Standing Committee E
Tuesday 2 February 1999
[Mr. Peter Atkinson in the Chair]
(Except Clause 1)
10.30 am
The Chairman: Before I call Mr. Boateng to move the sittings motion, I wish to inform the Committee that I have selected the amendment tabled in the name of the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir N. Fowler) and his hon. Friends.
The Minister of State, Home Department (Mr. Paul Boateng): I beg to move,
That, during proceedings on the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill, the Committee do meet on Tuesdays at half-past Ten o'clock and at half-past Four o'clock and on Thursdays at Nine o'clock and at half-past Four o'clock.
I am sure that I speak for the whole Committee when I express my pleasure to be serving under your chairmanship, Mr. Atkinson, during our consideration of this important Bill. You will bring an authority and purpose to our proceedings for which you are justly renowned. We taken equal delight in the fact that Mr. Cook will, from time to time, be relieving you of your onerous duty. Looking at some of the Opposition Members, especially one with whom I have served on a similar Committee, I know that there will be times when your patience will be much tested. Labour Members will do all that we can to ensure that the Bill is dealt with expeditiously and given due and proper consideration.
The Bill is important and we will have an opportunity to consider one aspect of it on the Floor of the House. It has two distinct parts, the first of which is the equalisation of the age of consent for gay and heterosexual sex—a matter that the entire House will want to consider, for obvious reasons. Hon. Members will have the opportunity to follow their conscience, as is the tradition when discussing such matters.
The other equally important part of the Bill is one that all right hon. Members will want to ensure is given the detailed scrutiny that proceedings in Standing Committee afford. It is right that we should be introducing a proposal for equality that the whole House can consider, as it is right that we should consider in Committee how best to protect vulnerable young people—a matter in which for the first time we, as a society, are engaged. I am not talking only about the Bill; we are tackling with a new sensitivity and sensibility a raft of measures concerning the protection of young people at a time when, sadly, we have realised the extent to which they are under threat and the extent to which historically over many years they have been abused in circumstances that are only now coming to light.
Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby): Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Boateng: I should like to make some progress, then I shall give way to the hon. Gentleman.
During our deliberations we shall be giving detailed consideration to the abuse of positions of trust. In doing that, it is right that we should fix clearly in our minds what principles underpin the clause. The amendments that have been tabled show the extent to which the Committee takes the issue seriously.
The Government seek to underpin what we want to achieve with four basic principles. Those principles will determine the areas that should properly be covered by the criminal law—in circumstances in which the criminal law is, of necessity, brought into play only with good reason. We believe that, in this matter, there will be good reason to do so.
The first principle concerns the vulnerability of some young people. Hon. Members will see that the Bill refers particularly to health care and child care. The second principle is about location—young people in the care of those in a position of trust, hence the reference to detention.
The third principle concerns the special influence of the adult. That is particularly important in relation to teachers, who are in a special position because they are in loco parentis. That is a quite different position from those who run creches, who do not have the same standing in relation to young people as teachers. If a parent leaves a child at a creche while shopping, the person in charge is, for a limited time, in a position of trust in relation to that young person; but that relationship could not, by any stretch of the imagination, be described as in loco parentis. There is something special about the relationship between teachers and the young people in their care. The special influence of the adult is the third of the four guiding principles that underpin this part of the Bill.
The fourth principle is just as important: it is the lack of easy access to other adults. The particular mischief that the abuse of trust provisions in clause 3 seek to address is the absence of a countervailing influence—when young people have no one to turn to or to say, ``X or Y is seeking to impose themselves on me.'' Young people at risk need to be able to unburden themselves; they need a countervailing influence in their lives.
Those four basic principles underpin the areas where the criminal law has a proper place. The Bill refers to the vulnerability of young people; to their location; to special influences; and to the lack of easy access to other adults, and the absence of a countervailing influence.
I ask the Committee to give the Bill proper and detailed consideration, over a number of sittings. I ask hon. Members to keep those four principles very much in mind, because we believe that such vulnerability should be protected by the law. The Bill is about equality. Above all, however, it is about respect for the notion that there is something about vulnerable young people that requires protection, that there is something about the relationship of trust that I have outlined that must not be breached—and that when it is breached, it is right that the criminal law, with all its force and influence, should be brought to bear.
In moving such a sittings motion, we are demonstrating our determination to ensure that the House is involved in all matters in which it wants to be, and that the Committee will have a proper opportunity to give the Bill the detailed examination that it and its subject matter deserve. I hope that the motion will find favour with the Committee.
Mr. James Clappison (Hertsmere): I beg to move, as an amendment to the motion, at end add
`except on Thursday 18th February when the Committee will meet at half-past Ten o'clock and at half-past Four o'clock.'
I entirely associate myself with the Minister's opening remarks about the great pleasure it is to serve under your chairmanship today, Mr. Atkinson. We look forward with eager anticipation to serving under your chairmanship as we proceed with the detailed consideration of this important Bill, and to the chairmanship of your colleague Mr. Cook. It will be an extremely pleasant experience for us all.
The Bill falls into two parts. The first is the reduction of the age of consent in clause 1, which, as the Minister said, is subject to a free vote and will be dealt with on the Floor of the House. I imagine that we shall hear different views throughout the Committee, as in the House, on that subject.
The second part of the Bill is the subject that we shall consider in Committee. I hope that there is, and am sure that there will be, widespread agreement in the Committee that we should do all that we can to protect vulnerable youngsters in such matters. We owe them a considerable duty to try to get the legislation right and to give them the strongest possible protection.
When the proposal to reduce the age of consent was originally presented to the House, there was a widespread mood in the House and outside that, while considering the age of consent, we should consider how best to protect youngsters. I hope that the sittings motion will enable us to do just that—as the Minister said, to deal with the matter expeditiously, as I am sure that the House would want, but also, as the Minister rightly said, to give the matter full and detailed consideration. I hope that at the forefront of our minds as we consider the question of sittings will be how we can best do justice to the important task of giving the fullest possible protection to those children.
I listened carefully as the Minister set out the propositions and principles, which are important. One of the reasons why we need time to give the Bill detailed consideration is so that Ministers can take away amendments and matters that we debate, and consider them in detail.
The Minister referred to previous legislation in the field; it is right that a great deal has been done in the field over the years under Governments of both parties. However, the fact remains that, over the years, time after time terrible scandals have come to light in a variety of settings, often involving dedicated and persistent offenders who have abused vulnerable young children, who have been subjected to all sorts of unpleasant sexual abuse. We owe it to those children, to future generations of children in care and to future generations of vulnerable youngsters to do our very best to give the Bill detailed consideration and to give them the strongest form of protection. Worthy though the intentions and objectives of the Bill are, gaps may remain that we may need to fill, and the legislation might somehow be taken further to give even stronger protection. We should like the time in Committee to present our ideas, and we should like Ministers to consider them seriously. I am sure that the Minister will want to give serious consideration to the important task of protecting our children. I listened carefully to the Minister and accept that the propositions and principles that he put forward are important. However, I hope that the Government do not get too hung up on a cast-iron, inflexible approach and will be prepared to listen to other people's ideas, whether they come from us, the Liberal Democrats, or, even, the Government's own Back Benchers.
It is all too easy for Committees and Governments to set out, with the best of intentions, to frame legislation, but inevitably, gaps will appear and abusers will take advantage of that. We want to give the best possible protection by having the strongest possible legislation that does not retain those gaps and which goes far as it can to protect children. That is our objective and we shall be examining the Bill closely to ensure that it offers the protection that we want.
10.45 am
I raise a specific point, which I shall not press to a vote, but which is worth considering. I am not a great supporter of Committees sitting at 9 o'clock in the morning. I do not mind going to work at 9 o'clock—or long before that, if necessary—but it has been convenient over the years for Committees to sit at 10.30 am. One of the reasons for that is because interested parties or groups may want to brief members of the Committee to give them the benefit of their experience and advice immediately before the Committee sits. That has proved valuable over the years. The Minister is smiling, but I am sure that in another capacity, he took advantage of that himself, and that he would want those members of the Committee who are not Ministers to take advantage of the same facility.
It is important to listen to people with experience from outside. There is not a monopoly of wisdom in the Government, as the Minister may find out in due course. We want to take advantage of all the experience that outside groups can bring to bear, which will be made more difficult if the Committee sits at 9 o'clock. I appreciate that Committees have to sit at 9 am on Thursdays to fit in with the new sitting time and questions in the House at 11.30 am. However, that will not be the case on at least one of the Thursdays on which the Committee may be sitting.
I tabled the amendment, by way of exploration, to set down a marker to see what the position might be on Thursday 18 February. The Committee will know that the House will not be sitting on that day, and we shall have the opportunity to sit at a different time—not necessarily at 9 am. We want the sittings of the Committee to be such that we can do justice to the task of giving detailed consideration to the Bill, in order to give the strongest possible protection to vulnerable youngsters. We owe it to them to do so.
| 
