Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Bill [HL]

I did not think that the noble Baroness was at all grumpy. It is completely right and proper—I am looking forward to our discussions on the probing amendments that follow—that we show how much we have scrutinised this legislation. It is very important to me that it is done effectively and properly. It has been a great privilege to work with the noble Lord, Lord Lester, and the noble Baroness, Lady Verma. I pay tribute to my noble friends Lady Uddin and Lord Ahmed, who have done incredible work over the years on this subject. This is a humbling moment for me as we try to tackle what is an important issue in society and beyond. I, too, express my gratitude for all the help and advice I have been given. I have met some extraordinary people in the past few weeks, not least the victims of forced marriage, who were generous with their time and gave me good advice on how we should approach the Bill. I also thank the judiciary. Earlier today I met Mr Justice Munby and Mr Justice Singer to talk this through, and I know that they are deeply enthusiastic that this reaches the statute book. We also have the support of the Prime Minister. On discovering the Bill of the noble Lord, Lord Lester, he is very keen that I work as fast as possible to tackle the issue in the right way. My approach has been to talk to as many people as possible. I know that many of them are listening to the debate and I have already paid tribute to their organisations. They, too, have been extraordinarily generous. I approached the legislation on the principle that we would not do it if it was clear that it was not wanted or needed. People have queried aspects of it, and rightly so. My noble friend Lady Uddin was absolutely right to say at Second Reading that the Bill is not enough on its own; it is a tiny part of what needs to be done. Education and support are also critical, and I shall say a little more about that, too. This is a real team effort. I hope that those who read the report of our deliberations will see what I consider to be the House of Lords at its best, as well as the Government responding at their best. I had the privilege of responding to noble Lords at Second Reading and it was obvious that the quality of speeches and the level of support from everyone who participated meant that the Government should respond, and we have. I also pay tribute to my officials, who have been nothing short of magnificent. We gave them an almost impossible time limit because we wanted to do this as quickly as possible. My goodness, they have worked incredibly hard and they have done extremely well. I have paid tribute to the Forced Marriage Unit. There are six people in the unit, and I have visited them. They spend their weekends meeting victims in motorway service stations, often having spent months talking to them before they reach that point. They are dedicated and generous, and they do their work with a happiness that is quite extraordinary to see. I know that one of the consequences of our raising the profile of this issue is that their work will increase. They received 5,000 calls last year, which is a huge number, and many hundreds of those callers have been supported and helped. I also agree with my noble friend Lady Uddin that there is a real heroine behind all this in the shape of my noble friend Lady Scotland, who was working on this issue long before we dragged her into government and away from the legal profession. On Tuesday, my noble friend Lord Triesman and I were privileged to witness the launch of The Survivor’s Handbook, an incredibly important document offering support to people who need practical advice about what to do if they find themselves in this position. This returns me to the point made by my noble friend Lady Uddin about the need to think about this issue in the round. This is about educating people, giving advice and information, and providing support. We must let the courts play their part, but see that as part of a spectrum of support. We must also ensure that we give victims the highest possible quality of support after the event. Some of them may be living a long way from their families because that is unfortunately occasionally a consequence. They need to be helped and supported either through education and training or into work. Again, I pay tribute to the organisations doing such valuable work. Before she left, the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, responded to the point made by my noble friend Lord Plant about nullity. We are not affecting current law. That is a much bigger area, which the Government could look at if they wanted to. This whole question is one of the things that will inform our decision whether to do that. The law of nullity therefore remains as it is, but it is an important part of enabling people to get out of what may be a forced marriage. We cannot, of course, intervene to change the immigration status of spouses who are abandoned in the UK, but we try to offer them advice and put them in touch with organisations that might be able to help them. Those who have been victims of domestic violence, which includes forced marriage, may be able to apply for indefinite leave to remain under the domestic violence provision of immigration law. I completely accept the broader point, which is well made, that this is part of a whole range of work that needs to be done, such as considering immigration issues. My noble friend Lady Uddin is perfectly entitled to say ““I told you so””. Both she and my noble friend Lord Ahmed have been telling us that there will be a lot to do for some time. Hopefully this will be a small contribution to that. The noble Baroness, Lady Park, raised the question of education and her experiences with schools. When I was chair of the governing body of a primary school, we had children from all sorts of backgrounds: Brazil, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Poland, Germany and so on. I can probably say this now that I am no longer an education Minister: I encouraged parents to take their children back ““home”” to enable them to understand and develop the culture from which they came. Many families who had come from a long way away and were not well off could do one big trip, perhaps the only one they would make in 10 years. They took their children for quite long periods of time. As a chair of governors, my view was that that was completely reasonable, providing we were able to support them in an educative way. The education they would receive in doing that was important. Our parents responded magnificently. The children came back with scrapbooks they had compiled about where they had been, and would give presentations to the rest of the school when they were only six or seven years old. They benefited from the experience hugely. Done properly and done well, it is completely proper. The issue arises when children do not come back. The Crown Prosecution Service reported in 2006 that in Bradford some 250 girls aged between 13 and 16 left the school roll and did not return: all from one place in one year. So there is an issue. Not all of them may be doing anything other than going to live in another country and not informing the education authority. That happens in every area. I suspect that some of them, however, may find themselves in a difficult position. We must be mindful of that. There is a balance. I also agree that the quality of information and guidance coming out of education is important. The Forced Marriage Unit is working with the Department for Education and Skills on improving the situation for children missing from the education register, ensuring that we identify missing children and looking at how we can deal with that. The Forced Marriage Unit tells me that 30 per cent of the victims they deal with are under 16. To the noble Baroness, Lady Verma, I say that we are not setting a precedent for a Private Member’s Bill, and as the noble Lord, Lord Lester, confirmed. I hope that we are setting a precedent for taking forward issues where we clearly have a strong consensus, not just within your Lordships’ House—although getting a consensus in the House is a pretty good indicator of the importance of the issue—but also outside. We are talking to organisations such as the Metropolitan Police, the Forced Marriage Unit, voluntary organisations, judges, lawyers, individuals and, in particular, victims. When you get that kind of consensus, it is right and proper for the Government to move, and to do so speedily. As I have already indicated, the work of my officials has created a new part of the Family Law Act of extremely high quality. That does not mean that there might not be areas where noble Lords have suggestions for how we might improve the wording here and there as we take the Bill through your Lordships’ House and beyond. Indeed, when I met with members of the judiciary this morning, there were two or three areas where they suggested one word rather than another. We will examine all of that, but the principal thing is that we are on our way to getting this into law. On the difference between the judgments ofMr Justice Munby which the noble Baroness,Lady Verma, read out and what is new in this, there is, first, greater access to the county court, enabling judges—properly trained and resourced, of course—to deal with and tackle the issue speedily. There are also powers of arrest, better enforcement and statutory guidance, which we will discuss shortly. The importance of that, certainly in education, has already been addressed, not least by the example of the experiences of the noble Lord, Lord Lester, in Derby. It also sends a clear message from Parliament, which is important. This is about the empowerment of our citizens and ensuring that they all enjoy the human rights which we value so much in this country. It is one, small way in which we demonstrate that. It raises the profile of the issue of forced marriage, enabling victims, their friends and family to come forward, and sends that clear signal. This is an important moment, with a lot of support. I am grateful for all the comments that have been made, and we will now have the privilege of discussing some of the detail. Clause 1 negatived.