool which I, and this government, fully support the police using to keep our streets safe.

    I’m proud to say that under this government, it has never been easier for the police to make legitimate use of stop and search powers.

    Stop and search has helped remove over 40,000 weapons from our streets and led to over 220,000 arrests since 2019.

    Stop and search acts as a deterrent by preventing offenders from carrying weapons in the first place.

    And Serious Violence Reduction Orders, currently being piloted in four police force areas, will provide the police with enhanced powers to stop and search adults already convicted of knife or offensive weapons offences – reducing violence and crucially saving lives.

    Common sense policing requires the police to use all available powers, without fear or favour, to keep the public safe and stop the misery caused by violence and drugs.

    That is why I intend to write to police chiefs in the coming days, to reiterate the importance of stop and search and the government’s full support for the police’s appropriate use of it.

    […]

    Domestic burglary and robbery are around half the level they were in 2010.

    Violence and vehicle theft are around 40% lower than in 2010.

    And fewer people are dying from drug and alcohol related deaths compared to 2010.

    But I also see policing at a turning point. With devastating events like the murder of Sarah Everard, forces in special measures, and the problems highlighted in the Casey report, we must all work towards rebuilding public trust and refocusing on the public’s priorities.

    Common sense policing is the way we will do that.

    More police on our streets.

    Better police culture.

    Higher standards.

    More effective policing.

    Focused on the public’s priorities.

    Making use of all appropriate powers.

    Pursuing good old fashioned criminal justice rather than social justice.

    Relentlessly focussed on fighting crime, catching criminals, and keeping the public safe.

    That is the policing that the decent, hard working, law-abiding majority, up and down this country, can get behind and have confidence in.

    Common sense policing we can all be proud of.

    Thank you.

  • Dominic Raab – 2023 Statement on Family Law – Dispute Resolution and Mediation

    Dominic Raab – 2023 Statement on Family Law – Dispute Resolution and Mediation

    The statement made by Dominic Raab, the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, in the House of Commons on 23 March 2023.

    Today the Government are launching a consultation that will inform proposals to support more families, in appropriate cases, to agree their children and financial arrangements without court involvement.

    Family courts are under unprecedented pressure. In recent years, more families than ever before are applying to the court to resolve their disputes about children and financial matters, and once at court their cases are taking longer to be resolved. We believe that many of these disputes can be successfully resolved outside of court, and that in supporting this we can spare families, and especially children, the anguish of protracted litigation. Resolving more disputes outside of court will also help enable the courts to focus available resource on the cases that need to be there, including where domestic abuse is evidenced or there are urgent issues, and ensure these are resolved swiftly. This will help us to deliver on the levelling-up agenda by ensuring we improve the experience of parents across the country, including the most deprived areas.

    Key proposals in the consultation include:

    Supporting parents to resolve their children and financial arrangements without court involvement:

    We propose to strengthen access to resources and guidance for parents/carers and separating couples, and seek views on requiring parents/carers, in appropriate cases, to attend a co-parenting programme alongside mediation to help them better understand their family’s options.

    Resolving private family law arrangements through mediation:

    We propose to introduce a requirement, in appropriate cases, to make a reasonable attempt to mediate before applying to court. We are seeking views on how this could operate, and the circumstances that should make an individual or family exempt from the requirement. We propose that Government would fund the cost of this mediation for child arrangement cases and seek views on the funding of mediation for finance cases.

    Accountability and costs in court proceedings:

    We are also consulting on how costs orders could be used by the family courts to enforce requirements to mediate and discourage unnecessary prolonging of court proceedings.

    The consultation also seeks views on the impact these proposals may have on the mediation sector, and the role of other forms of dispute resolution in family cases.

    We want to hear from a range of people with experience of the private family law system, including families with experience of family courts, the organisations that work to support them, and the professionals who work within the system sector. We will be holding a number of stake- holder engagement events to ensure we receive detailed responses from a wide range of people and organisations.

    The consultation is available at: https://consult.justice.gov.uk/

    The consultation closes on 15 June 2023.

  • Chris Philp – 2023 Speech on Reducing Unnecessary Red Tape

    Chris Philp – 2023 Speech on Reducing Unnecessary Red Tape

    The speech made by Chris Philp, the Minister for Crime and Policing, on 13 April 2023.

    Good morning everyone.

    Thank you for attending today. It’s a great pleasure to see everyone here. Let me start by saying a huge thank you to everyone in policing, those here with us today and frontline officers up and down the country for the work they do on the daily basis to keep us and our families safe.

    We rely on the police to protect us, support us, to enforce our laws and help secure justice when those laws are broken.

    Officers place themselves in the way of danger to discharge their duties. The work they do is extremely important. Without it the foundation of our society would crumble. We owe thanks to the men and women up and down the country devoted to their mission of fighting crime and keeping their communities safe.

    And speaking of numbers, we’re going to have an announcement I think in a couple of weeks on the 26th of April, getting the results of the Police Uplift Programme – the plan to hire an extra 20,000 officers. While we don’t have the final figures yet, I am fairly confident when those figures are announced, we’ll have more police officers in England and Wales than we have at any time in our country’s history.

    And that is something only we can be enormously proud of. All of us that have worked on that mission together, I think can be enormously proud of as well, so keep 26th April marked in your diaries. That will be a huge announcement for policing and the law enforcement community. I know the Prime Minister and Home Secretary will be doing lots of work around the announcement but keep an eye out because it’ll be fantastic culmination of what’s been an incredible programme between the Home Office and policing.

    Now policing in a job like no other. Difficult, often dangerous, always pressurised. The work matters.

    One minute officers could be racing to the scene of an emergency, the next visiting a victim of burglary. One of the great privileges of my role as policing minister is seeing first-hand the incredible work they do. As Gavin [Chief Constable Gavin Stephens] said in his opening comments, fantastic officers across the country go above and beyond the call of duty. Who run towards danger when others run away, who give everything to help others.

    My respect and admiration for these officers is unlimited.

    I also want to see those same officers use their time on the things they are good at and trained for, and indeed the things they want to do. Protecting the public, supporting victims and preventing crime.

    First of all, as Policing Minister I want to make sure we clear away any obstacles that get in the way of police officers focusing on the things that matter to them and to our communities, which means cutting down on red tape which so often gets in the way of real police work.

    Whatever their values, police officers are driven by a desire to protect the public and catch criminals. But they can’t do that if they are spending hours putting excessive information into computers. We have processes to ensure proper records are kept. But those can’t go too far, and I’ll say a little more about our plans in a moment.

    Secondly, I’m also clear the police should not be a stopgap for other agencies. Police officers are of course often first responders, problem solvers and investigators, but they are not for example, mental health specialists. In my view the police should not be expected to fill in for other emergency services where there is no risk to life or safety and where no criminal offence has been committed.

    I want to talk about the plans we have to reform the way mental health cases are handled to ensure policing spend time protecting the public, not on work better done by other agencies.

    I would like to take this opportunity to thank Alan Pughsley, former Chief Constable of Kent, who is leading piece of work on police productivity. The counting rules I will talk about, the mental health work is part of this, but there is more to come.

    I’d like to thank Alan for this work to ensure the police will spend as much of their time as possible fighting crime and catching criminals affecting the public, not on other activity that is bureaucratic or a distraction. So, Alan thank you for your work leading on that area.

    Now let me start substantively talking about the Home Office counting rules. This is an area of the criminal justice system, outside policing, not many people are familiar with, but they are rules which specify what the police have to record in detail as criminal offences.

    Now clearly, it’s vital that accurate records are kept, but concerns have been brought to me as policing minister over the last few months that the rules developed over time have become excessively bureaucratic and compel the police to record the same reports of crime under multiple records, creating huge amounts of data entry duplication, which is preventing them being on the streets looking after the public where they belong.

    Chris Rowley, the Chief Constable of Lancashire very kindly agreed, well I assume he agreed rather than being compelled, to look into this and provide a series of recommendations. Chris came up with these recommendations a few weeks ago and we have accepted in full and this morning we are formally announcing that.

    One of his recommendations is that we cease the requirement for police to create separate crime records when there is more than one crime in a particular report or account that a victim has passed to the police.

    All of those other crimes will still get recorded on the incident record so we can prosecute and investigate them. We don’t really need to create multiple criminal records when there is only one report or incident. So, we’re going to revert the principal crime rule for all crime which was the case until relatively recently in 2017. We are also removing the requirement to record minor public order offences where no victim has been identified or when the police turn up, there is nothing to see.

    Of course, that will still be recorded as an incident, and used for intelligence purposes, but creating a whole new crime record where this is no victim and nothing when the police turn up is taking up a lot of time which could be better spent catching criminals.

    We are also making clear frivolous allegations of criminal offences should not be recorded as a criminal offence unless a criminal threshold has clearly been met. We don’t think being rude or insulting is a police matter. Officers are not the thought police. And where something is reported and it doesn’t meet that clear criminal threshold, we don’t want that being investigated or to be recorded as a crime, we don’t want to waste police time on that kind of thing. We will very shortly be publishing guidance clarifying where that threshold should sit.

    So, what’s the impact of the changes I have described? What is the impact on policing? Well, the NPCC, the National Police Chiefs Council, have done some sums on this, and they have calculated that making the changes I have described will save 443,000 hours of police time each year. Almost half a million hours of police time. Instead of being spent filling in forms and bureaucracy, they will be spent catching criminals and supporting victims.

    This is an enormous impact the public and policing will welcome. I want to see these changes implemented as soon as possible. Nothing annoys me more than government processes taking months and months or years and years. So, I have pressed colleagues to get this done fast. We should actually be able to get these changes rolled out next month. The changes I have described will take practical effect just a few weeks from today.

    We’re not going to stop there. I would like to go further and there will be a second phase to the work on counting rules which I hope Chris is willing to continue working on. We will look at various other things like the National Standards for Incident Recording for example and the way that the outcomes of investigations are recorded. I think currently there is 20 or 30 ways the outcomes of investigations are recorded. So, we are going to see if we can go further and lift the burden off the shoulders of policing, because we want to see police chasing criminals, not paperwork.

    So, Chris, Alan, thank you again for the work you’re doing on this over the last few months. As a return on a few months’ work, saving half a million hours of police time, every year, forever, is a pretty good return on investment.

    So, Chris I want to say thank you very much for everything you have done.

    Now secondly one of the other areas brought to my attention shortly after being appointed Policing Minister a few months ago was the demand mental health places on police time. This was raised by people from Mark Rowley of the Met to frontline emergency response officers in Croydon, which is the borough I represent in Parliament.

    Everyone was raising this as a concern. The concern was cases that were basically medical, a mental health crisis, where there was no threat to life or safety, either to the individual themselves or the public more widely, were getting passed to policing, rather than being dealt with as a medical or social services incident and taking up a huge amount of police time.

    Turns out there has been some fantastic work done on this in Humberside to define more appropriately who deals with what incident, which also benefits the individual. If someone is having a mental health crisis, it’s not really that helpful to have a police officer turn up without medical support.

    In Humberside, led by Chief Constable Lee Freeman – who I initially just discovered was initiated by Chris when he was Chief Constable beforehand. It’s called “Right Care Right Person”.

    Humberside Police estimated that just in their force area alone, it’s saving something like 15,000 hours a year, just in Humberside, which is actually a small police force.

    They have done this in partnership with the local NHS, the local ambulance trust and local authorities.

    The concept here is we will apply nationally across the whole country via a National Partnership Agreement.

    My colleagues at DHSC, the ministers over there, have embraced this concept enthusiastically which is good news and we are hoping the National Partnership Agreement between policing, the Home Office, the NHS, the Ambulance Trust and the Department of Health and Social Care will be in place and ready to be rolled out in the coming months.

    Well, it says here in the coming months, but I’m hoping by the summer we’ll be in a position to get this done. Let’s show a sense of urgency. Because again, that’s going to really help the individuals suffering from mental health crises, as well as save enormous amounts of police time that could be better spent protecting the public.

    So once again, thanks to Alan, to the NPCC, the APCC as well, for the work they’ve been doing in developing that model. I think it can make a real difference.

    And that is a good moment, I think, to also thank police and crime commissioners, who I know have been working extremely hard on these topics. I can see Donna Jones from Hampshire; I can see Roger, my good friend from Essex. I know you have been putting a lot into this as well.

    And this partnership between the Home Office, policing and police and crime commissioners I think makes these kind of reforms really work. So, a big thank you for what you’ve been doing as well.

    Now the third area, where I think there is an opportunity to do more is the way the wider criminal justice system functions.

    Now, I mean partly getting cases heard more quickly before the crown court, which is recovering still from COVID and the barristers’ strike last year, but it also means getting cases charged a lot more quickly.

    And there has been a very effective pilot run in I think Cheshire, Merseyside and Wales, where the most urgent cases have had charging decisions made by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in a matter of a few hours. Which is a big step forward from where it’s been in the past. And I’m delighted to say the Director of Public Prosecutions, Max Hill, has agreed to roll that out nationally – I think by the end of the year. So that will give us a huge benefit in terms of getting charging done more quickly.

    But I think there is a lot more we can do, in terms of getting our cases well prepared and sent to the CPS in good condition. I think we can probably improve a bit.

    Some forces, like Cambridgeshire, have got a really good dedicated criminal justice unit, who help frontline officers get their cases prepared and sent to the CPS. They have got the highest case file success rate in the country. I think there may be a case to work with police forces to see if we can do a little bit more in that area.

    But I also want to see changes made that will reduce some of the other burdens on policing, around for example redactions, where case files have to be redacted prior to sharing with the CPS.

    We’re looking at ways of making legislative amendments, via the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, to either reduce or in some cases remove the redaction requirements on policing before case files are shared with the CPS, prior to a charge decision. And then perhaps reduce, but not eliminate, the redaction required before cases are then passed to barristers, solicitors and the courts.

    And if we are successful in doing that, again that could save hundreds of thousands of hours of police time each year that could instead be spent chasing criminals.

    And all of those things, the mental health work I mentioned, the work we’re doing together with the Director of Public Prosecutions and the CPS, it is all in addition to the 443,000 hours of police time saved by the announcements being made today.

    So, I think all of those initiatives have enormous potential to free up police time for the frontline. It is all very well hiring extra officers but we have got to make sure their time is well spent protecting the public.

    Now before I finish, I would like to say a word about ethics, integrity and standards.

    We have clearly had quite a lot of public commentary on this over the last few weeks and the last few months. We had the Casey Report into the Met just a few weeks ago, which makes for very sobering reading for those of us that are involved in policing.

    It is quite clear we have more work to do to earn and retain the trust of the public, which is a critical prerequisite of protecting the public. As Robert Peel said 150 years ago, without public confidence policing cannot do its job.

    So, we’re working in the Home Office very closely with the policing community to make sure Her Majesty’s Inspectorate’s 43 recommendations on vetting are being implemented. And Andy Cooke, the chief inspector is going to make sure those are indeed being implemented in the coming months.

    We’re making sure that police officers are being checked against the Police National Database to identify anyone else who should not be serving as an officer. And the College of Policing, I can see Andy Marsh is here I think – Andy’s there – is working with us on some new statutory guidelines on vetting. I think those are out for consultation, or the consultation may just have closed at the moment.

    But in addition to that, we in the Home Office have committed to review the rules around police officer dismissal.

    Because a point that Mark Rowley and others have made is that chief officers cannot run their forces well, effectively cannot root out misconduct, if they cannot control effectively who is in their force.

    The rules around dismissals are quite a convoluted. Misconduct cases involve legally qualified chairs, who have the final say. And the process for poor performance is extremely convoluted. It is also very difficult to remove an officer who fails vetting once they have gone through their probationary period.

    So, we initiated a process to review those rules. That will conclude in the next few weeks. And I anticipate making announcements probably in middle to late May, where we will propose some changes to address the issues I have just referred to.

    It is vital that chief officers have the powers they need to run their forces and make sure that only officers who deserve to serve in uniform are able to do so.

    And I am very confident, you can take the steps I’ve described, if chiefs officers show the leadership I know they are committed to showing and if officers from the frontline to the top embrace the changes that are needed, I know we will earn the right to have the public’s confidence.

    It has been shaken somewhat recently but I know it can be restored. I am completely confident that it will be restored. And by working together, I know that we’re going to do that.

    Thank you to everyone here who has already made a contribution to that work. I think it is critical not just to restore and maintain policing’s reputation but it is also critical prerequisite of protecting the public as well.

    Let me just finish by saying that I think the work we have done here on these issues, around the bureaucracy that we are getting rid of, the work on mental health, the work we are doing with the CPS, is a really good example of government working together with policing, working together with police and crime commissioners, to ensure the public are protected.

    I have found it, just speaking personally, an enormously rewarding and highly motivating process these last few months. It shows that we can deliver, if we work together very quickly, in a matter of weeks or months, not years. None of us want to see these changes taking ages.

    And I feel that we are really making a difference for the public in the work that we are doing. And if we continue to work together in this way, recruiting more police officers, getting rid of bureaucratic distractions, focusing on higher standards, getting back to common-sense policing, protecting the public, prosecuting criminals and supporting victims, I know we’re going to make a criminal justice system and a police force we can all be proud of.

    So let me just finish by saying again, a huge thank you to everybody here and in police forces up and down the country who do such incredible work to keep out communities safe. Thank you for what you’ve done so far and thank you for, more importantly, what we are going to do in the future.

  • Dominic Raab – 2023 Speech at the King’s Counsel Appointments Ceremony

    Dominic Raab – 2023 Speech at the King’s Counsel Appointments Ceremony

    The speech made by Dominic Raab, the Secretary of State for Justice, at Westminster Hall, London, on 29 March 2023.

    It’s a great pleasure to welcome you all, as you make your declarations…

    And confirm your new status as Kings Counsel, and Honorary King’s Counsel.

    This is the first time in over 70 years that a Lord Chancellor has presided over the appointment of ‘King’s Counsels’, since the passing of Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

    Of course, for all of you, I know this is the culmination of years of hard work, dedication, and sacrifice.

    The late nights working on a brief,

    The weekends lost to preparing a case in court,

    The countless hours spent representing your clients will now,

    I hope, at long last be worth it today.

    You have made it to the pinnacle of your profession,

    You will be recognised for that by your peers, by the Crown,

    For what is an immense achievement.

    You, your families, friends, and colleagues, should rightly be very proud.

    Steeped in tradition going back to the 16th Century, the KC title has long been a hallmark of excellence.

    It acknowledges your experience, expertise and eminence in your particular fields of law.

    And so, today’s ceremony cements your status as ambassadors for a legal system envied across the world.

    And, as we celebrate your success in these historic surroundings…

    Arguably the birthplace of both British justice and democracy… You are taking your own place personally in our country’s distinguished legal history.

    Of course, the KC quality mark is recognised not just here in the UK, but abroad too.

    It holds up our legal professionals as the best in a global market.

    And it underpins the worldwide appeal of our legal system… along with our common law precedents and world-renowned independent judiciary.

    Our profession is, of course, also one of the reasons the UK has become the world’s pre-eminent centre for dispute resolution.

    Just to give you a flavour, in 2021, over 28,000 civil disputes were resolved through arbitration, mediation and adjudication in the UK, while more than 80 percent of the world’s maritime arbitrations are handled here.

    Businesses around the world turn to us time and time again to be their counsel and courtroom… because they know that a decision from a UK court carries a global kitemark… of impartiality, integrity and enforceability.

    It isn’t by luck that English and Welsh law is the choice for global business and international trade… used in some 40 percent of all global corporate arbitrations.

    Nor is it a surprise that more than 200 foreign law firms, from over 40 jurisdictions have branches in the UK.

    In fact, every single one of the world’s top 40 law firms has an office right here in London.

    A world-beating legal system goes hand-in-hand with our world-beating legal services…

    One of this country’s greatest exports – and at the heart of our future as a global, free-trading Britain.

    Our legal services support the growth of global trade and investment across the whole country… contributing billions to our economy each year.

    And it’s why we’re working hard to promote legal services abroad…

    Targeting priority markets, like the Indo-Pacific and the United States…

    And opening up market access for our legal professionals through free trade agreements… including current negotiations with India, the Gulf states, Canada, Mexico and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

    All this serves as a reminder that our KCs don’t just serve in English and Welsh courts.

    They make a huge contribution to the international rule of law. Never has this been more true than today.

    All the way back to Nuremberg, our legal professionals have played their part in bringing the worst war criminals to justice.

    Take Hartley Shawcross KC – a formidable advocate who led the British prosecution at Nuremberg.

    His opening and closing speeches widely held to be some of the finest of those historic, ground-breaking trials.

    He observed that while some thought the Nazis on trial should have faced summary justice ‘…swept aside into oblivion, without elaborate and careful investigation into the part they have played…’

    ‘Not so would the rule of law be raised and strengthened on the international as well as upon the municipal plane…

    Not so would future generations realise that right is not always on the side of the big battalions…

    Not so would the world be made aware that the waging of… war is not only a dangerous venture… but a criminal one.’

    I think Shawcross’s words resonate, when we consider the importance of the international rule of law… and the ‘elaborate and careful’ investigations currently underway into atrocities in Ukraine.

    Nuremberg paved the way for the prosecution of war crimes and genocide in Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia and other wars and conflicts…

    And our KCs have been instrumental in the development of international law in the decades since, alongside our allies.

    We just need only look to The Hague to see the influence of some of the UK’s best legal minds.

    Sir Geoffrey Nice, Steven Kay, Andrew Cayley and Jo Korner are just some of the exceptional British barristers to have made their mark there and beyond.

    And another Brit, Karim Khan KC, is currently Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court and responsible for the investigation into atrocities in Ukraine, among other vital work he’s doing.

    All of these appointments are a testament to the standard of our professionals and indeed their standing in the world.

    I saw it myself – twenty years ago as a Foreign Office lawyer… I was posted to The Hague to help bring war criminals to justice at the Yugoslavian and Rwandan tribunals.

    So, I know first-hand the impact the ICC and ad-hoc tribunals can have.

    I remember in particular, Radovan Karadžić, the so called Butcher of Bosnia.

    In 2004, as a fairly fresh faced lawyer, while serving in the Hague I negotiated a sentencing enforcement agreement between the UK and the UN.

    Back then, no one thought we would get to use it…

    But 17 years later, Karadžić was transferred to a UK jail cell under that agreement.

    As you can imagine, I was proud to be a small part of that effort… a 30-year pursuit for justice.

    Now as you will know, on 17th of March, the ICC indicted President Putin for the forcible removal of children from Ukraine. An appalling crime.

    Today again, many doubters ask whether he will face the dock of a court.

    We know, these cases are complex, and it will take patience.

    To the doubters and the cynics I point to Karadžić, to Milošević, to Charles Taylor and others…

    To know that justice is on our side, and history is on our side.

    But justice doesn’t happen by accident.

    It requires deeds, not just words.

    That is why, a week ago today in the UK I hosted a meeting of justice ministers from around the world…

    Bringing together over 40 nations to agree support for the ICC, and its independent investigation into war crimes in Ukraine.

    I’m pleased we could agree that package that will support the ICC’s work in all its investigations.

    But looking at the country and profession, the real success was bringing 42 other countries together to offer support…

    Through the secondment of their national experts, the sharing of best practice to support the most vulnerable victims… and financial support to assist the ICC in its vital work.

    This is global Britain as a force for good in the world – galvanising other nations to act.

    In the same spirit, I have no doubt that many of you will go on to great things at home… and abroad… Building on the achievements of the remarkable KCs that have gone before you.

    I know you will make us proud.

    Today, we are also here to recognise eight candidates being appointed Honorary KCs, for outstanding contributions to the law outside of the courts.

    Our first candidate, John Battle, is a driving force in the campaign for open justice and in particular filming court proceedings.

    He is recognised for his extensive work with the media, Ministry of Justice, and with the senior judiciary.

    Next, Professor Lionel Bently is a universally respected scholar, nominated for his role in influencing intellectual property law in this country and beyond.

    Professor Richard Ekins has made a major contribution to public debate, and parliamentary deliberation, about the constitutional role of the courts…. Issues which are very close to my heart.

    Then we have Professor Rosemary Hunter, a leading Family Justice scholar. Rosemary is recognised for her important work in the field of domestic abuse, which has helped to shape the law in this area.

    Next, Dr Ann Olivarius, recognised for her vital role in the fields of women’s rights, sexual harassment and sexual abuse.

    She was absolutely instrumental in lobbying Parliament to pass laws against so-called ‘cyber flashing’, which I am proud we have now done.

    We also have Professor Richard Susskind is recognised for his important work to promote technology and innovation in legal and court services across England and Wales.

    Next, James Wakefield is nominated for his work to promote better access to the Barrister profession… encouraging retention of those from under-represented groups from across our society.

    Then we have Professor Julian Vincent Roberts, a leading authority on sentencing theory, policy, and practice.

    His work has made a major contribution to the analysis and development of sentencing worldwide.

    Last but certainly not least, there is Sir Michael Wood – a prominent member of the International Law Commission, recognised for his invaluable contribution to the teaching and application of international law in the UK and beyond.

    I have to say, there is one blot on his CV that I feel duty bound to point out.

    Sir Michael recruited me to the Foreign Office legal advisers in 2000, and then deployed me to the Hague between 2003 to 6.

    And was very much a mentor during that time, please don’t hold it against him.

    No one’s perfect.

    Of course, that’s just a brief mention of our recipients’ contribution to the law, which goes so much further.

    In closing, let me say again what an honour it is to preside over this ceremony.

    I hope you enjoy today’s celebration with your family and friends.

    It is truly well deserved.

    Each and every one of you here today is a shining example – the brightest and best of British justice, an inspiration to the next generation of lawyers.

    I’ve absolutely no doubt you will go on to even greater things in future…

    Playing your part in upholding the reputation of the finest legal system in the world.