Uncorrected Evidence 263

1.	This is an uncorrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others.
2.	Any public use of, or reference to, the contents should make clear that neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings.
3.	Members who receive this for the purpose of correcting questions addressed by them to witnesses are asked to send corrections to the Committee Assistant.
4.	Prospective witnesses may receive this in preparation for any written or oral evidence they may in due course give to the Committee.

Oral Evidence

Taken before the Home Affairs Committee

on Tuesday 4 March 2008

Members present

Keith Vaz, in the Chair

Ms Karen Buck

Mrs Ann Cryer

Mrs Janet Dean

David T. C. Davies

Margaret Moran

Gwyn Prosser

Bob Russell

Mr Gary Streeter

Mr David Winnick

________________

Memorandum submitted by CAADA

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Ms Diana Barran, Co-ordinated Action Against Domestic Abuse, gave evidence.

Chairman: Can I welcome you to this latest session in the Home Affairs Committee's deliberations on domestic violence and forced marriages and refer all those present to the Register of Members' Interests. We are very grateful to you, Ms Barran, for coming to give evidence to us. We have one more session after this in this inquiry, when we will be hearing from the entry clearance manager from Islamabad about those who come from abroad. Margaret Moran has the first question to you.

Q326 Margaret Moran: Hello. Some of us went to Wolverhampton - I think it may only have been me actually - to sit in on a MARAC, and we have heard a lot of evidence from various witnesses about the effectiveness of MARACs. There has been criticism that the MARACs only deal with the highest level of risk and, thus, there are many survivors of domestic violence who are not being dealt with. What would you say to that? The other criticism is that the measurement for effectiveness is only related to repeat offences, which may be severely misleading, since many victims and survivors contact agencies a number of times before getting appropriate help. How would you respond to those two criticisms?

Ms Barran: On the point about high risk victims and the MARAC process only being accessible to high risk, just to put it in context, we know that about 1.5 million people a year suffer domestic abuse. The MARAC is targeted at the top 150,000, so we are talking about the top 10%, so it is quite a big universe of high risk. That is the first point. Secondly, we are in a country with limited resources, and so, in terms of how we prioritise our resources, I think it is only defensible to look at those who are most at risk of being killed or seriously injured or whose children will be damaged by the abuse. Finally, in terms of information sharing, we can only share information legally without consent where the victim survivor is high risk. For those legal and practical resource issues, those are the reasons for it today. In terms of your point about repeat victimisation, I think it is a common misunderstanding. The whole point about MARAC is, you are absolutely right, victims of domestic abuse may not go back to the police a second time and that may not be a good indicator of its success, but the way that we measure repeats at MARAC is repeats to any agency. The whole point is, if she does not go back to the police but she does turn up at A&E, any incident that the police, had they known about it, would have defined as a crime would come straight back to MARACs - whether it is complaining about stalking to the health visitor or attending A&E with an injury or reporting to a refuge worker, or whatever it might be, that would come straight back to MARAC - and so the definition of repeats at MARAC is not a criminal justice definition, it is a safety definition, and that is very important. I think it is quite widely misunderstood.

Q327 Mrs Cryer: In your report you said that if we were to have a full network across the country, 1,200 IDVAs and 300 MARACs, it could well save the public purse Ł250 million in direct cost. First of all, what is the evidence of that? Also, you suggest that your running costs would be Ł15 million per annum for this national service. This is more than twice the budget of any other national agency. How would you be able to justify that?

Ms Barran: I will take the second point last. I think it must be a typo, because our running costs are currently Ł1.2 million and next year are forecast to be 1.5. They would obviously increase if the network multiplied, but it would be nothing like 15 million.

Q328 Mrs Cryer: I am sorry; I should not have said 15 million: five million.

Ms Barran: That is not just for CAADA support. As I say, CAADA today is 1.2 million and next year we are budgeting on 1.5, and we are expecting the network to triple and our costs to roughly double within that; so there will be some economies of scale, but, obviously, there is more training, there is more support and there is a whole lot of additional work outside this programme that we are looking to develop in relation to the accreditation of services so that we get consistent service provision. I can talk about that more if you want.

Q329 Mrs Cryer: But you are saying it would definitely be less than five million?

Ms Barran: Yes. Shall I take your other question in terms of the evidence for the 200? Is that all right, Chairman?

Q330 Chairman: Would you, please.

Ms Barran: The evidence for that comes initially from Professor Sylvia Walby's research, which she did in 2004 for the DTI, on the cost of domestic abuse, and within that she separated out three categories of cost: direct cost, which is obviously the cost of individual police officers or A&E staff, or whatever, attending incidents of domestic abuse, and then indirect costs, which relate to the emotional suffering borne by victims and survivors of domestic abuse and their families. We have excluded all of the indirect costs and we have broken her analysis down and done some analysis from other evaluations to look at what a typical MARAC case might be costing our society today before it gets to MARAC, and we have looked at the number of times somebody might call the police, the number of times they go to their GP, et cetera, and we have taken a pretty, relatively speaking, uncomplicated case, and I will not bore you with the details, but the figure that comes out of that is Ł10,000 per case in terms of direct cost. We have multiplied that by the number of victims who would get support from the MARAC and then we have taken an assumption on how many of those would access safety as a result of that multi-agency intervention, and we have said that 30% of them would, and that is about half of the figure that we are actually seeing today. Let us just say, these are ball park numbers that we are trying to work with, so let us put in a big cushion for where we might be over-optimistic, and that gives you Ł300 million and, if you subtract from that the cost of the IDVA network, the MARAC co-ordinators and additional support costs, not just our own but other organisations in the sector, that gives you a net figure of 250. I hope that is clear.

Q331 Mr Streeter: Do you think that the MARAC system should be put on a statutory footing? Do you think that would help the participation of other agencies, or do you think it would just encourage more of a tick-box culture that is already out there quite widely in the public sector? What do you think?

Ms Barran: I think that what we want to get in place systematically for the MARAC, and you would know better than I would whether the statutory footing will achieve that, is absolute standard behaviour for all organisations who are involved in MARAC to share information appropriately and feel that they are safe in doing so. At the moment we get, particularly in the health professional, very, very, diverging practice around the country and we need professionals not to feel that they are taking a risk to share information, they need to be absolutely clear about the limits of it and the boundaries, but also, where it is appropriate, to do so. That is one key thing, I think, that is missing today. The whole quality assurance exercise for MARACs needs to be absolutely accepted and standard, and obviously the resourcing of MARACs and all these services needs to be reinforced. We have come an incredibly long way in about 18 months since this process started, but most MARACs are massively under resourced in terms of IDVA. The capacity in Wolverhampton is fortunate in having decent IDVA capacity, but the IDVAs will do up to 80% of the work from the MARAC, so if you do not have enough of them it puts a huge burden on existing agencies. If we achieve that through statutory means, fantastic; if we need to get it another way, then we need to get it another way.

Q332 Gwyn Prosser: We know that work is underway to adapt or use MARACs for helping to deal with forced marriages. During the course of the inquiry we have met a number of victims of forced marriage, or second victims, and it is clear that there is a huge barrier of resistance amongst these young women, mostly young women, about approaching the police directly. Given that MARACs are primarily driven by the police, do you think it is an appropriate way forward and what work has to be done to make it work?

Ms Barran: I think two things. In some places the MARAC is primarily driven by the police, but what we are seeing in the data that we are getting back from MARACs around the country is that, as they mature, so other agencies feel more confident to refer in, and so in the more established MARACs about 30% of referrals are coming from non-police sources. That is the first point. The second thing is to say that MARACs clearly are not a magic wand for forced marriage or anything else, sadly, but they are a very helpful tool in the toolkit. I think, in relation to forced marriage, they are more relevant, obviously, for those people who are at risk of forced marriage rather than those who have already been through a forced marriage. Thirdly, obviously, in most cases, where appropriate, MARACs will look at young people aged 16, 17 and 18, but, clearly, younger than that, it would be a child protection matter rather than a MARAC matter; but I would come back to the key thing, which is that there is a whole heap of work to do about awareness as a result of forced marriage in the education system and elsewhere and making sure that the MARAC is accessible for other agencies to refer into is absolutely critical. It is not going to be a quick win, but it is really important that we work on it now, because we are hearing of MARACs trying to deal with forced marriage today without necessarily the tools do it, and we have updated all our materials to accommodate elements of forced marriage and we have had help from Karma Nirvana in doing that, so we are doing our best, but we are all having to run very fast.

Q333 Gwyn Prosser: Your current risk assessment assesses risk to women from male abusers. How useful is it for identifying the risks for male victims, victims of same-sex forced marriages, and other so-called honour-based violence?

Ms Barran: We have been working very closely with ACPO in relation to including honour-based violence and forced violence into the risk assessment, and we are going to be publishing a revised version of that, and we are hoping that ACPO will be doing the same, although it is slightly more complicated for them than for us (they have got a few more hurdles to jump) in April of this year. The whole language of that will focus on potentially multiple abusers and will address honour-based violence specifically. As to the issue about male victims, are you asking me specifically in relation to forced marriage or more widely?

Q334 Gwyn Prosser: More widely. Forced marriage and honour-based, so-called honour-based violence?

Ms Barran: To date there are various areas where the MARAC has not been successful. As I said, it is early days, but one of those is certainly in relation to victims from gay relationships, where there is just a tiny percentage of cases, nearly none, that have come in so far. Certainly in our training the risk tool that we have is valid in same-sex relationships, but we have an additional screening tool that we recommend practitioners use where it is harder to assess who the primary aggressor is. In relation to heterosexual abuse where it is a woman abusing a man, I know that other people are doing work on that. We do not do anything ourselves at the moment.

Chairman: Ms Barran, thank you very much for giving evidence to us today, it has been very helpful, and we will send you copy of our report when we publish it.

Witnesses: Mr Iain Wright MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, and Kevin Brennan MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, gave evidence.

Q335 Chairman: We now have as our witnesses the ministers in the Department of Communities and Local Government, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Iain Wright, and the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, Kevin Brennan. Welcome ministers. May I start with you, Mr Wright? Other than the sanctuary scheme, can you give examples of outreach initiatives which your department funds?

Mr Wright: Chairman, that is a big question and forgive me if I go on at length about this. There is whole range of things that we support, financially and otherwise, in our department. I would mention the Ł150 million that we have given in respect of the next three years to local authorities in terms of homelessness services, which could incorporate, to some extent, domestic violence. That is the biggest ever cash injection in respect of homelessness services and demonstrates this department's and this government's priority in respect of that. In terms of other resource-based funding, I would mention the Supporting People initiative, which has been a huge success. It is going up in terms of the amount of money that has been given in respect of domestic violence issues.

Q336 Chairman: We are coming on to that slightly later. You talked about a cash injection. What was the amount of cash?

Mr Wright: One hundred and fifty million pounds for local authorities. If I may go on Chairman, in terms of capital funding, there is an issue with regard to refuges for women and, in conjunction with the Housing Corporation, the department has invested Ł34 million to provide 511 new and refurbished units, and only last week the Housing Corporation continued this work by announcing another six million pounds for a further 113 units in the next comprehensive spending review. Then there is the wider issue, Chairman, about housing supply and making sure that there is the available housing for victims of domestic violence to be provided, and I think that is an important point and that is a wider issue, whether we have got the homes available to meet the needs of the population.

Q337 Chairman: Ministers, some say that sanctuary schemes are just being used by local authorities as easy alternatives to finding refuge spaces. What evidence is there that the schemes really do make a difference, they make women safer and are what victims want?

Mr Wright: That final point, Chairman, is the key point, because I do not think a sanctuary scheme should go ahead unless it has got the express consent of the victim. That is absolutely important. I do think sanctuary schemes are an important consideration in terms of domestic violence. It provides continuity, it provides stability, it makes sure that children who may be involved in domestic violence have the stability of going to the same school, which continues the point that I should imagine Kevin Brennan will want to talk about. Anecdotally, and I appreciate the limitations of this, the scheme has been a success. In Harrow, for example, we have got something like an 80% success rate in the ratio of referral to actual completion and people that have been involved in it have said it has been a huge success. Similarly, in Barnett, 90% of all people who have been part of the sanctuary scheme have expressed it as being a success. I appreciate that there are limitations with regard to that, I also accept that it is rather anecdotal, and so I am keen to commission research to have a broader evidence-based evaluation of the sanctuary schemes. As you hinted at in your question, Chairman, the sort of thing that victims are not forced into and it is being considered in a comprehensive and systematic manner, so that, and I am being rather flippant here, forgive me, it is not just a case of, "We will give you an extra lock", this needs to be done very much in consultation with: what are the risks involved, how does this address the individual needs of the victim and how we can move forward?

Chairman: Mr Russell, do you have a supplementary based on our visit to your constituency?

Q338 Bob Russell: I would invite the Minister to go and see for himself and roll-out the best practice across the country, because it is quite clear there are insufficient places for women who are at serious risk and also the children in many cases.

Mr Wright: I understand that point, Chairman, and in terms of what Mr Russell is saying, as I said, we are keen to increase as much as possible the amount of spaces available, and that is a wider and more fundamental issue. Given the importance of domestic violence as an issue, I still think it is an important point about the increase in housing supply, because we do need to have the houses that meet the needs of the population in the twenty-first century in this country. One of those things will be that we need to make sure that women, predominantly women, although I recognise it is not just women, who are fleeing domestic violence have appropriate accommodation to go into. It is absolutely key and something that my department, and me personally as a minister, would wish to support.

Q339 Ms Buck: As you said, the issue is setting sanctuary in a wider context of housing supply, but the survey done by Women's Aid found that two-thirds of those who responded said that women were actually waiting longer than they were two years ago for moving on from sanctuary accommodation into sustained temporary or permanent accommodation. Why is that?

Mr Wright: I think there will be an element of silting up in the system. I can understand that. There is an issue with regards to housing supply, which we have already touched upon. I am keen to make sure that the sanctuary scheme does work effectively. As I said, I think that provides an element of stability, but, as I said, the wider and more fundamental issue of housing supply is something that we need to address, certainly in the urban areas, and certainly we have had letters and met about things like how to borrow accommodation. It is very important we have an holistic approach to this. I would suggest, Chairman, that we make sure that it is not just meeting the accommodation needs, important though that is, it is making sure that any connections that a victim may have in terms of family support in a particular area is addressed as well, and that is why out-of-borough accommodation is quite an important point that we have corresponded about.

Q340 Ms Buck: We have, and, indeed, one of the things that Women's Aid found, which very much confirms my own experience, is that there are occasions when households are offered accommodation which is unsuitable for their needs in a number of ways and are then declared intentionally homeless as a consequence. In some cases this is because they have been reluctant to take out-of-borough accommodation, miles away from their home. Is that acceptable?

Mr Wright: It is something I would like to look at. In terms of possible legislation, I am taking the Housing and Regeneration Bill through the House of Commons at the moment. There was an important amendment tabled by Andy Love that was supported by Margaret Moran with regards to vulnerability. This is the sort of thing that I thought was an incredibly powerful and eloquent argument about vulnerability and the test of priority need for people who are fleeing domestic violence. I have agreed to take that away and look at it. I am very keen to make sure that we are considering this so that anybody who is fleeing---. One of the things that Margaret Moran actually said, Chairman, at the committee was that it is very much a postcode lottery in terms of what goes on. I want to stress-test that as much as possible and make sure that the discretion and definition of vulnerability that Margaret Moran mentioned in the committee is addressed, and I promise to report back, at report stage of the bill, further progress but I am very keen to work on this. I think this is an important matter that this department, and me personally, needs to be dealing with.

Q341 Ms Buck: There clearly is a discrepancy between what the department says happens and what is actually happening on the ground. Is this something that you are able to close? Another example of this: I met a woman recently who was on her ninth temporary accommodation address in ten years. This is not supposed to happen. Why does it happen?

Mr Wright: It is not good enough. I admit that. What I would be suggesting, and what I want to do as much as possible is undertake policy that is evidence-based. I have mentioned research into sanctuary schemes, which I am keen to address. I was also struck, Chairman, by the evidence given to this committee by Ms Harwin, who I understand is the Chief Executive of Women's Aid. In terms of this silting off of the process, I am keen to go in, look at this and make sure that the vision of the department and the Government, in terms of accommodation which is appropriate for the victims of domestic violence, matches the reality on the ground. It is a very important, incredibly difficult and complex issue that involves a great deal of broader issues about housing supply, but, in terms of the priority of this government in terms of housing, I think it is something that we are addressing and making sure that that vision matches up with the reality.

Q342 Ms Buck: Do you actually know who gets nominations for social housing?

Mr Wright: In terms of the department?

Q343 Ms Buck: In terms of the number of people who enter the system through different channels who then end up getting a tenancy and where they come from; whether it is domestic violence or medical priority or other routes into homelessness.

Mr Wright: We get some degree of information through the P1E form, but there is always tension between how much data we collect and how much we leave to the discretion of the local authorities in respect of the devolution agenda, with local needs being addressed by local measures. I understand that tension and a balance needs to be struck as to where we need to be. It is very important, but I understand your point.

Q344 Margaret Moran: I am going be boring and refer back to postcode lottery provision, particularly the evidence that we have received. If you have read the evidence from Nicola Harwin, you will have seen that there is an on-going concern regarding commissioning under Supporting People, that the thrust of the guidance, or the thrust of what is happening with local authorities through the tendering process, is for more generic services, thus losing the specialisms of both Women's Aid and, more acutely, BME women's support services. We were at Ashiana yesterday, who are losing two of their workers. We understand that Southall Black Sisters, one of the most long-established in this area, dealing with both domestic violence and forced marriage, is under financial threat partly because of the way in which tendering and commissioning is happening. What can you do to ensure that we have some ring fenced funding so that those services do not vanish entirely. In Scotland they ring fenced Supporting People. Why cannot we do it here?

Mr Wright: That is a very important point. I think it is very important that we have efficiencies in the Supporting People programme. I do not think anybody would dispute that. In terms of the expertise that has been built up on the ground, it is very important that we retain that. My department has provided funding and round about three and a half million pounds over the last three years to provide advice and capacity building for the umbrella firms in respect of the voluntary sector. Recently the Housing Association charitable trust has been given half a million pounds to come up with ways in which that expertise that you were referring to is captured and retained as much as possible. It could be through a whole range of things - it could be through subcontracting and sub-tendering, it could be through consortia - but I am very clear, and I would be very keen, Chairman, as to the examples that have been mentioned today, if you could give me evidence of that so I can take it away and see where the difficulties have been in respect of tendering and procurement and what we can do centrally to address that.

Q345 Chairman: Members of the Committee went to visit Southall Black Sisters and, as a direct result of the process that you have initiated, it may well close. I have written to the leader of the Council about this, and he said, "This is what the Government has asked us to do." That is the evidence.

Mr Wright: I am very keen for them not to close, Chairman. As I said, I would like to look at that more closely and make sure that any difficulties that have been put in place because of tendering and procurement guidelines issued centrally are addressed so that we can resolve this.

Q346 Bob Russell: Mr Wright, the unintended consequences of the legislation are already happening. Margaret Moran has said so, Nicola Harwin of Women's Aid told this committee and gave a specific incidence where a local authority had, in effect, removed 30 years of experience, and the Chairman and I had the same warnings yesterday at the Woman's Aid in my constituency. This is a serious threat and, I am sorry, your answer and your department's answer is not good enough.

Mr Wright: Let me look at that. Mr Russell, I have read the submission and the transcript of earlier sessions of this Committee where you have raised this very issue. I am very concerned at the loss of expertise and capacity on the ground, the unintended consequences of making sure that we have efficiencies, and I am keen to address that. I hope I can pledge that to the Committee.

Q347 Margaret Moran: Perhaps we could have a note specifically about BME women's special services and, whilst you are doing that note, would you look at what I call the Darra Singh consultation - you know what I mean: community cohesion - which also appears to veer in the same direction, in other words focusing more on generic services and squeezing out specific BME support services? I think the thrust of your department is going in that direction. It is not just Supporting People; it is a whole range of initiatives. Could I ask you one further question which is about no recourse to public funds? You no doubt are aware that we are in a situation where BME women, where they have uncertain immigration status under the domestic violence rule but are applying for status, have no recourse to public funds. Why is it that your department does not want the advice to local authorities to be strengthened? Currently the advice on helping to fund those survivors or victims who have no recourse is simply for information only. These women become destitute as a result, because Women's Aid and other hostels simply cannot afford to take them, and the funding that was available to try and help out through Women's Aid has now gone. Why is it that you have not evaluated the impact of the information, not even guidance, nothing stronger than information, to local authorities and what is actually happening to those survivors?

Mr Wright: In terms of recourse to public funds, one of the whole intentions of Supporting People is that it is flexible and mobile so that it follows the person who is actually accessing that rather than being quite strict and silo-based funding. In that respect I am fairly happy, but I am also keen to go away and look at the issues that you are concerned about.

Q348 Margaret Moran: They are not entitled to any support?

Mr Wright: Chairman, let me take that away and look at it, because I am concerned with what you are saying. As I said, my very clear intention is that it is very flexible and mobile, it follows various groups who are at risk (1) of being mobile and (2) in danger of being destitute. Victims of domestic violence is one group, gypsies and travellers are another, but that is certainly an issue I can take away.

Q349 Mr Winnick: Mr Wright, you said in reply to the Chairman that you are looking into, or will look into, the position of the Southall Black Sisters. Clearly, I think you will recognise it will be a devastating blow - I do not think there is any other way to describe it - if it was forced to close as a result of a new formula the local authorities intended to use over financing. Would it be possible for you to give us a note in the next two weeks about the situation?

Mr Wright: Yes, I will do that.

Chairman: If we could ask for it by next week, because the Council is considering this. I will send you a copy of the letter from the leader of the Council and if you can report to us next week, that would be very helpful.

Q350 Mr Winnick: We will have it by next week then.

Mr Wright: Yes.

Q351 Tom Brake: Mr Wright, I believe that local authorities have an option of choosing the two domestic violence targets as part of the indicators in the new local area agreement system, and those are reducing repeat victimisation and reducing homicide. Would you happen to know how many local authorities have indeed adopted those indicators or intend doing so?

Mr Wright: Out of 150 authorities, 150 so far have pledged to do that, although we are still in the process of negotiation with those local authorities, so that could alter. I would anticipate, in terms of the direction of travel, that would increase.

Q352 Tom Brake: That is good news. Are you confident, however, that under the new local area agreement arrangements there will be an ability not just to focus on perhaps the highest risk cases but also the wider range of cases?

Mr Wright: I do think that in the new system that we are proposing, in terms of local area agreements, local authorities will have the discretion to focus on the areas that most concern them and also to be more nimble in their responses. I think that is important. The previous BPVI was somewhat blunt and did not take into account circumstances or direction of travel in terms of the 11 questions that they answered and then came out magically at the end, yes or no. In that respect I do think the new local area agreements and NI32 will be a lot better and allow local authorities to be much more responsive.

Q353 Tom Brake: Is there anything that the department will be doing in terms of monitoring the progress in relation to the performance indicators?

Mr Wright: As part of that negotiation, as I mentioned earlier, this is certainly something that we will be talking to local authorities about.

Chairman: Thank you, Mr Brake. We now turn to Mr Brennan. Thank you for sitting there so patiently. As you know, this matter was raised during the course of our inquiry by our colleague Martin Salter, who cannot be with us today. He raised it at Prime Minister's Questions and he has written to the Secretary of State about it. Gwyn Prosser.

Q354 Gwyn Prosser: Mr Brennan, yesterday we visited Ashiana in Leytonstone and we had a briefing from a young outreach education worker. Her role is go into schools and talk about the domestic violence issue, about forced marriages and give advice, and she made it very clear to us that there were some very strict barriers which were stopping her doing her job properly. Some schools would not have her at all, other schools limited what she could say and quite a number of schools would not even allow her to leave leaflets or put notices on the notice board. The worrying factor is it seems that those schools which were resistant probably house a greater proportion of those girls and young women who would be victims of violence. What powers does the department have to instruct schools to adopt measures to tackle domestic violence and forced marriage?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, all schools should be dealing with matters relating to the safeguarding of children, including domestic violence and forced marriage. I read with interest the evidence you have taken here in the committee and the reports as well as the letter from Martin Salter, and, in fact, Chairman, we have done some more work, which your committee might be interested in in the meantime, through government offices to find out what has happening in various parts of the country where there is a particular problem in relation to forced marriage. I could give you a little bit of a flavour of the sorts of things that are happening, but perhaps it would be better if I provided you with a longer note after the committee session because there is quite a bit of work that has been done. What we have done is looked into the issue of what is happening in schools in relation to information about forced marriages, and it is not just an issue of posters, Chairman, as I am sure you appreciate, it is an issue of to what extent is there a culture within schools of being prepared to take on this issue. Every school must have a member of staff whose job it is to look after the safeguarding of children. Every person working with children in school should receive training in relation to the safeguarding of children, including issues of domestic violence and forced marriage. In our evidence that we have been collecting from the government offices over recent weeks about this, I think it is fair to say there is a variable performance around the country in relation to what is going on. In some areas there is very good practice going on whereby the issue is being taken very seriously, and often leaflets are being used instead of the posters that you have heard evidence about previously; in other areas of the country, I think it is fair to say, there is insufficient awareness, and what we are intending to do in building on all the work that has gone on about safeguarding children and on this issue of forced marriage and domestic violence in recent years is to do a lot more work with the Forced Marriage Unit in the months to come to design better materials for schools; because I think it is fair to say, if you have seen the poster, Chairman---

Q355 Chairman: Here is the poster that Gwyn Prosser was referring to.

Kevin Brennan: Indeed.

Q356 Chairman: What gave rise to this was the fact that in Derby this was not being displayed. That is why we are keen to know, and that is why Mr Prosser has asked you, what have you done about the fact that this poster has not been displayed?

Kevin Brennan: In relation to Derby, Chairman, my officials have visited the local authority and spoken to them about the issues that have occurred in Derby, and they were very keen to impress on us that they have a very strong commitment to safeguarding children, including the issue of forced marriage. They found that three of the 13 secondary schools that they contacted could recall having contact from Karma Nirvana, who I know gave evidence to this committee. Of those three, two of them were already working with Karma Nirvana on the issue. One of them was displaying the poster. The other, the school explained it did not display that particular poster but was covering the topic of forced marriage through the curricular. We do not direct schools what materials to use in relation to the issue of forced marriage or in relation to any issue of what posters they should put up. That is just one possible way of dealing with the issue.

Q357 Chairman: But dealing with Mr Prosser's point, did you find that schools were not putting up these posters? That, I think, is the issue he wants to raise with you.

Kevin Brennan: I think in relation to both Derby and across the country a limited number of schools were using that particular poster. The point I wanted to make, Chairman, having looked at that poster - which was produced by the Forced Marriage Unit, as you are aware - is that what we want to do over the next few months, and particularly before the summer holidays, which is a critical period in relation to this, is to work with them to design some materials that are more specifically designed for schools and young people, to write to them to raise awareness.

Q358 Chairman: Are you designing the posters? Is that the issue?

Kevin Brennan: It could be a poster, but it could be other materials as well, Chairman, because, as I said, in some schools they may not feel that that is the best approach for them to take, to display a poster, there may be more discreet ways they would like to deal with the issue.

Q359 Gwyn Prosser: We are not talking about forced marriage or the victims of so-called honour-violence; we are also talking about the wider, very worrying concerns of domestic violence in general. I think the important point to stress is that, again, the resistance, we were told, mostly comes from the governing body and, if the governing body is made of communities who have some sort of lasting respect, if you can call it respect, have some sort of resonance with the whole issue and culture of arranged marriages and forced marriages and tolerance of domestic violence, male against female, then that is a very hard nut to crack. What can the department do to penetrate that?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, as you know, there will be guidance being put on a statutory footing in relation to forced marriage which will include guidance to people working in education in the months to come, and it is unacceptable for any governing body or any body of teaching staff not to take seriously in any school, for any child in any part of the country, any issue relating to the safeguarding of children. I want to make that absolutely clear, Chairman. Where there are issues of that arising, then clearly it is the case that, in relation to the inspection of those schools, those matters should be brought out very clearly and remedial action taken. Every child matters, Chairman, in every school in the country.

Q360 David Davies: Wonderful words, and I know you personally and I know you to be a decent and honourable man, but we have been told on this committee that 250 girls under the age of 16 have disappeared in Bradford alone. When you say "every child matters" and you are saying all the right things, if I may put it like this to you, what is actually being done to discover what has happened to those 250 girls in that one city and all of the other hundreds of girls that we can assume have disappeared in other cities? These are girls under age of 16. They should not have been able to disappear. Somebody should have been investigating what happened to them?

Kevin Brennan: That is right, Chairman. I understand that the figure of 250 that has been quoted quite widely has been taken up by the Committee. I have asked my official to look into that figure with Bradford City Council. They explained that they identified 205 children. If I could just continue.

Q361 Chairman: Mr Davies is being a little premature. We will be coming to this question a little later.

Kevin Brennan: You would not care for me to break that figure down, Chairman, which is what I was about to do for the sake of the record?

Chairman: I would ask you to hold on to your figure because another member of the committee will be questioning it. We will take a quick supplementary from Mr Streeter and then we must move on.

Q362 Mr Streeter: So I can feel reassured that something is going to change as a result of our inquiry. You mentioned yourself an inspection of schools. Are you able to discuss with Ofsted a higher ranking or a higher focus on this issue of schools where there is a particular issue? It is all fine saying "every child matters", but this is a particular issue for certain communities in certain parts of the country and in certain schools. Are inspectors alive to this? Will you go from this session, or from our report, and speak to the inspectors to make sure that something changes about how this issue is highlighted and how certain schools are failing to tackle this serious problem?

Kevin Brennan: Yes, Chairman, Ofsted will have to look at this issue. We are aware of the areas of the country where there is a particular problem, and government offices have been in contact with all of those areas recently to look at the extent to which the problem is being dealt with in schools. Can I make it clear to the Committee, it is absolutely the case, as part of an Ofsted inspection, in particular in relation to safeguarding, which, as I say, Chairman, has risen up the agenda considerably recently, the issue of domestic violence and forced marriage absolutely has to be a part of their inspection of schools.

Chairman: We will come back to Mr Davies' point and he will cross-examine you further on that issue a little later, but Bob Russell has a question on the curriculum.

Q363 Bob Russell: I would like to go back to the line of questioning that Mr Prosser was on with so-called domestic violence. I think we should call it thuggery, because that is exactly what it is. I was shocked that a survey of teenagers carried out three years ago by Sugar Magazine found wide acceptance of abuse among young people in the UK, and 45% of teenagers believed that, in some circumstances, it is acceptable for a boy to assault his girlfriend. I think that is an indictment against all of us, society in general, but, I would suggest to you, particularly against the education system, because the schools do have personal, social and health education, and I am sure you are aware that research commissioned by the Home Office came up with the conclusion that domestic violence - I use their phrase "domestic violence" - should be a core feature in the PSHE, including forced marriage. Why is it not part of the laid down curriculum? Forty-five per cent of teenagers think assaults by boys on girls is acceptable.

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, I come across many statistics in the course of my job and I take very seriously the point that Mr Russell is making, but I would not actually draw my evidence directly from Sugar Magazine necessarily as the best source for evidence on this issue. The Ofsted Tell Us Too survey on young people's attitudes I would recommend to the Committee as a very good way of looking at what young people actually think, and that is properly assessed and very good evidence.

Q364 Bob Russell: What is their figure?

Kevin Brennan: I have not got that figure to hand, Chairman.

Q365 Chairman: Will you let us have that figure, since you are relying on it in preference to Sugar Magazine?

Kevin Brennan: I can certainly have a look at it, Mr Vaz, but in relation to the serious issue about personal and social health education in schools, obviously there are opportunities for that issue to be taught through PSHE lessons, including domestic violence and forced marriage. It is for schools to decide, I think, Chairman, it is fair to say, within the PSHE curriculum how to deal with these issues, and there is huge pressure on the curriculum across the piece to introduce all sorts of things as additional statutory burdens on schools, and in relation to this what is absolutely clear is that PSHE should be taught in all schools and clearly the safeguarding of children, domestic violence and these issues are very important.

Q366 Bob Russell: We are the Home Affairs Select Committee and we are dealing with violence in society, and if we can deal with violence as part of education, then surely that must help society throughout the rest of life. Why can it not be part of statutory sex, relationship education? That is statutory. Why not extend it so that violence within the home, violence, male against female, and sometimes female against males, is regarded as a serious part of the statutory education provision alongside sex education?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, that may be possible. We have given a commitment to review that in the Children's Plan, as the Committee will be aware.

Q367 Chairman: By when will you have completed your review?

Kevin Brennan: I do not have the date to hand, but I imagine it will be within the next few months, Chairman, because everything coming out of the Children's Plan is moving forward pretty rapidly and we will be taking into account, obviously, the views of young people and if this committee wants to make representations, I am sure---

Q368 Chairman: The reason why Mr Russell is so passionate about this is because only yesterday, when we went to Colchester, we asked four women, the victims of violence: where does it all start? How do we get an early intervention? They said to us it started in the school. If there was proper education given, proper training, then the cycle of violence would end. That is why he is pressing you on this.

Kevin Brennan: It is a very fair point, Chairman, and obviously we need to look at improving PSHE. Often, as you know, Chairman, the cycle of violence starts within the home as well. I should make that point.

Q369 Mrs Dean: To go back to the information that is available in schools, particularly about forced marriage, would you agree that if there are posters displayed, that can empower young women, particularly young people, but if it is in the form of a leaflet, they may be in a drawer somewhere and not able to empower. I think that posters can have a better chance of getting information through to students than leaflets, although leaflets are important. Secondly, in your experience, are schools reluctant to display the information about forced marriage because of the pressure from parents or local communities? If that is the case, would it not be a good idea to insist that schools display this information, to mandate schools to put the information up for students, so that we know that all students have that information?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, we would not want to mandate schools to put up particular posters, I should make that absolutely clear, on any subject. Schools have to have a degree of flexibility of how they deal with these issues at local level. Nevertheless, we would want them to deal with the issue and deal with it in a serious manner. In relation to your question about what the evidence is out there, the government offices gave a fairly mixed report in relation to the Forced Marriage Unit posters in schools. Some areas are displaying the posters. For example, in Oldham they are on display. Staff in some areas were not aware of the materials but would display them if they were aware, and as I understand it, Chairman, they were not sent out routinely, they are posters that are available to be ordered for use in schools if they want to. For example in Blackburn that was the case. Some areas do not display them. For example, the Newham Asian Women's Project has not seen the posters in any of the schools they are working in. In other areas, for example in Luton, Chairman, that is where the authorities issued Forced Marriage Unit cards, which they considered to be much more effective than the posters.

Q370 Chairman: So it is very patchy.

Kevin Brennan: There are variable approaches to this, Chairman. What I would say is---

Q371 Chairman: What can we do about it?

Kevin Brennan: We do not want to get hung up on the issues of posters, Chairman, when what we need to be doing is to understand that every school should take this issue seriously but that they should respond to it according to the local situation and their own knowledge.

Q372 Chairman: Certainly. Minister, I can assure you the Committee is not getting hung up on the issue of posters. What concerned the Committee, and that is why it was raised by Martin Salter with the Prime Minister, is the very patchiness that you describe, but what is the Government, what is your department doing to end this patchiness?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, there are a number of things that we are going to be doing in the coming months in relation to that. One of them is to work with the Forced Marriage Unit to try and improve the quality of some of these materials and make them perhaps more suited for use in school, and I think it is important that we actually engage young people as well in the design of some of these materials and hear what they think is effective. We are also going to work with the Forced Marriage Unit to revise the guidance for professionals, and that is going to be put on a statutory footing, which gives us more levers in relation to this. The other thing, Chairman, is working on the issue of data. At a local level, it has now become mandatory since last year for data to be collected in relation to this on a local level. I am conscious of the fact that we have a devolution agenda in local government, and we do not put burdens on them without consultation, but we do want to work to consider how we can best improve the amount of data available on a national level on the issue of children missing from education and forced marriage.

Chairman: Thank you.

Q373 Mrs Dean: It was suggested to us that one of the reasons some schools did not display the information was because of community pressures. Did you come across any evidence of that?

Kevin Brennan: That was the point I was going to come on to, Chairman. In the government office evidence that they looked at, they did not find any direct evidence of that, Chairman. However, obviously we are conscious you have taken evidence to that effect and, where there is direct evidence of that, clearly that is something that would need to be followed up.

Q374 David Davies: Going back to that, Minister, can you explain what your figures were again, 205 not 250? I am sure you would agree they are worryingly high.

Kevin Brennan: Yes, Chairman. If I could finish the point, and anyone reading this evidence, I hope, will refer to this bit rather than when I stopped earlier on. The Council explained they had identified 205, not 250. Of that number, 172 of these children were tracked to an alternative destination or known to be on roll at a school. That does still leave a number of young people unaccounted for, Chairman, but I think it is useful if the Committee has the figures that have been given by Bradford City Council to the department.

Q375 Chairman: Who is looking for these children?

Kevin Brennan: Where a child is missing from education, then after 20 days, if they have been missing without any account of where they are, in other words they become an unauthorised absence for 20 days, it is a requirement of the school for the school and the local authority to try to discover their whereabouts and, if they are unable to do so, then the matter should be reported also, clearly, to children's services in relation to the safeguarding issues, also to the police and also the forced marriage unit if there is a suspicion they may have been taken abroad.

Q376 David Davies: Mr Brennan, that is 28 girls under the age of 16 who have disappeared in one city in one year alone.

Kevin Brennan: Twenty-three, Chairman.

Q377 David Davies: I take your point: 23 young girls under the age of 16. Is that not a scandal?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, I think I am not going to have words put in my mouth in relation to it.

Q378 Chairman: What are your words then?

Kevin Brennan: What I would say is that it is a serious concern when any single child becomes unaccounted for, and we need to try to seek the explanation for what has happened. In many cases, Chairman, you will be aware that there are instances where children who are in school are dual passport holders. There may be an explanation in some cases.

Q379 David Davies: Are the police looking for them?

Kevin Brennan: They should be.

Q380 David Davies: Are they looking for them?

Kevin Brennan: I do not have that information in front of me.

Q381 David Davies: Do you know how many other cities have up to 20 girls who have disappeared under the age of 16 across the UK?

Kevin Brennan: It is fair to say that the issue of forced marriage is particularly prevalent in certain areas. I understand that the areas which government offices have been asking questions about are the areas which are particularly of concern. I should imagine it is those areas where we would have a similar problem. Government offices inquired of, I think, 14 different areas in the country, Chairman. I can provide you with that list if you like.

Q382 Chairman: In answer to Mr Davies' question, he is obviously very concerned about it, as is the Committee. Fourteen areas; 23 in Bradford. What is the global figure of the missing children?

Kevin Brennan: That figure, as I explained earlier on, Chairman, is not available at a national level, but we are looking with the Forced Marriage Unit, as I explained earlier on, to find a way to be able to collect that statistic at national level.

Q383 Chairman: How did you look at Bradford's figures?

Kevin Brennan: By government offices contacting Bradford City Council, Chairman. The point I was making was that for the last year, for the first time, these statistics are now being collected by local authorities, and that has been a requirement placed on them by government.

Q384 David Davies: Surely you can tott up the total figures from each of the 14 areas you have inquired of and give us the total number. We would like to know how many young girls under the age of 16 have disappeared. We can assume that it is in the hundreds.

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, I may be able to provide you with some figures in relation to that after today's session from information we have available through government offices. Also, there is some information, but it is not entirely reliable, from the school census because, of course, not all of the young people involved necessarily have been on the school---

Q385 David Davies: Are you going to call the police in about this?

Kevin Brennan: I beg your pardon?

Q386 David Davies: Will you call in the police if the education authorities in those areas are unwilling to do so?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, I would have to look at what my locus is with regard to calling in the police as a minister, but it is certainly the case that where there is any concern about a missing child and any suspicion with regard to the safeguarding of that child, the police should be involved.

Q387 Chairman: I realise that you are hindered in relation to these issues because of the facts not being with you at the moment, Minister, but it would be extremely helpful if you could let the Committee know by next Tuesday the figures that we request.

Kevin Brennan: Certainly, Chairman. I will undertake to provide you with any figures that you require.

Q388 Chairman: They are most important in the way in which we will conclude our inquiry, so that would be very helpful. Have you ever considered a designated point for domestic violence and forced marriage issues, a contact person in each school, as being an effective way of dealing with these issues?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, the guidance already requires every school to appoint a senior member of staff as a designated person on the safeguarding of children, and that would include forced marriage and domestic violence. They should also have a deputy in case they are absent from school, and clearly they could, if they wished to, ask that deputy to specialise in a particular area, but there is already a designated person who should be dealing with this within each school.

Chairman: That is very helpful. Thank you.

Q389 Tom Brake: Mr Brennan, you have mentioned the fact that the Forced Marriage Unit is going to be developing guidance which will be of a statutory nature. You have said that that is going to give more levers. Can you explain what those levers are?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, we would expect the new guidance to be incorporated into child protection training within all our schools, and that would not just apply to teaching staff, that applies to all staff within the school, and that then would be monitored by Ofsted as part of any school assessments and inspections, and work to tackle forced marriage clearly is part of that process. The local Safeguarding of Children Board as well, Chairman, would be responsible for monitoring and making sure that that local safeguarding is evaluated at a local level with regard to forced marriage. We are looking also at ways within that guidance that we can monitor better, as I have mentioned already, instances of absence from school.

Q390 Tom Brake: When you say you would expect it to be included in child protection training, do you mean it will be?

Kevin Brennan: Yes, Chairman.

Q391 Tom Brake: Would you also expect or require perhaps the detailed reporting to the police after a determined period of time when people have gone missing, so that the national statistics, which you are not able to provide immediately, you are going to have to go and find, would then be readily available because the statutory guidance would require reporting to happen at a certain time and in a certain way consistently across the country?

Kevin Brennan: Chairman, there is also a requirement for local authorities to collect the information, although they do not form part of a national statistic and I appreciate that is a technical thing. Mr Davies is correct, it is possible to look at what local authorities have collected and to ask for that information, but we do have protocols around burdens that we place on local authorities which have to be gone through. There are already quite specific measures that should be taken in the instance where there is any concern about forced marriage and the procedures that should be followed are already in place. For example, if a school is concerned and reports matters to Children's Services, already within the Safeguarding Children and Safer Recruitment in Education guidelines there is a very specific flowchart which children's social workers should follow, which takes into account all the questions that they should ask and the things that they should not do in relation to dealing with these sorts of issues.

Q392 Tom Brake: Once the guidance is statutory, is the requirement that all teachers should be trained in the guidance? Will your Department ensure that this is monitored nationally?

Kevin Brennan: In relation to the training of teachers, that is a matter that is undertaken and the budgets are controlled at a local level in schools to provide them with the flexibility. All teachers and all the people working with young people and children must be trained in safeguarding issues, which would include domestic violence and forced marriage. We do not intend to direct particular training in particular schools on particular subjects at particular times; that is a matter that is devolved to schools. It would be good practice and it certainly would be part of our statutory guidance that these are issues that teachers should be trained in. There is a designated person in each school who will have special responsibility in these areas. All teachers should be trained in how to spot the potential that someone might be subject to a forced marriage or a victim of domestic abuse or witnessing domestic violence.

Q393 Mrs Cryer: Are you going to mention in these guidelines the fact that in September the Forced Marriage Civil Protection Act comes into force whereby a teacher, if she or he so wished, could actually go to court and seek an injunction to stop parents from taking their child abroad for marriage? I hope you are aware of this.

Kevin Brennan: Yes, Chairman.

Q394 Mrs Cryer: I hope it will be included in your guidelines because that is the only way people are going to know about it, if it filters through in that way.

Kevin Brennan: The guidelines are being consulted upon and that is certainly a point that could be contained within them. Perhaps I may pay tribute to Mrs Cryer for the work she has done in this area over the years. I think the very elegant use of the civil law in this regard, particularly allowing third parties to use the law, which is what Mrs Cryer is describing, is an extremely important step forward in this area.

Q395 Mrs Cryer: My constituency is part of Bradford and I am well aware of the horrors that schools have with their truancy levels going up all the time and how that after two weeks a child is removed from the school roll after he or she has disappeared. It cannot help in tracking down children if those children are removed from the school roll after two weeks just to get them out of a situation of truancy. What are you prepared to do about this? Are schools reluctant to report those who go missing for fear of adversely affecting those truancy figures?

Kevin Brennan: Schools cannot remove children from their rolls without reporting them as missing. They have a duty under the pupil registration regulations not to remove them from the register without reporting them as missing and that duty is also placed on local authorities. They also have a duty to try to find children who go missing and that duty also applies to local authorities if they have been away from school with an unauthorised absence of more than 20 days and therefore there should not be the perverse incentives that she describes. If in practice schools are not following that path then clearly we need to be made aware of it. They may not delete children from their registers without reporting them as missing.

Q396 Mrs Cryer: I am sure I am right in saying that in Bradford children are removed from school rolls after two weeks to avoid truancy levels going up and you are talking about 20 days.

Kevin Brennan: That is correct. There would have to be 20 days of continuous unauthorised absence before a child can be removed from the school roll. They cannot be removed from the school roll without them being reported as missing. They have a duty to try to find out where they are and that duty also applies to local authorities. If that is not happening in practice then obviously that evidence is very important.

Mrs Cryer: I hope you will take this up with the education department in Bradford.

Q397 Ms Buck: In how many instances have schools via local authorities actually reported children missing?

Kevin Brennan: I have not got that information.

Ms Buck: There are some pretty serious inconsistencies in that data. That would be a very useful piece of information to have because I think we will find there are some pretty serious inconsistencies in that data.

Q398 Chairman: Thank you. Those are very serious matters. Mr Brennan, we invited you to give evidence to clear up a number of questions but you have actually raised so many more. We are genuinely very concerned because these are very, very serious matters. The figures you have given us have shocked members of this Committee just in relation to Bradford. What Mrs Cryer has said has made matters even more unclear to us in the sense that we need the facts. There are 14 other areas where there are missing children. This is totally unsatisfactory. I would be most grateful if you would let me have a note by next Tuesday with the figures contained in it.

Kevin Brennan: Of course.

Chairman: We do intend to raise this again. We may have you back to give evidence before the end of the inquiry. Mr Wright, we would be most grateful if you could let us have a note about the position of Southall Black Sisters and in particular the issues raised by members of this Committee because I think that decision is going to happen very shortly. We are extremely grateful to both of you. We know you are extremely busy. Thank you for coming to give evidence this morning.

Witnesses: Ms Kiranjit Ahluwalia, domestic violence survivor, and Ms Hannana Siddiqui, Southall Black Sisters, gave evidence.

Q399 Chairman: Ms Ahluwalia and Ms Siddiqui, thank you very much for coming to give evidence. You very kindly gave evidence to us in private. We felt it was appropriate to take short evidence from you in public otherwise we would have had a session consisting entirely of ministers speaking and your comments as a victim are very important. The whole world knows about your history, Kiranjit Ahluwalia, the violence that you suffered at the hands of your husband over ten years, the fact that you were imprisoned and the fact that there was a campaign led by the Southall Black Sisters for your release. You are now back to what can be described as a normal life considering what you had to go through in the past. Do you feel that the criminal justice system let you down in your case?

Ms Ahluwalia: Yes. First of all, they never understood my family honour or religion. It was a situation I was facing in my community and in my family. My marriage was not a forced marriage, it was an arranged marriage. From the first day of my marriage my husband started beating me. I was not allowed to talk to my family or do anything. I ended up in prison. I thought I would get justice from British law, but they could not understand Indian culture, family honour, religion and the society I was brought up in. I ended up with a life sentence. I suffered ten years with my husband and the law gave me 13 years, which was total injustice. Southall Black Sisters came along and they started my campaign. My story was put forward in the media after they found me a good solicitor.

Q400 Chairman: Do you feel that the criminal justice system let you down?

Ms Ahluwalia: I went to the police station twice and I went to court twice. When I went to the police station the policeman said, "You'll have to sort yourself out. We don't want to interfere in your married life." I went to family and the same thing, they said they did not want to interfere.

Chairman: I am now going to move on to Mr Winnick who has specific questions about family and community issues.

Q401 Mr Winnick: As the Chairman said, everyone knows of the terrible plight that you suffered at the hands of your husband. When this was happening, he was beating you and other forms of cruelty, what did you find within the family? Were you able to speak to the family on any occasion about what was happening?

Ms Ahluwalia: Yes, of course. My in-laws knew that my husband was very short tempered and very violent towards his mother and sister and to me from the beginning of the marriage.

Q402 Mr Winnick: They knew what was happening?

Ms Ahluwalia: They knew that.

Q403 Mr Winnick: That was his family?

Ms Ahluwalia: Yes. They never interfered. They said, "We are sorry, we can't do anything. He doesn't listen to us." After that I went to see my family in India and I showed them my bruises and my brothers and sisters were really angry with my husband. But did my husband apologise? I wanted to have a divorce. My family, brothers and sisters, said I was not allowed to have a divorce because it was not acceptable in the family or in the community, they said, "What would other people think?" So I had to go back to my husband. Then I went to the police twice and I went to court and got a court injunction. None of them could help me. In the end I tried to kill myself twice and I ended up in hospital. Nobody helped me.

Q404 Mr Winnick: I can imagine how distressing it is for you even now. When you went to the hospital it was in this country, was it?

Ms Ahluwalia: Yes, Crawley Hospital.

Q405 Mr Winnick: And they saw the injuries that you had suffered?

Ms Ahluwalia: Yes.

Q406 Mr Winnick: Did they not ask you whether they should report these injuries to the police?

Ms Ahluwalia: When I ended up in prison my doctor's report was there. He saw the injuries to my arm and my shoulder. Even the hospital report was there, the year I went to hospital and tried to kill myself, all the reports were there, but still I could not get any justice from British law. Everything was there. Even my husband's family was there. His uncle was there and he was willing to give evidence on behalf of me.

Q407 Mr Winnick: Was this an arranged marriage?

Ms Ahluwalia: My sister was living in England and I was in Canada. My sister's friend was friendly with my husband's mother. They talked and said how that they were looking for a girl and my sister said that they were looking for a boy in the same cast. Cast is very important as well. My brother told me I could not get married out of cast. I never had a boyfriend and was never allowed to talk with men. My brother was very strict. They were willing to give me money but I was not allowed to go out with my friends. It was arranged within the family. I saw my husband for five minutes and I asked him two questions.

Q408 Mr Winnick: Five minutes before the marriage was the first time you saw him?

Ms Ahluwalia: Yes. My brother asked me if I wanted to ask any questions and I said yes and I was allowed five minutes in the next room. All I said to my husband was I wanted to study after the marriage and I did not want to wear Indian dresses.

Q409 Mr Winnick: Was his conduct cruel from the very beginning?

Ms Ahluwalia: When I came back to the airport he came to pick me up and a couple of hours later he pushed me and held my chin against the wall. He just tapped on my head. I thought, "What sort of joke is this?" I said not to do it again. I felt faint because he hit me a bit hard. I thought it was a joke, but it was not a joke. The next day after our marriage I was just talking to his sister, introducing my family back home and she was introducing her family and my husband came and pushed his sister and pushed me against the wall and he was slapping his sister and me because of nothing. He had such a short temper.

Q410 Mr Winnick: Can I bring you to the situation later where you were charged with the murder of your husband. Were the police at all interested in what had happened to you during your years of marriage? Did they ask you questions or did you tell them how you had been treated?

Ms Ahluwalia: The police were only interested in arresting me. They kept saying to me, "Tell us what happened. Why did you do that? What have you done?" All the time they were interested in what I had done. They were not interested in what I went through. I was trying to explain it to them. One policeman came in and he said, "We are charging you, Mrs Ahluwalia, with attempted murder." I did not understand the meaning of "attempted", so I asked him to explain it to me and he did. Even though I was admitting everything, this is what happened, this is what I have done in the end after ten years, he was saying, "No, tell us more." He was tapping on the table and trying to scare me. My English was so poor. I had been educated in India, I could speak English, but I lost my confidence while I was living with my husband. I could not explain it to him. There was nobody who could translate for me.

Q411 Mr Winnick: No one at all?

Ms Ahluwalia: No.

Q412 Mr Winnick: The police did not offer an interpreter?

Ms Ahluwalia: No.

Q413 Mr Winnick: Did your defence counsel put your case in court, how you had been treated throughout your marriage, the cruelty and the violence?

Ms Ahluwalia: Not really. I could not explain things to my defence solicitor. When he was preparing the case for my trial I gave him 35 pages of my life history. Even though I kept telling my solicitor or barrister, "I need an interpreter. I want to tell you more," they kept saying, "Mrs Ahluwalia, you do not need an interpreter because your English is quite good, we understand," but I wanted to go into the details. I could not explain it to them until I ended up with a life sentence. Southall Black Sisters could understand Hindi, Punjabi and English. Then I explained my whole story to them and when they did my case for my appeal there were 350 pages in my statement.

Q414 Mr Winnick: When we were speaking to the minister the Chairman and other members of the Committee were very determined that the Southall Black Sisters should not go out of existence because of the current financial difficulties they are facing. What advice would you give to other women in your situation? What would you suggest they do?

Ms Ahluwalia: I would tell them not to suffer in silence. The family honour is not that important. Now we are living in a modern society. You must come out with your children. If you cannot call the police, if you are too shy or too scared, go to an organisation like the Southall Black Sisters or any other organisation that can understand your language and they can explain where to go and how to get there.

Mr Winnick: I am most grateful to you. Thank you.

Q415 Chairman: Ms Siddiqui, you and Southall Black Sisters took up the case and supported Kiranjit Ahluwalia despite the circumstances of it. Have things got better over the years for the victims of domestic violence that you deal with?

Ms Siddiqui: For women in minority communities in some respects things have got better in terms of after the Kiranjit Alhuwalia case there was greater awareness within Asian communities around domestic violence, but I think we have still a very long way to go in changing attitudes within communities. Outside of the communities, I think one of the things that we have seen is the discrimination women face from agencies like the police, how there are issues around cultural sensitivities, which is one of the reasons why they do not intervene in minority communities to protect women. Despite some improvements in policing generally around domestic violence, the response with minority communities I still think is very poor and very inconsistent and not only in relation to forced marriage and honour-based violence but domestic violence quite generally, including women who have immigration problems. There is a lack of understanding of how issues around destitution, no recourse to public funds and immigration as well as cultural and religious pressures impact on their lives.

Q416 Chairman: Where do they go? Kiranjit suffered violence on a daily basis for ten years. She tried to commit suicide. She went to her GP. She went to the police. Where do they go?

Ms Siddiqui: Black and minority women's organisations are the grass-roots organisations that provide frontline services often with great hostility from the community and a lack of support from outside of their community. That is the very sector, the specialist sector, which is now under threat with cuts in funding from local authorities and other bodies around the commissioning process and around the mainstreaming of services, which means larger organisations are able to win tenders for bids for funding and where local authorities are using issues such as community cohesion to deny funding for what they see as single ethnic group funding. That is one of the reasons our local authority in Ealing has been using to try to cut our funding. They are saying there is no need for specialist services, there is no need to have single ethnic group funding because that undermines their community cohesion strategy, but at the same time they want to fund Muslim women's groups when there is no demand for such services in the area and all they are doing is duplicating our services.

Q417 Chairman: We have raised this issue before you came in. On the night that Ms Ahluwalia's husband died she ran into the garden with her son and hid behind a shed. She did not run away from the police, she was still there. How old was your son on that day and what happened to him?

Ms Ahluwalia: He was about two and a half. My husband put a hot iron on my face and he broke my teeth. He did all sorts of things to me. I poured petrol on him because he had been evil to me so many times when I tried to run from him.

Q418 Chairman: What happened to your son after that?

Ms Ahluwalia: I picked my son up and hid behind the shed.

Q419 Chairman: Was he taken into care or was he taken into the care of the family?

Ms Ahluwalia: My mother-in-law kept both my sons for several months.

Q420 Chairman: How old are they now?

Ms Ahluwalia: One is doing law. He wanted to be a barrister. My eldest son graduated in computing. I am very proud of them.

Chairman: Kiranjit Ahluwalia, this Committee is enormously grateful to you for coming in today. We regard you as a brave and courageous woman and we thank you very much. We are honoured to have you here.

Witness: Mr Vernon Coaker MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Crime Reduction, Home Office, gave evidence.

Q421 Chairman: Minister, you came early and you heard the evidence that was given by Kiranjit Ahluwalia. Have things got better?

Mr Coaker: Chairman, thank you very much for the invitation to come in and listen to that testimony. In some respects we have made progress. We can point to a range of measures that have been taken, that is, specialist domestic violence courts, independent domestic violence advisers, the Domestic Violence Act and the Forced Marriage Act that is going to come into force in the autumn. However, if you go out on the ground and say, as we have just heard, is everything as we would want it to be, do we have all the statistics that we need, do we have all of the services in place that we need, then the answer to that is clearly that there is a long way to go. We have made significant progress in my view. If you look at some of the legislative and criminal justice proposals that are there and all the guidance that is going out, it is about turning all of that into reality on the ground and understanding it. The point that was being made in that moving testimony is that it is not just a criminal justice response that is important, it is the prevention and the support and so on that needs to be made available as well.

Q422 Mr Streeter: You mentioned just now the Domestic Violence Act 2004 and yet section 9 (domestic homicide reviews) and section 12 (restraining orders) have not been implemented. It is no good passing an Act unless we implement it. Is it a shortage of money that is stopping us from protecting people properly? What is going on here?

Mr Coaker: With respect to statutory homicide reviews, which are one of the sections of the Domestic Violence Act that has not been implemented yet, I can tell the Committee that the intention is to implement that in the summer. I think that is an important step forward. Mr Streeter, you are quite right to say it is something that we perhaps ought to have moved forward more quickly on, but we are now in a position to say that hopefully we will be able to not just review those homicides but we will actually be able to implement them. Alongside that we have the other aspect of it which is the criminalisation of the breach of restraining orders. I am not able to say to the Committee that we have come to a position where I can tell you that we will implement those. There are negotiations continuing between ourselves and the Ministry of Justice with respect to costs and prison places, but it is my intention - and I make this commitment to you - that we will do that as soon as we possibly can because I recognise the importance of ensuring that the criminalisation of restraint orders was an important part of the Act. We should have done it by now. All I can say to the Committee is that we have made some progress with homicide reviews and we will continue to do that. The Domestic Violence Act has made a significant difference. We have got the non-molestation orders and that has been implemented and made a difference. There are one or two outstanding sections. I have dealt with one. We will deal with the other one as soon as possible. The other part of the Act has made a significant difference to tackling this problem.

Q423 Ms Buck: I want to ask about the Government's approach to the target setting and the way in which we focus very heavily on the criminal justice side of it given that, as we know, only a quarter of domestic violence cases get to the criminal justice system. Why is it that we have focused so much in terms of our objectives on what is a serious but nonetheless minority part of the whole problem?

Mr Coaker: I think it is right to say that there has been an emphasis on criminal justice and that alongside that there has been a need for us to recognise that you cannot just solve this through a criminal justice response, it is necessary to go out and talk in the communities. We have done that to a certain extent. In terms of the action plans that we are bringing forward, particularly with respect to honour-based violence, we will be holding seminars in various communities about what that should involve. We need to talk to our colleagues in other government departments and accept the responsibility that we have ourselves to ensure that those voluntary organisations that work in communities, that are supporting victims and are dealing with these cases, which are very difficult, are supported. The natural reaction is often to have a criminal justice response to issues. The evidence you have had from various people has shown that the statistics are the tip of the iceberg, that there is a lot more with respect to some of the issues that arise from forced marriage going on in communities which has surprised us all. If we are going to deal with that then simply by responding in a criminal justice sense will not be sufficient. What are we doing in our schools? What are we doing to support victims when they come forward? How are we changing the culture with respect to this so that, as we heard so appallingly, when somebody comes forward and even engages with agencies people actually listen to them, believe them, understand them, all of those sorts of things? That on its own will not be brought about by a criminal justice response.

Q424 Ms Buck: I think that is absolutely right and I am sure we all welcome you saying that. If the national delivery plan does place so much emphasis on that, is it not the case that inevitably - and we have seen this across the board with targets - this squeezes out the resource that is available for precisely that broader contextual work that you are talking about? What concrete steps can we take to make sure that that does not happen in the future?

Mr Coaker: I think the answer to your question is yes, there is a danger that that can happen. One of the key aims of the national delivery plan is to reduce the prevalence of domestic violence and to increase the rate that it is reported. If we are going to take those sorts of measures then we need to understand that. In terms of the practical things that are going on, in the Forced Marriage Act there is the guidance that will become statutory in the near future. That guidance goes out to the police, to social service professionals, to education and all of the various professionals that work within that area. In terms of the practical steps we are going to take, we need to ensure that those people have regard to the duty with respect to them. We are holding seminars in communities across the country where we will actually be going out and talking about what it is that the Government should be doing in order to address this problem and involving communities themselves in the solutions to the problems rather than dictating to them. Is there a danger that the criminal justice system dominates? Yes, there is. How do we do something about that? The first thing is a recognition in Government that there is that danger, but we need to ensure that we balance it and part of that responsibility belongs to the inter-ministerial group, which involves all of the ministers across government. One of the things that I have thought about considering since the Committee started this inquiry is, in order to deal with the problem that Ms Buck has raised, whether we actually, in the same way for sexual violence and some of the other things, have stakeholder groups which we meet with regularly. It might be an idea for us to look at involving them in discussions with us at a ministerial level to inform us on the way forward and the policies that we pursue and adopt.

Q425 Chairman: Is there an Inter-Ministerial Group on Domestic Violence?

Mr Coaker: Yes.

Q426 Chairman: Is the Department for Children represented on that?

Mr Coaker: Yes, it is.

Q427 Chairman: Were you therefore shocked, as we were, to hear that there were 23 missing children in Bradford and the minister is not aware of what has happened to them?

Mr Coaker: All the departments you would expect to be are on that committee.

Q428 Chairman: Did you know about that figure?

Mr Coaker: I did not, no.

Q429 Chairman: Do you know that he also does not know how many children are missing in 14 other areas?

Mr Coaker: I did not know that.

Q430 Chairman: What are you going to do about it?

Mr Coaker: As part of the challenge that there is for all of us - and it is a challenge for me as well as the co-ordinator and the lead minister with responsibility for that group - we need to ensure that the inter-ministerial group works as effectively as possible, that we demand and say to the various ministers and departments who contribute to that that they look at their own practice, look at their own policies and procedures and ensure that we bring all of that to the table.

Q431 Chairman: One of the key things is to get the statistics. How often does this group meet?

Mr Coaker: It meets roughly quarterly.

Q432 Chairman: And on the last occasion nobody from the Department for Children, Schools and Families mentioned the missing Bradford children?

Mr Coaker: Not from memory, no. I cannot remember that being mentioned.

Q433 Mr Winnick: Why are the police not looking for these children? Is there a possibility that it is assumed that if they are from the Asian community they have been taken abroad?

Mr Coaker: I do not know the particular instances. It is something we will look at. First of all, if children are missing from school or children are missing full stop then that is a matter of concern whatever the community. If there are 23 children missing then there are 23 children missing. That should be a matter of concern in that area. That matter should be reported to the police. If it is reported to the police then you and I would expect, as the minister responsible, that the police would investigate that, they would look for those children, they would regard it as a matter of the highest priority and that they would respond in the appropriate way. I do not know the details, but you would expect the police to be informed of that and the police to respond with the highest priority to that because there can be nothing worse than children going missing.

Q434 Mr Winnick: If they are not reacting with the highest priority, can we take it that arising from this session there will be a different approach and if children are missing one of the first priorities of the police will be to look for those children? They could be sexually assaulted or subject to other forms of abuse, even murdered. There is a necessity for some sort of priority which at the moment does not seem to be the case.

Mr Coaker: Of course. No one could disagree with the points that you are making. That was my point in answer to the Chairman's question at the beginning when I said that we had procedures that were supposed to be followed. All of those are now in place. The key thing is to make sure that those procedures are actually implemented and that is with respect to missing children and the broader domestic violence agenda as well, so that if somebody turns up at the front desk they are actually believed and listened to. I know you had Chief Constable Brian Moore here talking about this and I spoke to him a week or two ago and he was saying to me that one of the things he is going to be doing, because of his concerns that there is inconsistent practice across the country, is bringing all of the police forces together in order to look at these particular issues to see how we move forward.

Q435 Chairman: This also relates to the other areas. It is not just Bradford. He listed 14 other areas. Presumably after this meeting you will get a list of these areas and find out what is happening.

Mr Coaker: Absolutely.

Q436 Chairman: In respect of Chief Constable Brian Moore's point, are you satisfied with his proposals to have a more consistent approach amongst the various police authorities?

Mr Coaker: I am satisfied that Chief Constable Brian Moore is determined to bring about that cultural change that needs to take place and that is the starting point. We have got the most senior police officer with respect to violence involved with this saying practically how he is going to take this forward. I think the important thing then will be for us to continue to monitor regularly the performance of our police forces and our criminal justice system with respect to all of this so as to be able to demonstrate statistically and qualitatively through testimony that the system is changing and responding to the demands that are being made on it.

Q437 Chairman: You chair the inter-ministerial group, do you not?

Mr Coaker: Yes.

Q438 Margaret Moran: We know the attrition rate in domestic violence cases is very high. Why is it that when we talk about rape we measure the attrition rate in one way and domestic violence in another, which demonstrates that the attrition rate in domestic violence is worse than rape? Surely that should be in the public domain and we should measure things on a like-for-like basis.

Mr Coaker: The whole statistical base of the work that we are doing needs to be updated and reviewed. There is a discrepancy between the figures. It is something I am looking at. I thought this question may come up. I have got statistics relating to the total number of domestic violence incidents that are reported which actually lead to charge, which leads to prosecution, which leads to conviction and some percentages about what that means in terms of success and outcomes.

Q439 Chairman: Could you send those to the Committee?

Mr Coaker: I am going to send those to the Committee because it does show some quite big improvements in attrition because attrition is the real issue.

Q440 Margaret Moran: It has been suggested to us that we should put forward a public information campaign. We went to Refuge to see the hotline yesterday. The resources to be able to man the hotlines to deal with the campaign are woeful. Would you look at the value for money arguments for increasing the capacity of the Women's Aid and Refuge hotline because it is clear that there are money saving arguments there which I am sure the Treasury would be interested in? Have you looked at what other European countries such as the Netherlands and Germany are doing by introducing something called "go-orders", which allows ten days respite whereby the perpetrator is taken out of the family home to enable the safeguarding of the victim? Has that ever been considered by the Department?

Mr Coaker: No, but it is something we clearly need to look at. Thank you for raising that. I will look at the issue of the helpline again. We give Ł500,000 from the Home Office to the helpline, but of course if it is in difficulty we will look at it. It raises the broader point that Ms Buck raised about the need to support these organisations and the various mechanisms for support that are available to victims out there in the community and it is something we need to look at. We already support it, but I will look at the problem that you have raised.

Q441 Mr Winnick: Why did ministers come to the view that the arguments against were more powerful than for in making false marriages a criminal offence?

Mr Coaker: We took that view following the public consultation that took place in 2005. The overwhelming view from that evidence was that by making it a criminal offence you would actually increase the problem by driving it underground rather than helping. Many of the people involved in this know that it is within the family. There was a fear that you could have a situation whereby family members would possibly be criminalised by the actions of a family member. You will know that the Forced Marriage Protection Act that we have got coming in in the autumn has taken a different route, that is, the civil route of trying to deal with forced marriage through Forced Marriage Protection Orders. If those orders were to be breached then there would be a criminal sanction. We are always open to looking at these things. The reason we did it was simply that people out there told us it would not help the situation. I also think what will help is the consultation we are having with respect to third parties being able to represent victims and put forward victims to the court for the giving of a Forced Marriage Protection Order. People out there told us it was something that would not work.

Q442 Mr Winnick: You accept that are arguments as well for making it a criminal offence. Could I ask you if there is a possibility when you monitor the outcome of the Forced Marriage Act when it comes into force later this year that the decision not to criminalise forced marriages will be looked at again?

Mr Coaker: I think it would be arrogant of me as the minister responsible to say if we introduced a piece of legislation and it had the opposite effect to that which it was supposed to have then we would not review it and not keep it under review. We will of course look at the evidence. We are going to monitor the outcome of the Forced Marriage Act. The clear evidence to us at the time was that it would not help, that it would actually have the opposite effect of what people who proposed the criminalisation thought it would have. We will keep it under review, but at the moment we have no plans to do that.

Q443 Mrs Cryer: I suppose you are aware that many women who have left the family home because of domestic violence or have been thrown out of their home finish up on the streets and frequently find their way to my office. I have made good use of the domestic violence concession. Time is of the essence. If they have not got indefinite leave to remain, is there anything that you can do for such cases to speed up the procedures so that they can get their indefinite leave to remain? Would you be able to give stronger guidance to local authorities on how to help such women?

Mr Coaker: The whole issue of guidelines is really important. We are looking to strengthen guidelines not just to local authorities but to the whole range of providers and public service agencies in this area and then to ensure that that is put into practice. In terms of people speeding up the process for ILR, yes, we do need to do that, but the issue that always comes to us is the no recourse to public funds with respect to that. I can tell the Committee that we have listened to the representations that we have had on that. Although final details are to be worked out, in the very near future we will put together a system, in consultation with our colleagues in DCLG and, if not, we will pursue it ourselves, to ensure that where people do receive a positive determination with respect to their ILR status they will actually be able to apply for and receive housing and living costs for that period up to the determination of their ILR when, of course, if they are given that, they will be able to apply for other benefits. That will be on the basis that that money will be paid retrospectively, so it will be when their ILR is determined. I hope that is good news. I know it is something that people have asked for over a considerable period of time. We have listened to that and I think that is another positive move forward.

Q444 Mrs Cryer: Does the Home Office-commissioned research into raising the age of sponsorship show that the risks associated with raising the age to 21 are likely to be greater than the benefits?

Mr Coaker: We have just done some consultation on that. I have not seen the details of that because it is due on 14 March. There are strong arguments for and against. Some people see this as a positive way forward, as a way of preventing people from being subject to abuse. It would protect them if it was 21 before they could sponsor a spouse. Others say that it does not actually tackle the real issue, that it just disguises the issue and postpones the issue, that if you are going to do something about this then it is getting to the causes of it that is important. Although it may appear to be something that will impact on it, it will not prevent it. I have not seen the evidence from that yet. As soon as we get that we can let the Committee have that, but I have not seen it yet.

Chairman: We hope to publish our report at the end of the Easter recess, so if you could let us have that that would be very helpful.

Q445 Bob Russell: Do you accept that male victims of violence in the home suffer disbelief and prejudice from professionals and public services?

Mr Coaker: I think there is some truth in that. The forced marriage figures showed that 15 per cent of the cases were male. I do think there is an issue with respect to domestic violence and men and forced marriage. I think there is a cultural problem with respect to that. I think men find it very difficult in some cases to come forward and report that for fear of being regarded as not quite masculine enough. I think there is a very real issue with regard to that. Obviously the majority of people involved are women, but we have to accept that there is a minority of men who are involved with this and we need to change the culture with respect to that. It is not just young men. I cannot remember the exact age, but the Forced Marriage Unit had a man in his fifties who was the victim of a forced marriage.

Q446 Bob Russell: Recognising there is this problem, what is the Home Office doing to improve the identification of the genuine male victims, encourage reporting, and provide male-only support services?

Mr Coaker: I think we do need to look at all of that. We have funded advice lines. There is an advice line specifically for men which does not run 24 hours but runs during office hours. There is a website that is available. We have also supported an organisation called Broken Rainbow, which is a gay and bisexual and transsexual advice line. So there is work going on with respect to that. The key issue is the development of services, but we will not identify men who are the victims of domestic violence until they themselves feel confident in being able to come forward and until we change the environment. One of the ways that we are trying to do this is we have established something we have called a men's coalition which brings together a variety of men's health organisations and other organisations and which is about challenging some of the stereotypes in this area. I am very proud and privileged to be a male minister with the lead for domestic violence. When I go out to different organisations they think that says an awful lot because for far too long domestic violence was often seen as a women's issue. This is a mainstream issue for the whole of society.

Q447 Gwyn Prosser: Mr Coaker, as you quite rightly said, we need to take an holistic approach to these matters and not be so narrow about it. One of the areas which we think is effective is the perpetrator programme. All of the service areas have their programmes in place and that is good news. The bad news is that they are wholly unresourced to do the job they need to do. Will you make representations to your colleagues in the Ministry of Justice and make sure that these programmes are fully funded?

Mr Coaker: I have already made representations about that. The perpetrator programmes did not exist before. At least we have rolled those out now in every probation area. That is a positive message. You are quite right to say that there are not enough. There are waiting lists for those. My own view is that we need to develop other alternatives as well as the perpetrator programmes run through and by probation and this is where the voluntary sector has such a vital role to play. What can they provide in terms of helping deal with perpetrators? What sorts of support can be made available through them? Sometimes some of the most powerful ways of dealing with these issues are actually things that are organised by the communities in those areas. You are quite right to point out that we need to statutorily and from Government ensure that the perpetrator programme through the criminal justice system is there, but we also need to look at what can be done in the third sector, the voluntary sector or even the faith sector as well.

Q448 Mrs Dean: Minister, what can the Department of Health do to engage and train GPs in routinely enquiring about domestic violence and providing information on support services?

Mr Coaker: This is an extremely important question. Lots of manuals and guidance and all of those sorts of things have gone out to different professionals. The Department of Health has comprehensive training manuals, they have handbooks, they have guidance that goes out, they make routine enquiries of women in pregnancy and talk to them now very carefully to see if there are any issues with respect to domestic violence. They will have a violence and abuse programme. I think what is key across the board is that we need to improve the monitoring mechanisms that we have for all of our work and the response that we have where we find that the monitoring tells us there is a difficulty. There is a lot of work going on to improve it, but we need to improve the monitoring. The area where I think there is a weakness and there are pilots now that are established in a number of accident and emergencies in the South-East is the sharing of information between the health professionals, whether it be in A&E or at the doctors' surgery, and other appropriate professionals. We have been to see the Information Commissioner about this and information which is shared on the basis of public protection is information that can be shared providing it is done properly. I think sometimes with data protection and all of these other things people are frightened of it. We have got to drive through this and say this is a public protection issue. If an accident and emergency department has information which suggests to them that there is the possibility of somebody having been the victim of domestic violence then that information needs to be shared. We are establishing protocols about that. We are trying to support people doing that. We have the pilots in the South-East which we expect to roll out across the country, but we need to change people's mindset that you cannot share information as you will be doing something illegal.

Q449 Mrs Dean: Would that involve other departments such as STD clinics and hospital dentistry?

Mr Coaker: It involves the whole area of work. With the rollout of MARACs that we are seeing, which we announced recently to expand virtually across the whole country by 2010/2011, we should see that improve. The sharing of information is absolutely crucial to this area of work whether it be a hospital dentist, an ordinary dentist, an A&E or a GP.

Q450 Chairman: Minister, thank you very much for giving evidence today. We would like to stress our concern as a Committee about the flow of information from other departments to you as the chairman of the inter-ministerial committee and we hope this will be addressed. If there is anything else you would like to put before to us before we conclude, we would be most grateful. Thank you very much for coming.

Mr Coaker: Thank you very much for inviting me.