Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Pension Funds

17. Dr. Julian Lewis: What representations she has received on the impact of the abolition of the advance corporation tax dividend on pension funds. [34058]

Mr. Denham: A number of organisations with an interest in pensions have written about this matter.

Dr. Lewis: Will the Minister encourage private pension fund managers to inform their pension holders by how much they must increase their monthly contributions to make up the shortfall in their pension funds--or would the Government rather keep their victims in ignorance, in the finest traditions of the late Robert Maxwell?

Mr. Denham: That is a remarkable question from the party that was responsible for the mis-selling of personal pensions on an unprecedented scale. I make it clear that it is a responsibility of private pension providers to provide best advice to holders of their policies.

The best thing that we can do for pension provision is to lay the basis for sound, sustainable economic growth, which achieves high levels of investment and produces the wealth from which all our pensions will be paid. I believe that both the Budget in July 1997 and last week's Budget will achieve just that.

Mrs. Dunwoody: Is it not important that people are given accurate information about their pensions, whether

23 Mar 1998 : Column 17

from the private or the state sector? Is my hon. Friend aware that it was a previous Labour Government who sent in the inspectors of Mr. Robert Maxwell and produced a report which said that, under no circumstances, should he ever be given any support, and that a Conservative City of London proceeded to lend him as many millions as he asked for?

Mr. Denham: My hon. Friend makes an interesting point. I agree that it is important to ensure that people receive accurate information about their pension provision. That is why the Government have set up the pensions education working group to examine how to raise the level of awareness about financial and pensions information. I anticipate receiving that group's report in the next few weeks.

Violence Against Women

18. Ms Southworth: What plans she has for tackling violence against women. [34059]

Ms Ruddock: The purpose--

Ms Southworth rose--

Ms Ruddock: I think that hon. Members are trying to follow your diktat, Madam Speaker, and make their questions rapid and brief.

Madam Speaker: It also applies to Ministers.

Ms Ruddock: I shall try, Madam Speaker.

The purpose of the national strategy on tackling all forms of violence against women is to create a safer environment for women at home and in the outside world by working to eliminate all forms of violence against women and to empower women to challenge abuse. It will cover the safety of women in personal relationships, on transport, at work and in the community.

Ms Southworth: Will my hon. Friend join me in welcoming the two-day conference that will be held in my constituency next month, when local agencies will meet to develop a community plan to take action against domestic violence? Does my hon. Friend agree that those kinds of partnerships are essential if we are to deal with domestic violence, which is an abhorrent crime in which the perpetrators attempt to intimidate the victims so that they are too afraid and ashamed to speak out? Can my hon. Friend confirm that the Government will speak out on behalf of the victims and will root domestic violence out of our society?

Ms Ruddock: I thank my hon. Friend for her question. I confirm that the Government are absolutely clear about the fact that domestic violence must be stamped out. I certainly commend the conference to which my hon. Friend referred and I commend partnerships. I recently witnessed an excellent partnership in Norwich involving the local authority and the housing department, which have worked with the police to enable a community care alarm provision for the elderly to be used also by victims of violence. There are many good practices out there from which we can all learn.

Mr. Brazier: I welcome the Minister's earlier answer. Will she confirm that one form of domestic violence that

23 Mar 1998 : Column 18

is even more common than violence against women is domestic violence against children? Will she reassure the House that children, who have no votes or voices, will be included in the Government's consideration of domestic violence issues?

Ms Ruddock: The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right: the whole Government are deeply concerned about all aspects of child abuse. When we examine domestic violence--which is categorised as violence affecting adults--we also take into account the effects of such violence upon children. The hon. Gentleman is correct to believe that we are building that consideration into our strategy of concern. My colleagues across government are also paying particular attention to all aspects of child abuse, which we wish to see removed from our society.

Lorna Fitzsimons: Although we acknowledge the insidious crime of domestic violence, it is important that the Government strategy makes people aware that our priority is not only domestic violence but all forms of violence against women. Will my hon. Friend tell us something about the cross-departmental workings that are going on to ensure that women can participate fully in the home, in the world of work, on transport and in the community without the fear of violence?

Ms Ruddock: I reiterate that the strategy that we are developing seeks to combat all forms of violence against women, including violence against women on transport. In terms of cross-Government working, I assure my hon. Friend that the women's unit and the Ministers for Women are having key input into the co-ordinated transport strategy document being developed by our colleagues in the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. It is essential to put women's concerns into all aspects of Government policy. We know that women fear violence when travelling on public transport and we hope that we can do much to make it safer for them in reality while addressing their real fears.

Winter Fuel Payments

19. Mr. Baldry: What percentage of those entitled have received their full entitlement of help towards winter fuel costs. [34061]

Mr. Denham: Winter fuel payments have been an enormous and unprecedented exercise involving the issue of almost 10 million payments to more than 7 million pensioner households. As of today, payments have been dispatched to more than 99 per cent. of eligible pensioners. About 15,000 payments remain to be issued over the next few days.

Mr. Baldry: I am sure the Minister will agree that, until recently, the scheme was a bit of a shambles, with large numbers of payments being made very late in the day. After all the problems this year, can he give the House an undertaking that, if the scheme continues for a further year, it will run more smoothly next year?

Mr. Denham: I do not agree that winter fuel payments have been a shambles. They have been a great success. The Opposition did nothing to provide pensioners with help with their winter heating bills over 18 years in office.

23 Mar 1998 : Column 19

The winter fuel payments will be made again next year, and we shall examine the procedures to see what, if any, lessons can be learnt from this year's successful exercise.

Pensioner Incomes

20. Mr. Dismore: What assessment she has made of inequality in pensioner incomes. [34062]

Mr. Denham: We want today's and tomorrow's pensioners to enjoy security in retirement. Income inequality between the best and worst-off pensioners has grown since 1979, and estimates show that that inequality is set to widen in the future.

Mr. Dismore: Is my hon. Friend aware that a quarter of pensioners are on income support, and that pensioner

23 Mar 1998 : Column 20

poverty is a serious problem, particularly in Burnt Oak and Colindale wards in my constituency? Next week, I am due to visit a pensioners luncheon club. Can my hon. Friend tell me what progress I can report to those pensioners when I meet them?

Mr. Denham: A quarter of pensioners are entitled to income support, but many of them are not receiving it. That is why, next month, we are launching nine pilot projects using the most up-to-date computer data techniques to identify those pensioners. We shall work with local authorities and local voluntary organisations to find the best ways of encouraging them to do so. I hope that, on my hon. Friend's visit to the lunch club, he will raise awareness of the Government's action for the poorest pensioners.

23 Mar 1998 : Column 19

23 Mar 1998 : Column 21

Police Complaints and Discipline

3.31 pm

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Jack Straw): With permission, Madam Speaker, I wish to make a statement about the Government's response to the Home Affairs Committee report into police disciplinary and complaints procedures. I am placing in the Library a copy of the response to each of the Committee's conclusions and recommendations. I thank all members of the Committee for the thoroughness of their work.

I begin by praising the honesty and integrity of the vast majority of police officers in this country. Their job is a difficult and dangerous one. As a society, we make huge demands of them. We have a police service that is one of the finest in the world.

The reputation of the service is put at risk, however, by a very small minority of officers whose behaviour falls below the standards that the public rightly expect. The actions of those officers undermine the work of honest officers, and shake public confidence in the service as a whole.

I am therefore determined to give the police service the powers it needs to deal effectively with that small but corrosive minority of bad officers. The Home Affairs Committee's report made a compelling case for change. I am announcing today the steps that I am taking to implement most of its recommendations.

A debate on reform of these procedures has been going on for five years, since the previous Government launched a consultation paper in 1993. At the heart of that debate has been the issue whether arrangements in the service should be brought more into line with normal employment practice in other fields. The burden of the Home Affairs Committee's report is that they should.

The time has come for the Government to take decisions on the report's recommendations and to act upon them. I have been helped in this by the constructive and professional approach adopted by the Police Federation, the Police Superintendents Association and the Association of Chief Police Officers.

One illustration of this approach is the widespread agreement already achieved with the staff associations that the police need new procedures for tackling poor performance by individual officers, and procedures that are separate and different from those needed to deal with disciplinary matters. I accept the Committee's recommendation that the new procedures should be introduced without delay.

Let me deal first with procedures for discipline. First, I have decided that the standard of proof in disciplinary cases should be changed from the criminal to the civil standard. I am alive to the argument that some officers might be less likely to tackle criminal behaviour through anxiety that this change could leave them vulnerable to unfounded or malicious complaints. However, the civil standard of proof has operated fairly in the police service in Scotland, and there is no evidence that this has undermined officers' effectiveness there.

Moreover, I have every confidence that, with this change, police officers as a group will continue to act in the public interest. Nevertheless, I am discussing with the

23 Mar 1998 : Column 22

police associations the possibility of conducting attitudinal research to monitor the effect of the change among police officers.

There are circumstances in which conduct may constitute a breach of discipline although it has not been proved to be a criminal offence. However, at present an officer acquitted of a criminal offence may not be charged with an equivalent disciplinary offence, principally because the standard of proof is the same in criminal and in disciplinary proceedings. In future it will be possible for officers to face both disciplinary and criminal action on the same facts. This will bring the police into line with the position of most others in the public and private sectors.

I am also accepting the Committee's recommendation to end the "right of silence" of officers in disciplinary hearings, and to apply the same modified caution as laid down in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.

At the moment, officers who face the loss of their job or rank as a result of a disciplinary proceeding are entitled to legal representation at all stages of formal disciplinary action. The Committee recommended that this right should be maintained only for those officers who are at risk of losing their jobs.

However, I have decided to retain the status quo, so that officers facing reduction in rank also retain their right to legal representation. In addition, I am rejecting the Committee's recommendation that discipline hearings should be held in public--although the public have a right to know the outcome of proceedings, it would in my view be manifestly unfair to officers facing discipline to have their cases dealt with at a public hearing.

For the most serious cases, the Committee recommended that chief officers should have available to them a system of "fast track" dismissal. I have decided to accept this recommendation. This system will need detailed and careful work before it can be ready for implementation. There will be discussions with the police staff associations about the appropriate procedure. The fast-track procedure will be within a framework of a fixed timetable of no more than six weeks from beginning to end. The procedure would include the right to legal representation and the right of appeal. Officers will be able to be suspended from duty immediately, as is the case now.

There is one serious defect in the present practice that causes very great public concern. This is where a police officer's retirement on ill-health grounds is agreed before disciplinary proceedings can be completed, thus ending all prospect of disciplinary action against an officer. As the House knows, the inability to complete disciplinary hearings after the Hillsborough disaster has quite rightly been a cause of great anger and frustration to the families of victims.

The procedures will therefore be strengthened so that where accused officers claim that they are unable, through ill health, to appear at disciplinary hearings, matters can be decided in their absence, but with appropriate safeguards. I shall also be securing a rigorous application of the existing regulations so that any outstanding disciplinary matters have to be completed before any application for early retirement can be considered.

I intend to take firm action against officers convicted of criminal offences connected with their work. At present, police authorities may apply to me for a

23 Mar 1998 : Column 23

certificate to forfeit the pension of any such officer, but this is at their discretion. In future, police authorities will be asked to refer all such cases to me automatically. It is abhorrent that public money should be paid out to those very few officers who are convicted of criminal offences and who abuse their position of trust.

It is my aim to introduce all these changes in England and Wales with effect from 1 April 1999. As the Northern Ireland discipline regime mirrors the one for England and Wales, I have consulted my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on my response. My right hon. Friend agrees with my proposals, and will be implementing them in Northern Ireland.

Let me turn now to the Committee's recommendations on complaints, which need to be considered separately. Independence and openness are the key to greater public confidence in the police complaints system. The Committee's proposals point the way forward. However, some of its proposals require legislation, and many have significant resource implications. Against that background, I intend to make progress on those changes that do not require primary legislation.

I accept the Committee's recommendation that the Home Office should conduct a detailed feasibility study of different arrangements for an independent police complaints investigation process. I also accept the Committee's view that, in the absence of a totally new investigative body, fundamental changes to the complaints process would be premature, but that, in the meantime, the Police Complaints Authority should make robust use of its existing powers.

I accept in principle the Committee's recommendation that the PCA be given the powers and the funds to commission independent investigations in cases where there is reason to believe that the existing process is inadequate. However, that would involve significant extra costs, which I am afraid make early change here unlikely.

The Committee recommended that either the PCA or any other independent review body should be able to undertake investigations whether or not the matter has been the subject of a complaint. In the light of this, I am minded to propose that, as Home Secretary, I should be given a power to request or require the PCA to initiate and oversee such investigations where this is in the public interest.

Many people make a complaint about the police, which, for one reason or another, is not then recorded. The Committee proposes a relatively straightforward change to the recording of complaints, which would make the current system more responsive to public concerns. It suggests that all representations that could constitute a complaint should be registered by the police, with a right of appeal to an independent body for the complainant where there is a disagreement; and that it should be possible for a complaint to be registered directly with the PCA in certain circumstances. I accept those recommendations.

I have considerable sympathy with the criticism of the Committee that the existing arrangements are not sufficiently open to public scrutiny. The Committee therefore recommended that investigating officers' reports should be subject to disclosure on the same basis as other documents relating to a complaint. It also recommended

23 Mar 1998 : Column 24

that investigation files relating to deaths in custody should generally be made available to the deceased's family before inquests.

Those recommendations raise difficult issues. The reports of investigating officers form a class that the courts have ruled is entitled to public interest immunity, although the police can be directed to disclose a report where a court is satisfied that the public interest of disclosure would outweigh the public interest of preserving confidentiality.

On inquests, the High Court has held that a person is not entitled in advance of the inquest to see copies of statements provided by the police to coroners. At the moment, the release of such documents is at the discretion of the police, but I accept some of the Committee's criticisms, and I am therefore giving further consideration to the scope for changes in this area.

My detailed response to the Committee deals with other confidence-building changes that it has recommended. Some of the recommendations on the complaints system that I have accepted will require primary legislation. The Government will look for suitable opportunities to introduce such changes. Much detailed work and consultation is required with ACPO, the police staff associations, the Association of Police Authorities, and other interested parties. This further work and consultation will begin straight away.

In considering the Committee's recommendations, I have paid full regard to the implications for all police officers who every day fight crime and disorder, and who protect the public. I have no intention of making police officers more vulnerable to malicious complaints about the way in which they do their jobs; but, equally, we must deal robustly with wrongdoing by a very small minority of police officers if public trust is to be preserved. Uppermost in my mind has been protecting the deservedly high reputation and standing of the police service as a whole.

In this country, we police by public consent, and that consent depends on public confidence and trust. The measures that I have announced today will strengthen the people's trust and confidence in their police service, and I commend them to the House.


Next Section

IndexHome Page