Category: Parliament

Queen Victoria – 1872 Queen’s Speech

Below is the text of the Queen’s Speech given in the House of Lords on 2 February 1872. It was spoken by the Lord Chancellor on behalf of HM Queen Victoria.

My Lords, and Gentlemen,

I avail myself of the opportunity afforded by your re-assembling for the discharge of your momentous duties to renew the expression of my thankfulness to the Almighty for the deliverance of my dear son the Prince of Wales from the most imminent danger, and of my lively recollection of the profound and universal sympathy shown by my loyal people during the period of anxiety and trial.

I propose that on Tuesday the 27th instant, conformably to the good and becoming usage of former days, the blessing thus received shall be acknowledged on behalf of the nation by a Thanksgiving in the Metropolitan Cathedral. At this celebration it is my desire and hope to be present.

Directions have been given to provide the necessary accommodation for the Members of the two Houses of Parliament.

The assurances of friendship, which I receive from Foreign Powers, continue to be in all respects satisfactory. I need hardly assure you that my endeavours will at all times be steadily directed to the maintenance of these friendly relations.

The Slave Trade, and practices scarcely to be distinguished from Slave Trading, still pursued in more than one quarter of the world, continue to attract the attention of my Government. In the South Sea Islands the name of the British Empire is even now dishonoured by the connexion of some of my subjects with these nefarious practices; and in one of them the murder of an exemplary Prelate has cast fresh light upon some of their baleful consequences. A Bill will be presented to you for the purpose of facilitating the trial of offences of this class in Australasia; and endeavours will be made to increase, in other forms, the means of counteraction.

Various communications have passed between my Government and the Government of France on the subject of the Commercial Treaty concluded in 1860. From a divergence in the views respectively entertained in relation to the value of Protective Laws, this correspondence has not brought about any agreement to modify that important Convention. On both sides, however, there has been uniformly declared an earnest desire that nothing shall occur to impair the cordiality which has long prevailed between the two nations.

Papers relating to these subjects will be laid before you.

The Arbitrators appointed pursuant to the Treaty of Washington, for the purpose of amicably settling certain claims known as the “Alabama” claims, have held their first meeting at Geneva.

Cases have been laid before the Arbitrators on behalf of each party to the Treaty. In the Case so submitted on behalf of the United States large claims have been included which are understood on my part not to be within the province of the Arbitrators. On this subject I have caused a friendly communication to be made to the Government of the United States.

The Emperor of Germany has undertaken to arbitrate on the San Juan Water Boundary; and the Cases of the two Governments have been presented to His Imperial Majesty.

The Commission at Washington has been appointed, and is in session. The provisions of the Treaty which require the consent of the Parliament of Canada await its assembling.

Turning to domestic affairs, I have to apprise you that, with very few exceptions, Ireland has been free from serious crime. Trade in that part of the United Kingdom is active, and the advance of agricultural industry is remarkable.

I am able also to congratulate you, so far as present experience allows a judgment to be passed, upon the perceptible diminution of the number both of the graver crimes, and of habitual criminals, in Great Britain.

Gentlemen of the House of Commons,

The principal Estimates for the coming year have been prepared. They will at once be laid before you; and I trust that you will find them suitable to the circumstances of the country.

The state of the Revenue affords favourable indications of the demand for employment and the general condition of the people; indications which are corroborated by a decline of pauperism not inconsiderable.

My Lords, and Gentlemen,

Your attention will be invited to several measures of acknowledged national interest. Among these there will be Bills for the improvement of Public Education in Scotland, for the regulation of Mines, for the amendment of what is known as the Licensing system, and in relation to the Superior Courts of Justice and Appeal.

In particular, a Bill, having for its main object the establishment of Secret Voting, together with a measure relating to corrupt practices at Parliamentary Elections, will be immediately presented to you.

Several measures of administrative improvement for Ireland will also be laid before you.

There will likewise be laid before you Legislative Provisions founded on the Report of the Sanitary Commission.

You, my Lords and Gentlemen, will, I am confident, again apply your well-known assiduity to that work of legislation which, from the increasing-exigencies of modern society, still seems to grow upon your hands. And I shall continue to rely, under Divine Providence, alike on the loyalty of my people, and on your energy and wisdom, to sustain the constant efforts of the Crown to discharge the duties, to uphold the rights, and to defend the honour of the Empire.

May 31, 2020
Queen Victoria – 1871 Queen’s Speech

Below is the text of the Queen’s Speech given in the House of Lords on 9 February 1871. It was spoken by the Lord Chancellor on behalf of HM Queen Victoria.

My Lords, and Gentlemen,

AT an epoch of such moment to the future fortunes of Europe, I am especially desirous to avail myself of your counsels.

The war which broke out, in the month of July, between France and Germany, has raged, until within the last few days, with unintermitted and likewise with unexampled force: and its ravages may be renewed, after but a few days more, unless moderation and forethought, prevailing over all impediments, shall sway the councils of both the parties, whose well-being is so vitally concerned.

At the time when you separated, I promised a constant attention to the subject of neutral obligations; and I undertook to use my best endeavours to prevent the enlargement of the area of the war, and to contribute, if opportunity should offer, to the restoration of an early and honourable peace.

In accordance with the first of these declarations, I have maintained the rights and strictly discharged the duties of neutrality.

The sphere of the war has not been extended beyond the two countries originally engaged.

Cherishing with care the cordiality of my relations with each belligerent, I have forborne from whatever might have been construed as gratuitous or unwarranted interference between parties, neither of whom had shown a readiness to propose terms of accommodation such as to bear promise of acceptance by the other.

I have been enabled, on more than one occasion, to contribute towards placing the Representatives of the two contending countries in confidential communication: but, until famine compelled the surrender of Paris, no further result had been obtained.

The Armistice now being employed for the Convocation of an Assembly in France, has brought about a pause in the constant accumulation, on both sides, of human suffering; and has rekindled the hope of a complete accommodation. I pray that this suspension may result in a Peace compatible, for the two great and brave nations involved, with security and with honour, and likely therefore to command the approval of Europe, and to give reasonable hopes of a long duration.

It has been with concern that I have found myself unable to accredit My Ambassador in a formal manner to the Government of Defence, which has subsisted in France since the revolution of September; but neither the harmony nor the efficiency of the correspondence of the two States has been in the smallest degree impaired.

The King of Prussia has accepted the title of Emperor of Germany at the instance of the chief authorities of the nation.

I have offered My congratulations on an event, which bears testimony to the solidity and independence of Germany, and which, I trust, may be found conducive to the stability of the European system.

I have endeavoured, in correspondence with other Powers of Europe, to uphold the sanctity of Treaties, and to remove any misapprehension as to the binding character of their obligations.

It was agreed by the Powers, which had been parties to the Treaty of 1856, that a Conference should meet in London. This Conference has now been for some time engaged in its labours; and I confidently trust that the result of its deliberations will be to uphold both the principles of public right and the general policy of the Treaty, and, at the same time, by the revision of some of its conditions in a fair and conciliatory spirit, to exhibit a cordial co-operation among the Powers with regard to the Levant.

I greatly regret that my earnest efforts have failed to procure the presence at the Conference of any Representative of France, which was one of the chief parties to the Treaty of 1856, and which must ever be regarded as a principal and indispensable Member of the great Commonwealth of Europe.

At different times, several questions of importance have arisen, which are not yet adjusted, and which materially affect the relations between the United States and the territories and people of British North America. One of them in particular, which concerns the Fisheries, calls for early settlement; lest the possible indiscretion of individuals should impair the neighbourly understanding, which it is on all grounds so desirable to cherish and maintain. I have therefore engaged in amicable communications with the President of the United States. In order to determine the most convenient mode of treatment for these matters, I have suggested the appointment of a joint Commission; and I have agreed to a proposal of the President, that this Commission shall be authorized at the same time, and in the same manner, to resume the consideration of the American claims growing out of the circumstances of the late war. This arrangement will, by common consent, include all claims for compensation which have been, or may be made by each Government, or by its citizens, upon the other.

The establishment of a Prince of the House of Savoy on the Throne of Spain, by the free choice of the popularly-elected representatives of the Spanish nation, will, I trust, insure for a country which has passed with so much temperance and self-control through a prolonged and trying crisis, the blessings of a stable Government.

I am unhappily not able to state that the inquiry which was instituted by the Government of Greece into the history of the shocking murders perpetrated during the last spring at Dilessi has reached a termination answerable in all respects to My just expectations, but I shall not desist from My endeavours to secure the complete attainment of the objects of the inquiry. Some valuable results, however, have in the meantime been obtained, for the exposure and the repression of a lawless and corrupting system, which has too long afflicted the Greek Peninsula.

The anxiety which the massacre at Tien-tsin on the 21st of June last called forth has happily been dispelled; and while it will be My earnest endeavour to provide for the security of My Subjects and their trade in those remote quarters, I count on your concurrence in the policy that I have adopted of recognizing the Chinese Government as entitled to be dealt with in its relations with this country in a conciliatory and forbearing spirit.

The Parliamentary recess has been one of anxious interest in regard to foreign affairs. But I rejoice to acquaint you that my relations are, as heretofore, those of friendship and good understanding with the Sovereigns and States of the civilized world.

Papers illustrative of the conduct of My Government in relation to the several matters, on which I have now summarily touched, will be duly laid before you.

In turning to domestic affairs, I have first to inform you that I have approved of a marriage between my daughter Princess Louise and the Marquis of Lorne, and I have declared my consent to this union in Council.

Gentlemen of the House of Commons,

The revenue of the country flourishes, and the condition of trade and industry may, though with partial drawbacks, be declared satisfactory.

The estimates for the coming year will be promptly laid before you.

My Lords, and Gentlemen,

The lessons of military experience afforded by the present war have been numerous and important.

The time appears appropriate for turning such lessons to account by efforts more decisive than heretofore at practical improvement. In attempting this you will not fail to bear in mind the special features in the position of this country, so favourable to the freedom and security of the people, and if the changes from a less to a more effective and elastic system of defensive military preparation shall be found to involve, at least for a time, an increase of various charges, your prudence and patriotism will not grudge the cost, as long as you are satisfied that the end is important, and the means judicious. No time will be lost in laying before you a Bill for the better regulation of the army and the auxiliary land forces of the Crown, and I hardly need commend it to your anxious and impartial consideration.

I trust that the powerful interest at present attaching to affairs abroad, and to military questions, will not greatly abate the energy with which you have heretofore applied yourselves to the work of general improvement in our domestic legislation.

I commend anew to your attention several measures on subjects which I desired to be brought before you during the last Session of Parliament, but which the time remaining at your disposal, after you had dealt with the principal subjects of the year, was not found sufficient to carry to a final issue.

I refer especially to the Bills on Religious Tests in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, on Ecclesiastical Titles, on the Disabilities of Trade Combinations, on the Courts of Justice and Appeal, on the Adjustment of Local Burdens, and on the Licensing of Houses for the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors.

The inquiry made by a Committee of the Commons House being now complete, a measure will be placed before you on an early day for the establishment of Secret Voting.

A proposal is anxiously expected in Scotland for the adjustment of the question of primary education. With reference to the training of the young in schools on a national scale and basis, that portion of the country has especial claims on the favourable consideration of Parliament: and I trust the year may not pass by without your having disposed of this question by the enactment of a just and effective law.

The condition of Ireland with reference to agrarian crime has, in general, afforded a gratifying contrast with the state of that island in the preceding winter; but there have been painful though very partial exceptions.

To secure the best results for the great measures of the two last Sessions which have so recently passed into operation, and which involve such direct and pressing claims upon the attention of all classes of the community, a period of calm is to be desired; and I have thought it wise to refrain from suggesting to you at the present juncture the discussion of any political question likely to become the subject of new and serious controversy in that country.

The burdens devolving upon you as the great Council of the nation, and of this ancient and extended Empire, are, and must long continue to be, weighty. But you labour for a country whose laws and institutions have stood the test of time, and whose people, earnestly attached to them, and desiring their continuance, will unite with their Sovereign in invoking upon all your designs the favour and aid of the Most High.

May 31, 2020
Queen Victoria – 1870 Queen’s Speech

Below is the text of the Queen’s Speech given in the House of Lords on 8 February 1870. It was spoken by the Lord Chancellor on behalf of HM Queen Victoria.

My Lords, and Gentlemen,

WE have it in command from Her Majesty again to invite you to resume your arduous duties, and to express the regret of Her Majesty that recent indisposition has prevented Her from meeting you in person, as had been Her intention, at a period of remarkable public interest.

The friendly sentiments which are entertained in all quarters towards this country, and which Her Majesty cordially reciprocates, the growing disposition to resort to the good offices of allies in cases of international difference, and the conciliatory spirit in which several such cases have recently been treated and determined, encourage Her Majesty’s confidence in the continued maintenance of the general tranquillity.

Papers will be laid before you with reference to recent occurrences in New Zealand.

Gentlemen of the House of Commons,

The Estimates for the services of the approaching financial year are in a forward state of preparation. Framed with a view in the first place to the effective maintenance of the Public Establishments, they will impose a diminished charge upon the subjects of Her Majesty.

The condition of the Revenue has answered to the expectations which were formed during the past Session.

Her Majesty trusts that you will be disposed to carry to its completion the inquiry which you last year instituted into the mode of conducting Parliamentary and Municipal Elections, and thus to prepare the materials of useful and early legislation.

My Lords, and Gentlemen,

It will be proposed to you to amend the laws respecting the occupation and acquisition of land in Ireland, in a manner adapted to the peculiar circumstances of that country, and calculated, as Her Majesty believes, to bring about improved relations between the several classes concerned in Irish agriculture, which collectively constitute the great bulk of the people. These provisions when matured by your impartiality and wisdom, as Her Majesty trusts, will tend to inspire among persons with whom such sentiments may still be wanting, that steady confidence in the law and that desire to render assistance in its effective administration which mark Her subjects in general; and thus will aid in consolidating the fabric of the Empire.

We are further directed by Her Majesty to state that many other subjects of public importance appear to demand your care; and among these especially to inform you that a Bill has been prepared for the enlargement, on a comprehensive scale, of the means of National Education.

In fulfilment of an engagement to the Government of the United States a Bill will be proposed to you for the purpose of defining the status of subjects or citizens of foreign countries who may desire naturalization, and of aiding them in the attainment of that object.

You will further be invited to consider Bills, prepared in compliance with the Report of the Commission on Courts of Judicature, for the improvement of the constitution and procedure of the Superior Tribunals of both original and appellate Jurisdiction.

The question of religious tests in the Universities and Colleges of Oxford and Cambridge has been under discussion for many years. Her Majesty recommends such a legislative settlement of this question as may contribute to extend the usefulness of these great institutions and to heighten the respect with which they are Justly regarded.

Bills have been prepared for extending the incidence of rating, and for placing the collection of the large sums locally raised for various purposes on a simple and uniform footing.

Her Majesty has likewise to recommend that you should undertake the amendment of the laws which regulate the grant of licences for the sale of fermented and spirituous liquors.

Measures will also be brought under our consideration for facilitating the transfer of land, for regulating the succession to real property in case of intestacy, for amending the laws as to the disabilities of members of Trade Combinations, and for both consolidating and improving the body of statutes which relate to merchant shipping.

While commending to you these weighty matters of legislation, Her Majesty commands us to add that the recent extension of agrarian crime in several parts of Ireland, with its train of accompanying evils, has filled Her Majesty with painful concern.

The Executive Government has employed freely the means at its command for the prevention of outrage, and a partial improvement may be observed; but although the number of offences, within this class of crime, has been by no means so great as at some former periods, the indisposition to give evidence in aid of the administration of justice has been alike remarkable and injurious.

For the removal of such evils Her Majesty places Her main reliance on the permanent operation of wise and necessary changes in the law. Yet She will not hesitate to recommend to you the adoption of special provisions, should such a policy appear during the course of the Session to be required by the paramount interest of peace and order.

Upon these and all other subjects Her Majesty devoutly prays that your labours may be constantly attended by the blessing of Almighty God.

May 31, 2020
Keir Starmer – 2020 Statement on Equal Pay

Below is the text of the statement made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 29 May 2020.

The Equal Pay Act was a historic achievement that showed the impact Labour can make in power.

But half a century later, progress is stalling. Coronavirus threatens to set us back years in the fight for pay equality.

We must come out of this pandemic with the commitment to build a better future. That means strengthening the Equal Pay Act and monitoring how this crisis is impacting on women.

May 30, 2020
Wendy Chamberlain – 2020 Speech on Constitutional Law

Below is the text of the speech made by Wendy Chamberlain, the Liberal Democrat MP for North East Fife, in the House of Commons on 19 May 2020.

I and my Liberal Democrat colleagues welcome this legislation, which will finally allow police restitution orders to be brought forward in Scotland. As other Members have said, this is long overdue.

As other Members have explained, restitution orders will make a fine payable if somebody is convicted of abusing or assaulting a police officer. The fines will finance an expansion of the support that officers receive, by helping to finance specialist non-NHS support for injured police officers. Today’s debate relates to the fact that Westminster approval is required to permit such restitution orders to be claimed from benefits payable. This is unequivocally a positive step forward for police officers and adds to the victim surcharge, which was finally introduced last year.

It is a sad fact that many police officers are injured on duty, and assaults on police officers are often the cause of those injuries. Members will know that I come from a family of police officers; I, my father and my husband have all served, and I have other family members currently serving in Police Scotland. All of us were assaulted during our police careers. My husband was knocked unconscious during the policing of a football match. My father was head-butted by a prisoner in the police cells and required stitches.

My own most vivid memory is from early in my police career—within months of leaving initial training at the police college in Tulliallan in fact. It relates to attending a call about a report of a domestic dispute in a high-rise block of flats in Edinburgh. On arrival at the landing in question, my tutor and I could hear a loud argument and decided to call for additional officers to make their way to support us in case they were required. I am glad we did so. The door was answered by a man who, after telling us where to go, was then attacked by his girlfriend, but from behind with a knife. A toddler was visible at the back of the flat hallway. My colleague managed to baton the knife from the women’s grasp, and in anger both of them then turned on us, and a violent struggle ensued.

Luckily for us, colleagues came quickly, and both people were arrested. The man, in particular, struggled violently throughout the arrest and attempted to spit at all the officers, claiming that he was HIV-positive. It then transpired that he had been responsible for an assault and robbery nearby earlier that evening. Other than bruising, my colleague and I were unharmed, but it was a salutary lesson to me in being prepared for any eventuality and in being responsive to events.

Police officers, like other key workers during the current covid-19 pandemic, are leaving their homes and families every day to carry out vital work and without knowing what that day will bring them. Restitution orders are not simply about a financial penalty for those who assault officers in the course of their duties, but about showing police officers that the work they do for us on behalf of society is valued. Now more than ever, we are relying on the police, who are doing a very difficult job in strange times. They are enforcing new emergency laws and keeping us safe from coronavirus, alongside tackling other types of crime. Other crimes, such as domestic abuse, are now more difficult to prevent and detect, and the police are therefore working on more innovative ways to encourage reporting of offending.

I pay tribute to my former colleagues in the Police Service for doing so much to get us through this crisis. I welcome the positive impact that the restitution orders will have on support for police officers. However—I do not believe that this is politicising; it is asking legitimate questions—while the end result of restitution orders is indeed positive, I am incredibly disappointed that these measures are being introduced far later than was ever envisaged. It is a matter of regret that this order is being brought forward nearly seven years after it was initially announced by the Scottish Government. The Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2014 was passed by the Scottish Parliament in 2013 and received Royal Assent in January 2014. The legislation was brought forward by the then Cabinet Secretary for Justice in Scotland, now the hon. Member for East Lothian (Kenny MacAskill), who has already spoken in the debate. The measures were welcomed at the time by the Scottish Police Federation, yet for a very long time two of the flagship features of the Act were missing.

All that was needed was a minor statutory instrument to be passed in the UK Parliament—in other words, what we are debating today—but for whatever reason the Scottish Government have chosen not to bring plans forward to make these features operational until this time.

The victim surcharge was finally established last year and now, almost seven years on, restitution orders are being brought before this Parliament. This is a flagship policy of the Scottish Government, yet, despite legislating, police officers are still waiting for support. There is clearly an unanswered question about why this has taken such a huge amount of time. As I mentioned, this proposal won the backing of the Scottish Parliament in the days of the tenure of the hon. Member for East Lothian (Kenny MacAskill) as the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice. At that time, Police Scotland, the amalgamation of the previous eight Scottish forces, was just a few months old. Sir Stephen House was the chief constable and Vic Emery chair of the SPA. Since then, we have had another two Justice Secretaries in Scotland, two more chief constables and three more SPA chairs.

Clearly, these have been challenging times, and I note the turmoil of the SPA in particular. When the most recent chair, Susan Deacon, resigned in 2019, she stated that governance and accountability arrangements for the police service in Scotland were fundamentally flawed. A permanent replacement for the role of chair has yet to be appointed. But that does not excuse the extraordinary length of this delay. Someone who was undertaking their initial training at the Scottish Police College when the then Justice Secretary was championing the scheme and heard the promises made will now be in the seventh year of their police service.

There are huge questions to be answered by the Scottish Government as to why this delay has occurred. Indeed, my Scottish Liberal Democrat colleagues at Holyrood have been asking this question consistently since the Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2014 was passed. Each time they were assured that preparatory work was ongoing. It gives a sense of an idea, very laudable, but with no thought or plan on how best to implement it and no real impetus to prioritise it, despite the complexities that other Members have referred to. I hope that the passing of this legislation will be swiftly followed by the introduction of the scheme.

Where will the money raised by the orders go to exactly? At the time, the then Justice Secretary said the Police Benevolent Fund as well as the Scottish police treatment centre, Auchterarder, which has previously benefited members of my own family—yes, I did contribute to it myself financially—were going to benefit. Is that still the case? How much are restitution orders estimated to raise every year, so that we can establish potentially how much money the police support services have missed out on over the past six years?

As other Members have referred to, there were more than 1,600 assaults on police officers between April and June 2019, a five-year high. These orders might go some way to acting as a deterrent, so we have to ask: how many officers would have benefited from additional special support if restitution orders had been in place? There has been a human cost, sadly, to this delay, but this is about not just individual officers, but the public as well. How many officers have been forced to retire due to ill health as a consequence of an assault on duty? We are losing good people from the police service. How can we quantify the effect of this lack of prioritisation on police wellbeing and morale? These are questions that I wholly expect my Scottish Parliament colleagues to be pressing the Scottish Government on.

The significance of the support that the orders will provide to injured police officers has been overshadowed, sadly, by the seven-year wait for the scheme. I hope the Minister will agree that it is imperative that the Scottish Government now implement the restitution orders as quickly as possible. I thank all Members for their positive contributions and say that police officers cannot afford to wait any longer.

May 28, 2020
Christine Jardine – 2020 Speech on Constitutional Law

Below is the text of the speech made by Christine Jardine, the Liberal Democrat MP for Edinburgh West, in the House of Commons on 19 May 2020.

It is delightful to take part in this debate on something that, as has already been alluded to, may not appear as important or groundbreaking as some of the legislation we discuss but is vital to the everyday lives of our constituents. Let me take the opportunity to welcome back to the Front Bench the hon. Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray) and associate myself with his remarks about Scottish football—although perhaps the less said about the most recent decisions, the better for us all.

It is also an honour to follow the hon. Member for East Lothian (Kenny MacAskill), who, as he said, introduced the Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Bill to the Scottish Parliament. I, together with my Liberal Democrat colleagues, welcome the opportunity to enable the Act to be fully enacted through this order. It was fascinating to hear the hon. Gentleman’s account of the genesis of the Bill, which is now coming to fruition no less than seven years after he introduced it at Holyrood.

None of us dispute that, currently, Police Scotland, in common with police and other emergency services up and down this country, is working in extremely challenging circumstances. It has to balance its daily responsibilities of maintaining order with its extended role of protecting the public in the context of the pandemic. Police Scotland deftly responds to its emergency powers and protects the public by ensuring that we observe lockdown and social distancing, but, as the Minister mentioned, that has come at a price, with no fewer than 100 direct coronavirus-related attacks on our police service.

Until recently, safe working was something which many of us were lucky enough to be able to take for granted. But the police service as a profession never can, and its daily routine is not without significant risk of abuse or assault. In fact, over the past five years in Scotland, while we have been coming to this point with the Bill, there has been a gradual but sustained increase in the number of reported assaults on police officers. More than 3,000 police officers were assaulted—that is an average of almost 20 a day— between March and September last year. To assault a police office is of course already a crime under Scots law, but, as we have heard, this legislation allows for restitution orders to finally be brought forward into law. For those convicted of impeding or assaulting a police officer, a court will be able to impose this new financial penalty. This significant step ensures that police officers who are victims of crime receive support for their individual needs so that they continue their duty serving and protecting the public. It is perhaps fitting that this week is Mental Health Awareness Week as many victims of crime—police officers and others—suffer mental health issues as a consequence.

Victims of crime engage with support services whose funding will come as a direct result of restitution orders, something whose day has finally arrived in Parliament. That perhaps brings me to a slight difference of opinion with colleagues I am following in this debate. Like many others, I am extremely disappointed that it has taken so long for this legislation to reach this point—the length of delay by the Scottish Government in what was a flagship policy for the SNP. It went through the parliamentary process as the Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Bill in 2013 and was given Royal Assent in 2014.

Police restitution orders which require this change were a vital part of that legislation, and just in case there is any doubt, this delay has not been in any way, shape or form the fault of the UK Government or Parliament. It is, however, reassuring that we can, at this final stage of the Bill, work together to make sure that our police officers in Scotland receive the restitution they deserve. I hope that none of us will use this as a political opportunity either to bash or to congratulate the Scottish Government. It is simply a fact that we have now come—finally—to the point where restitution orders can be put in place. I will take great pleasure in supporting this order.

May 28, 2020
Kenny MacAskill – 2020 Speech on Constitutional Law

Below is the text of the speech made by Kenny MacAskill, the SNP MP for East Lothian, in the House of Commons on 19 May 2020.

The right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) has pre-empted some of the comments that I was going to make. This legislation does go back to my time in office in a different Chamber—indeed, in a different lifetime. It has taken a considerable period of time for it to come through, and I do not know the reason for that. The right hon. Member was correct to say that the situation is likewise with the victim surcharge. However, I think we all know that in dealing with subordinate legislation—with very technical not only cross-border, but multi-departmental legislation—the devil is in the detail.

I have no doubt that Ministers, especially those involved in drafting the legislation, would have found it very complex, as they would have had to engage across multiple jurisdictions and agencies, including the Department for Work and Pensions, never mind the police authorities and everything else. But we are where we are, and it is to be welcomed. It is rather regrettable that this matter should have been slightly politicised by the right hon. Member, as it should be welcomed and perhaps even considered south of the border.

It may be appropriate for me to mention the genesis of this legislation. The Minister pointed out some of the dreadful treatment experienced by officers during this time of crisis. As others have said, that should not be a matter of routine. It can never be accepted that it is just part of the job. No one’s job—a prison officer, a police officer, somebody working in the health service, or someone working in any other public or private sector organisation—should mean that they routinely have to put up with abuse and violence. It is simply unacceptable.

That said, we are aware that the police are required to go to incidents and deal with people who can be threatening and violent, and on occasions they do suffer injuries. Ultimately, it has to be for the court to decide on the sentence to impose, and it is appropriate that it has as many options available to it as possible. It can deal with such behaviour with imprisonment, which will often be the case for very serious offences, but it can also issue a fine or compensation order.

There is one other area that comes to mind, and that is the ability for police officers to receive treatment. The real genesis of this legislation came from a visit to the police treatment centre that is supported and sustained by individual officers. I believe that almost every officer in Scotland contributes voluntarily from their income to the upholding of the centre. There is one in Auchterarder, of which many Scottish Members may be aware. I understand that there is also one south of the border in Harrogate. Police officers can go to these centres to get treatment: to get them fit and well, to try to get them back to work, and to get their life on as even a course as possible. As I said, the centre is paid for by police contributions, and the cost is not insignificant. I do not think that a huge amount of public funds—if any—are put into it, because it is run on a charitable basis.

The service at the centre is professional. There are treatments available that may be available in some towns or communities, but certainly not to the same level of expertise. Indeed, hearing about my visit to the centre would put the Minister in mind of a football team, because it has professional support staff such as osteopaths and other experts, and it has its own swimming pool. Officers come to the centre in Scotland not just from Scotland but from south of the border. It is sometimes easier for officers from south of the border to get taken there or to access it, depending on where they are based in the north of England.

In summary, that is why we are here. This measure is not meant to take away from the right of a court to impose a prison sentence, a fine or a compensation order, but it is an opportunity for the court to impose a restitution order that would see some benefit. It would not simply—I do not mean to be disparaging in any way—be a penalty fine that might go into the public coffers, but one which can tangibly be put to use for the police service, and that can go to the benefit of the individual officer and of those more widely, because it will be used, in the main, to support the police treatment centres north of the border for officers from Scotland or elsewhere.

As I said, although it has taken a long time, we welcome this measure. It should not be routine, but officers who are injured are entitled to receive the best possible service. They cannot and should not always have to do so by going to their own private physiotherapist or whatever; they should be able to obtain it as part of the service. They currently do so through their pay packet. This measure can provide some alleviation of that and further support for it. I simply ask the Minister to consider whether, as well as ensuring that we have the relevant restitution order, other support can come from Governments north and, indeed, south of the border to support not just the institution in Auchterarder but the one in Harrogate, Yorkshire.

May 28, 2020
David Mundell – 2020 Speech on Constitutional Law

Below is the text of the speech made by David Mundell, the Conservative MP for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale, in the House of Commons on 19 May 2020.

May I add my congratulations to the hon. Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray) on his return to the role of shadow Secretary of State for Scotland after his sabbatical? One of the great disappointments to me in my time as Secretary of State was the announcement, following his departure from that role, and in the absence of a Front-Bench spokesman, that either the Leader of the Opposition himself or the shadow Chancellor would participate in Scottish questions. Perhaps not unsurprisingly, immediately before the first such occasion, a shadow Scottish Secretary was appointed.

This process is important. It is unusual not just because we are participating in a virtual Chamber but because we are in the Chamber more generally. Usually, section 104 orders and others that flow from the original Scotland Act are transacted on the Committee corridor and get very little attention, but, as the Minister said, they are in many ways the backbone of the devolution settlement and the relationship between the two Governments and Parliaments. It is very easy, particularly given some of the headlines and media reports that we have seen in recent weeks, to think that the devolution settlement is not working, but this order and all the others that go through Parliament are actually a manifestation of the fact that it is working. Behind the scenes, officials in the UK Government and Scottish Government work closely together to ensure that these orders and the things that really matter to people in Scotland—the provision of a police service and a criminal justice system—go ahead in a way that relates to the whole of the United Kingdom. As the Minister said, this order ensures that, if people are in England or Wales, such orders still apply and the benefits system recognises that.

It is very important, when we see the flare-ups that sometimes happen between politicians north and south of the border, that we understand that, in the day to day, the devolution settlement is working and has been tested through these systems. There were many times when I had to put through orders on matters of substance with which I did not agree, but I did agree that the Scottish Parliament had made that decision, in terms of the devolution settlement, and therefore it was appropriate that the Westminster Parliament and the UK Government ensured that that legislation was fully enacted.

I want to give my thanks and praise to the police in Scotland for the job they do more generally and what they have done specifically during the coronavirus crisis. I particularly commend the chief constable of Police Scotland, Iain Livingstone, for his calm, measured approach to these matters. He said right at the start that it was important that he continued on the basis of policing by consent. From my experience, and from feedback I have received from constituents, I think that has been achieved. That is very important. He underpinned that by setting out three key roles for Police Scotland: ensuring that social distancing is enforced to reduce the mortality rate during the spread of the virus; ensuring that the relationship of trust between the public in Scotland and the police is maintained; and, of course, ensuring the welfare and safety of not just police officers but their families.

I also commend the chief constable on his very reasoned approach. When there were some differences in the guidance between England and Scotland and we heard some unhelpful suggestions, from my point of view, that we should have border patrols, Iain Livingstone was clear that that would be a wholly inappropriate use of police resources. That was very helpful for my constituents, many of whom cross the border regularly.

The Minister and the shadow Secretary of State for Scotland have already alluded to the shocking report that in the first few weeks of the lockdown 100 officers had been attacked or the subject of abuse. As the deputy chief constable Fiona Taylor said, that is outrageous and disrespectful. Abuse and assault are simply not part of the job of police officers and can never be tolerated. I think that that is at the heart of the legislation in the Scottish Parliament and this subsequent order to ensure that we do not in any way accept that the abuse or assault of police officers is regarded as routine or tolerated. In the event of such behaviour they must be supported in every way.

I do not think that we waited six years for this subordinate legislation to come through just so that the hon. Member for East Lothian (Kenny MacAskill), who in 2014 was the Justice Secretary in Scotland and brought forward that Act, could speak in this debate. I am sure he must be disappointed, given the passion that I know he has for this matter and for an effective criminal justice system, that it has taken quite so long for the legislation to be fully enacted and this order put in place, just as I am sure he was disappointed that it took until 2019 for the victim surcharge fund, which was also announced in 2014, to get up and running in Scotland.

This is not, Mr Deputy Speaker, the place to rehearse arguments that are rightly had in the Scottish Parliament, but it would be wrong for me not to ensure that the House is aware that my Scottish Conservative colleagues in the Scottish Parliament are concerned about the Scottish National party Government’s approach to the police and justice system in Scotland, particularly in relation to the ongoing issue of police funding and the ability of the police to do the job that is important to them. Indeed, my colleague Liam Kerr MSP has brought forward legislation in the Scottish Parliament which would give police officers even further protection. The events to which I have just referred, which have happened to police officers on at least 100 occasions, demonstrate that it is appropriate to have additional measures in place. Conservative colleagues in the Scottish Parliament will continue to advocate for that, and to call the SNP Government to account on their approach to policing and justice in Scotland.

The order, however late in the day, is to be welcomed. It is important that, wherever people who have been asked to make such an order are in the United Kingdom, the orders can be effectively approached. I therefore hope that the House will take the view that the order should be passed.

I have one specific query that I want to raise with the Minister, which is in relation to the Department for Work and Pensions and its ability to deal with such things at this time or in the immediate future. As we know, and as the shadow Secretary said, there has been an increase in the existing claimant count, so that is an increasing workload, but it has also obviously prioritised within its workload. I hope the Minister, in his closing remarks, will confirm that the DWP will in due course have the capacity to deal with these orders. We all want to see a minimal amount of these orders, because the optimum situation would be—

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)

Order. We gave you a bit of injury time to get the question out and I know the Minister heard it. Thank you very much for your contribution. I call Kenny MacAskill.

May 28, 2020
Ian Murray – 2020 Speech on Constitutional Law

Below is the text of the speech made by Ian Murray, the Labour MP for Edinburgh South, in the House of Commons on 19 May 2020.

I thank the Minister for his warm welcome at the Dispatch Box. I would rather that we were debating the debacle of Scottish football today, given his experience, which I am sure would be more amenable to our constituents. Perhaps we will get to one of those debates in future when we are back to normal.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ogmore (Chris Elmore) and I appreciate the Minister’s warm welcome and his words about my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (Tony Lloyd), who had a very serious bout of coronavirus. He is now out of hospital and I have spoken to him. You will be pleased to hear, Mr Deputy Speaker, that he has not lost any of his dry wit and sense of humour. We look forward to him being back in this place as quickly as possible.

I also thank the Minister’s wife. I had not realised that she was a serving police officer. I thank her and her colleagues for all that they are doing to keep us safe during the crisis, and not just during the crisis; police and other support staff keep us safe at all times, across not just Scotland but the rest of the UK.

We will work constructively with the Minister, his team and the Secretary of State when they agree with us and we will be a ferocious Opposition when they do not. We will work genuinely constructively when it is in the interest of the people of Scotland, but we will certainly scrutinise and hold both Governments to account for their decisions, because that is what they get paid for.

There is no disagreement this afternoon with regard to the order, which facilitates the retribution orders that the Scottish Government have put in place. It is disappointing that it has taken a bit of time to get here, but there is no better time than now to reassess how we punish those who assault our police officers physically, mentally or, as the Minister said in his opening remarks, by spitting during the coronavirus pandemic. It is time to get the legislation in place.

Retribution orders are useful tools for punishment and deterrence, and the fund that is developed is there for victims in the police service, and other associated people within the police, to seek retribution and have support. It is right for them to get that. We wish only that we did not have to have that kind of support for our police personnel, but we do, and we hope that it will reduce over the years.

It is also important, at this time, to look at the people who might be given a retribution order and how the legislation might affect them. There has been a massive increase in the uptake of universal credit. The unemployment figures released today are not a surprise, but will be a concern to us all. For people in receipt of a retribution order, this order will allow the retribution order to be deducted from their benefits.

I have big questions to ask the Minister with regard to that. How will he ensure the affordability of those orders for benefit claimants, particularly when people are stretched, so that they will not be made destitute by them? Figures released by the Department for Work and Pensions last year revealed that a quarter of a million people across the UK had been sanctioned on universal credit, and 5% of those had been sanctioned for longer than six months.

Can we be sure that any deductions from benefits will be taken into account if someone is sanctioned, in order for them and their families not to be put into destitution? That does not in any way dilute the seriousness of why they were given a retribution order, but it is important that it does not put families into destitution. How can the Minister and the Secretary of State ensure that any changes in legislation at the Scottish Government level are analysed and assessed on the basis of how the order will now work, if people are having deductions from their benefits and pay?

As I said, we do not disagree with the order. Ultimately, compensation for the victims of any crime goes further than its simple monetary value, particularly for crimes of assault on police officers. It can be of great significance as a real recognition of the crime that has been committed against the victim, as well as acknowledging the suffering as a result of any offence. Therefore, this is a necessary statutory instrument that will allow the justice system to work for victims by allowing them to see that the perpetrator’s actions have serious consequences, and will play an important role in victims’ recovery. We are therefore happy to support the order.

May 28, 2020
Douglas Ross – 2020 Statement on Constitutional Law

Below is the text of the statement made by Douglas Ross, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, in the House of Commons on 19 May 2020.

I beg to move,

That the draft Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2014 (Consequential Modification) Order 2020, which was laid before this House on 25 March, be approved.

I start by reminding the House that my wife is a serving police officer in Scotland—a police sergeant in Moray—which clearly relates to the business in front of us today.

May I take the opportunity, for the first time at the Dispatch Box, to welcome the hon. Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray) to his role as shadow Scottish Secretary, and the hon. Member for Ogmore (Chris Elmore) as the shadow Under-Secretary of State for Scotland? I look forward to working with them both in the weeks and months ahead.

May I also send our best wishes to the shadow Scottish Secretary’s predecessor, the hon. Member for Rochdale (Tony Lloyd)? All of us in this House were extremely concerned when he spent 25 days in Manchester Royal Infirmary. He is a great servant to this House and his community, and we wish him continued success as he recovers from coronavirus.

I am grateful for the opportunity to debate this order. Police officers and staff are on the frontline each and every day protecting the public. Members will likely have seen some media reports showing that, in the first three weeks of the current restrictions, police in Scotland recorded more than 100 coronavirus-related attacks and threats aimed at officers. These included officers being spat at or deliberately coughed on. Attacks against our officers and staff are deplorable and completely unacceptable, and this order facilitates police officers in Scotland in receiving the support they need should that ever happen. This will be quite a technical speech about the orders and the legislation in front of us, but we should always remember that behind this important order are our police officers and staff who are unacceptably being attacked in Scotland, and we must do everything we can to prevent that.

This order is part of the Government’s ongoing commitment to devolution and is made in consequence of the Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2014, which I shall refer to as the 2014 Act, and has been requested by the Scottish Government. This order is made under section 104 of the Scotland Act 1998, which allows for necessary or expedient legislative provision in consequence of an Act of the Scottish Parliament. In this case, provision is required in consequence of the aforementioned 2014 Act.

Through the 2014 Act, the Scottish Government sought to increase the support available to victims and witnesses of crime in Scotland. In doing so, the Scottish Government made provision for the creation of a new pathway called the restitution order to be imposed on offenders who assault a police officer or certain other prescribed persons. That will mean that those who assault police officers can be compelled to contribute towards the cost of support services for such victims. In the event of a non-payment of a restitution order, the Scottish Government were to enforce payment through a deduction in sums from benefits where appropriate. However, social security schemes for making deductions from benefits are not within the executive competence of Scottish Ministers.

The Criminal Justice Act 1991 introduces a process whereby fines can be collected through certain benefits. This order therefore amends Section 24 of the 1991 Act by referencing the restitution order and indicating that it should be treated in the same way as a fine for the purposes of that section. This facilitates the Scottish Government’s aim by allowing the recovery of the penalty via deduction from an offender’s benefits.

The process for collecting the restitution order from an offender’s benefits will follow the same process as for other fines or compensation orders. These are predominantly means-tested benefits such as income support and universal credit. The 1991 Act gives the Secretary of State the power to introduce a process whereby courts can apply for a deduction from an offender’s benefits to pay for a fine or compensation order through what is called a deduction from benefits order.

Once the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service has secured a deduction from benefits order, the Department for Work and Pensions will recover the restitution order on behalf of the courts in Scotland by direct deduction from an offender’s benefits. The funds collected will be transferred to the restitution fund, which will be held and managed by the Scottish Government, although functions can be delegated to a third party.

The fund will directly benefit police officers and police staff by securing the provision of any type of treatment which is intended to benefit the physical or mental wellbeing of the victim. Examples of this include the police treatment centres in Auchterarder and Harrogate, where treatment ranges from physiotherapy to psychological wellbeing,

The territorial extent and application of this instrument is England, Wales and Scotland. The territorial application is required as the courts in Scotland need to be able to make the deduction from benefits order, and agencies in England, Scotland and Wales may need to carry out the processes to ensure that the deductions are made. In addition, it provides for the collection of the restitution orders imposed on offenders who move from Scotland to one of the other two territories after conviction, and it also provides for those who reside in England and Wales but committed the offence in Scotland and were therefore tried by a Scottish court.

To summarise, this instrument facilitates the recovery of the Scottish restitution order by deductions from an offender’s benefits in appropriate cases. The order only gives Scottish Ministers the necessary powers to apply to the Secretary of State for a deductions from benefit order; it does not set the policy. That is, of course, a matter for the Scottish Government, under the scrutiny of the Scottish Parliament.

The UK Government remain committed to strengthening the devolution settlement, and this order demonstrates the two Governments working together to deliver for the people of Scotland. It also reiterates our support and respect for police officers and staff across the country. These police officers and staff do so much to protect us; with these orders we are supporting them. I commend the order to the House.

May 28, 2020