Legislative Consent Motion on the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill: Motion 1 and Legislative Consent Motion on the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill: Motion 2

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 6:10 pm on 18 January 2022.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Jane Hutt Jane Hutt Labour 6:10, 18 January 2022

Diolch, Llywydd. I am bringing forward today two legislative consent motions for the UK's Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill for your consideration. The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill is a complex and controversial piece of legislation. The UK Government's decision to amalgamate what were three separate Bills has resulted in a document containing over 179 clauses, 20 Schedules and running over 304 pages, all of which required close analysis. I've looked at the Bill holistically and there are some provisions that fall within the competence of the Senedd, which make changes that will benefit Wales. However, there are also provisions in the Bill within competence that we should not accept, some of which are egregious breaches of people's rights.

I've laid four separate memoranda during the sixth Senedd in relation to the Bill, and these related to UK Government amendments laid during various amending stages in the UK Parliament. The clauses I refer to today are the clause numbers as they appear in the Bill, published on 24 November 2021. I'd like to thank the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for its scrutiny of the memoranda, and I note that the committee published a further report yesterday. The LJC committee concluded that I should seek consent of the Senedd to clauses 1 and 2, clauses 7 to 22, clauses 23 to 35, clauses 36 to 38 and 40 to 42, and clause 46, as well as the amendment laid by the UK Government on 4 January to increase penalties for hare coursing within the Bill where those provisions are deemed to be within the legislative competence of the Senedd. The LJC committee did not agree with the Welsh Government's view that the Senedd's consent was required for clauses 56 and 57 and clauses 61 to 65. However, for the reasons set out in supplementary legislative consent motion No. 4, I believe these clauses do require the consent of the Senedd. The LJC committee's report at paragraph 9 refers to clauses 54 to 55 and 59 to 63, and this is based on an earlier published version of the Bill and are incorrect. The correct clause numbers are the ones I've referred to and are also referenced in paragraphs 34, 35, 39 and 41 of the report.

So, Llywydd, I turn to motion No. 1, which relates to clauses that I am recommending that the Senedd gives consent to. Clause 1 confers a duty on the Secretary of State to publish an annual report on the police covenant and present this to Parliament. Clause 2 increases the penalty from 12 months to two years for assaults on emergency workers, which are abhorrent. Clauses 7 to 22 are on the serious violence duty requiring authorities to collaborate to prevent and reduce serious violence, which now includes domestic abuse and sexual violence added as the result of an amendment to the Bill, which I fully supported. And I do support all the provisions relating to the serious violence duty, as they will facilitate a local response to help prevent and reduce the most serious crimes and contribute to our violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence provisions.

And I would like to say that I was pleased that the UK Government took on board the Welsh Government's concerns regarding clause 17. Following successful inter-government discussions, an agreed amendment came forward to the drafting of clause 17, requiring the Secretary of State to obtain the consent of Welsh Ministers before issuing a direction to a devolved Welsh authority. Previously, it was only consultation with Welsh Ministers being required before a direction-making power was used. So, obtaining their consent was a welcome amendment.

If I move on to clauses 23 to 35, offensive weapons homicide reviews will bring together safeguarding partners to conduct formal reviews and then lessons to prevent future deaths involving offensive weapons, and I'm pleased that Wales will be acting as a pilot area. Clauses 36, 37, 38, 41, 42 and 43 are related to the extraction of information from electronic devices, which aligns with the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014.

A new amendment to increase penalties for offences relating to game, et cetera, in order to protect hares by deterring poaching, made on 4 January 2022, which does not have an assigned clause, is also a clause that I'm suggesting we do give consent to.

And finally, clause 61 relates to public nuisance and protects individuals from public nuisance when nuisance creates a risk of, or causes serious harm to a person, including death or personal injury. I therefore bring motion No. 1 to the Chamber and ask Members to give consent to these clauses.

Before I turn to the second motion, I just want to highlight that there are provisions in the Bill that we are supportive of, but sit outside the Senedd's legislative competence. For example, the changes in law to introduce the offence of breastfeeding voyeurism. Voyeurism offences and other offences are harassment, removing a person's dignity, rights and freedom, and it's right that the law prohibits such behaviour.

And, Llywydd, last night, an amendment was agreed at the House of Lords to add a new clause to the Bill relating to misogyny as a hate crime. It was late last night, and I will be laying a further supplementary LCM in respect of this amendment in due course. But the Bill also makes changes to youth rehabilitation orders, which have the potential for ensuring the justice process is best suited to the individual needs of the child, preventing them from entering the criminal justice system and giving positive outcomes, which is very much an approach aligning with our youth justice blueprint.

So, I'll now turn to motion No. 2, which relates to clauses for which I'm recommending the Senedd withholds consent and recommending that Senedd Members vote against this motion No. 2.

Clause 47: while sentencing in courts is a reserved matter, monuments, memorials and culture are devolved. The changes the Bill introduces will make it possible for a person to be tried in the Crown Court and be imprisoned for up to 10 years and, in some cases, life, simply for causing criminal damage to a memorial with a value of less than £5,000. In my opinion, this approach is unfair and disproportionate.

Clauses 56, 57 and 62 allow the police in certain circumstances to impose conditions on public processions, public assemblies and one-person protests. Taken as a package, the draconian restrictions the Bill places on the right to protest are repugnant, and, let me be clear: the approach the Bill takes in relation to protest is tantamount to state control and rips away the fundamental right to protest. We continue to make the point to the UK Government that the measures they are proposing in relation to protest cannot and should not be tolerated. And I was heartened to see the opposition in the House of Lords yesterday and welcome the defeat of the clauses that give new powers to limit protest and those that are aimed at groups, such as, for example, Insulate Britain. I call on the UK Government to take these concerns seriously and think again.

We move on to clauses 63 to 65. The Welsh Government's approach to managing unauthorised encampments is unchanged. We focus on engagement with communities and investment for adequate provision of authorised sites for our Gypsy and Traveller communities, enabling local authorities to meet the accommodation needs, both residential and transit, of Gypsy and Traveller communities. This area of work is prioritised again in the race equality action plan, which contains a specific goal on better addressing the accommodation needs of these communities. The proposed clauses put forward by the UK Government focus on enforcement and criminalisation, which undermines and jeopardises the semi-nomadic way of life of Gypsies and Travellers. I've raised these strong concerns with the UK Government and have asked them to reconsider the approach in the Bill to unauthorised encampments, as I'm describing this as a sledgehammer approach that will impact disproportionately on members of our Gypsy and Traveller communities.

So, in conclusion, Llywydd, I therefore bring motion No. 2 to the Chamber, asking Members to withhold consent for these clauses.