It will not surprise the hon. Gentleman to know that I do not share his characterisation of the Bill. We have sought to draw the definition of those entitled to support under the victims code as widely as possible, keeping it to those who are victims of crime, because that is the nature of the Bill, but not being specific in listing a range of different groups or categories of victims. That is precisely because we want the Bill to be inclusive, rather than inadvertently being too prescriptive and leaving people out, thereby excluding them from services. We have tried to be as broad based as possible in our definition and approach.
To return to that core definition, this is about victims of crime and of criminal acts. To conclude my comments about the tone of the debate, I am grateful to everyone, not just right hon. and hon. Members who have engaged with the Bill, but stakeholders across the criminal justice system, including many charities, campaigners and others. Again, although we may not have always reached the same conclusion, the level of their engagement, and its
tone, has been phenomenal and much appreciated, and I think it makes for a better Bill. Indeed, some victims have bravely shared their experiences. It is not easy for someone to share their experience of crime with anyone they do not know, particularly in the context of a much debated Bill, so again, I am grateful to each and every one of them.
6.15 pm
The number of amendments tabled—that is the point made by the hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins)—and the amount of interest that the Bill’s provisions have generated, demonstrates how important it is. It is encouraging to see the number of right hon. and hon. Members who are in the Chamber for the Report stage, which I think speaks well of the House in that respect. It is, of course, vital that we deliver for victims, and for that reason, following points raised by hon. Members and other stakeholders, the Government will be tabling a number of amendments to strengthen the Bill further, to ensure that it delivers what we want it to, as well as reflecting the listening that we have done during its passage.
Part 1 deals with victims of criminal conduct. We will bring forward a legislative requirement for those under the duty to collaborate to carry out a joint assessment of the needs of victims when preparing their joint commissioning strategy for victim support services. That will require local commissioners to work together to assess the needs of victims in their local police area, the services that are available, and whether and how victims’ needs are being met. There will be an explicit requirement to have regard to the particular needs of certain victims such as children. That was raised in Committee, and I am particularly grateful to the Domestic Abuse Commissioner and her office, who have continued to raise the importance of joint needs assessments to strengthen the duty to collaborate. I am pleased to accept her recommendations and proposals, and to table the relevant amendment.
We will clarify the drafting of the Bill so that it clearly states and is understood that a crime does not need to have been reported for an individual to be included within the definition of “victim”. That was always our intent, but concerns were raised by stakeholders and parliamentarians that that was not explicit or clear enough, which is why we have tabled our new clause. Victims’ views are vital if we are to ensure that support services meet their needs. We listened to feedback in Committee on how valuable such insight can be, and our amendment to clause 13 would place a requirement on local commissioners who are under the duty to collaborate to make reasonable efforts to obtain the views of victims when preparing their commissioning strategy. There are also instances where seeking a view from the Victims’ Commissioner on those strategies will be useful, given their expertise and insight. However, we should also be conscious that that is not always the most appropriate use of the Victims’ Commissioner’s office, and may not be necessary in every case. The amendment clarifies that that will not be a requirement, but it is possible for such engagement to take place.
In Committee, the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Jess Phillips) raised concerns about support for those who are bereaved by suicide where the cause is domestic abuse. I see her in her place on the Back Bench.
I very much enjoyed debating with her when she was on the Front Bench, and I suspect those debates will continue from her new seat. The content may be the same, it is just the seat that is different, and I welcome her back to the Back Benches and look forward to engaging with her further. I agree it is right that suicides are also recognised as fatalities following domestic abuse. For that reason, new clause 20 will change the name of domestic homicide reviews and the circumstances in which they can be carried out. Domestic homicide reviews are multiagency reviews that seek to identify and implement lessons learned from deaths that have, or appear to have resulted from domestic abuse. We will rename those “domestic abuse related death reviews”, better to reflect the range of deaths that fall within the scope of a review. That name change will emphasise that all deaths linked to domestic abuse should be treated as seriously as a domestic homicide.
I also highlight the specialist support that is available for those bereaved under such circumstances. It may not go as far as the hon. Lady would wish, but I hope she will see it as another step forward. We are committed to developing the evidence base and interventions for suicides that follow domestic abuse, and we will also update current legislation for such reviews, to ensure that a domestic abuse related review is considered when a death has or appears to have resulted from domestic abuse, as defined by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021.
Government new clause 37 concerns Jade’s law. In October this year, the Lord Chancellor announced that the Government would suspend parental rights from parents who murder their partner or ex-partner with whom they share children, and the new clause will give effect to that pledge. It will provide for the suspension of parental responsibility in the tragic situation where one partner has been convicted of killing a partner or ex-partner. The new clauses will allow the family court to review the suspension, which will be facilitated by placing a new duty on the local authority to rapidly initiate and bring such proceedings when there is likely to be no one else holding parental responsibility for a child.
I take this opportunity to offer my most sincere condolences to all families dealing with these tragic circumstances, including the family of Jade Ward, who lost their daughter, mother and friend in such a horrific way. Their tireless campaigning, along with that of the right hon. Member for Alyn and Deeside (Mark Tami), has led to and helped shape this amendment. It is important that where we make these changes, we recognise those in this House—from whichever side of the Chamber they come—who have put in the work to achieve them, and I do that now.
Our amendment will provide that where a parent is convicted of the murder or voluntary manslaughter of their co-parent, the Crown court will make a prohibited steps order. That will prevent that parent from exercising their parental responsibility in respect of any children they share at the point of sentencing. We must ensure that in any decision making, the family court considers the best interests of any children involved and the impact it may have on them. The convicted parent may also make representations. The family court will decide whether the order should remain.
There are some cases where an immediate suspension of parental responsibility by the Crown court would not be appropriate. We will therefore include provision
for the Crown court not to suspend parental responsibility where it concludes that it would not be in the interests of justice. This important amendment will give a clear route to help protect families from additional trauma in their darkest moments.
Before moving on to part 2, I will address a number of other concerns that have been raised by Members and tabled as amendments to part 1. I will not pre-empt what may be said by those Members speaking to or moving those amendments—I wish to hear what they have to say—but I thank them for engaging with me over the summer on their concerns. After careful reflection, there are a number of amendments that we have not brought forward or have sought to address through non-legislative means. Some of them seek to expand the definition of a victim or expand support services to reference specific crime types. Although I understand the rationale for that, as I mentioned to the hon. Member for Chesterfield, and the positive impact on victims that recognising a specific crime in legislation can have, on careful consideration I remain of the view that it is right that the definition of victim in this Bill and for support services remains purposely broad and high-level, ensuring that it captures every victim of crime.
However, I recognise in particular the calls made for non-criminal antisocial behaviour to be referenced in this Bill. I also recognise, as I suspect does every Member of this House, the impact that persistent antisocial behaviour that does not reach a criminal threshold can have on individuals and whole communities. While we remain of the view that this is not the right Bill for these measures, I reassure the House that the Government are committed to supporting this cohort. For that reason, the Criminal Justice Bill—it is currently before the House, with its Second Reading so ably concluded by my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Laura Farris)—contains provisions related to tackling all antisocial behaviour, and we therefore consider it the most appropriate vehicle for any legislative changes and for this debate. It will be supplemented by a suite of non-legislative measures.
The Home Office, as the lead Department, recently relaunched its antisocial behaviour case review, formerly known as the community trigger, and raised awareness of the tool throughout ASB Awareness Week 2023. Additionally, the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities is working on a one-stop shop reporting system for ASB, which will ensure that victims of ASB have easy and flexible ways of reporting antisocial behaviour and will receive an update on what has happened as a result. It is also important to remember that a large amount of antisocial behaviour is in fact criminal. While it may not be categorised as antisocial behaviour, the individual offences that are criminal often apply to many of these cases.