Author: jonesjb

Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 15

Published on by jonesjb

Regulators such as Ofwat have been in bed with the water industry bosses, and the Environment Agency has lost staff and legitimacy. Labour are wedded to private ownership of water and refuse to consider public ownership, even though it would be the most popular legislation they could enact this Parliament.

These amendments take a direct route to stopping pollution by making this personal to the people at the top. If they do not spend the money to invest and reduce pollution, then that is a crime. They are taking the public’s money and failing to improve. Continue reading “Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 15” →

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill Report Stage

Published on by jonesjb

I feel that we have completely failed children who are home educated; we have not understood how important that aspect of education is for many children. At the moment, there are excessive data powers, legal ambiguity and the erosion of long-standing parental rights. It is just so much worse than it could be, and I feel very sad about that. I have three grandchildren who were home educated; two are now studying at Cambridge and the other is making films, so their home education did not hold them back. I am concerned about the digital ID as there are no safeguards on sharing that information. There are unchecked powers for the local authorities, and there was no meaningful consultation or risk assessment. Therefore, home-educated children are subject to a higher level of scrutiny and data extraction, and it just seems that we are going to a place where a lot of children are going to be very disadvantaged, because being taught at home is not an option for them. Continue reading “Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill Report Stage” →

Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 13

Published on by jonesjb

A system that criminalises without regard to intent places an enormous burden on lawful expression and legitimate activity. Also Parliament and the public need assurance that proscription is based on sound reasoning, reviewed independently and grounded in evidence. One thing we did not really have when we were asked to proscribe Palestine Action was evidence. And proscriptions should be time-limited and expire after a set period, such as two years, unless Parliament is asked to proscribe yet again. At the moment, once proscription has happened, it in effect lasts forever. Continue reading “Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 13” →

Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 12

Published on by jonesjb

Police officers do a very difficult job—I am very appreciative of that and understand the problems—and most do it well. But when someone abuses that role, the damage is much greater for public trust. It is wider than any single case. Trust in policing depends on people believing that no one is above the law. At the moment the rule of law is not for us all, as exemplified by the way we treat police in some cases. Continue reading “Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 12” →

Sentencing Bill Ping Pong

Published on by jonesjb

Continue reading “Sentencing Bill Ping Pong” →

Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 11

Published on by jonesjb

His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services does really important work in shining a light on what is going wrong, but inspection takes us only so far. My amendment asks whether the follow-through is strong enough and whether lessons from other regulated sectors could help turn findings into lasting improvements. In healthcare, education and financial services, regulators are able to require change. Those systems exist because inspection without action does not protect the public. The amendment invites us to consider whether policing oversight could benefit from similar clarity and grip. Continue reading “Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 11” →

Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 10

Published on by jonesjb

At some point we have to accept that the police’s use of Facial Recognition Software needs regulation. We cannot accept that the police constantly mark their own homework. We were reassured that all the flaws in the algorithm and so on had been fixed, but clearly we cannot be sure of that because we do not have any way of knowing exactly what the flaws were and who has fixed them. Live facial recognition represents a huge departure from long-established principles of British policing. In this country, people are not required to identify themselves to the police unless they are suspected of wrongdoing. Live facial recognition turns that principle on its head by subjecting everyone in range of a camera to an automated identity check. It treats innocent members of the public as potential suspects and undermines the presumption of innocence. Continue reading “Crime and Policing Bill Committee Stage Day 10” →