Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Mr. Streeter: I am delighted to accept the hon. Gentleman's apology.

The amendments make clear in the Bill the links between divorce procedures and procedures under the Children Act 1989. New clause 12 also extends the list of factors currently in section 41 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 that a court should take into account when deciding whether to exercise its powers under the Children Act. These now include: requirements to regard children's welfare as paramount; that the court should have regard to the wishes and feelings of the child concerned; the principle that, in addition to the child's welfare being best served by having regular contact with those with parental responsibility, there should also be regular contact with other members of the family; and the requirement for the court to have particular regard to any risk to the child that may be caused by the actual or proposed arrangements for the child's future.

I understand that the amendments have the full support of the children's organisations. They clarify the court's position and that of children in the divorce process. They provide for even greater protection of children's interests--and children are, of course, the innocent victims of divorce. I am pleased to support these worthwhile amendments.

The Government tabled amendment No. 22 simply to clarify that the requirements of section 41 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973--the duty of the court to

17 Jun 1996 : Column 592

consider whether there are children of the family and, if there are, the arrangements to be made for them--must have been satisfied before a separation order can be converted into a divorce order under clause 4. The amendment ensures that any children born after a separation order has been made are taken into account by the court when considering the application for a divorce order under clause 4.

Amendments Nos. 45, 46 and 63 introduce into schedule 1 a further exemption to the requirement of clause 9 that financial arrangements must be decided upon before a divorce or separation order can be granted. It will apply where there is an occupation order or a non-molestation order in force and in favour of the applicant for ancillary relief, or a child of the family, against the respondent. For this exemption to apply, the requirements of section 41 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 must have been satisfied, the applicant must have tried to reach agreement relating to the parties' financial affairs but been unable to do so and be unlikely to do so in the foreseeable future, and it must be the case that delay would be significantly detrimental to the welfare of any child or seriously prejudicial to the applicant.

The Government believe that it would be wrong for a divorce to be denied on the ground that financial arrangements had not been settled when domestic violence or other harmful conduct by the respondent is, or has been, present in the family, provided that the applicant has made every effort to comply with the requirements as to the parties' financial arrangements for the future. The applicant for ancillary relief should not have to wait until the molestation causes ill health, disability or injury before he or she can apply for an exemption, as would be the case without the amendments, which I am happy to support.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.

New clause 14

Provision for separate representation for children (No. 3)


'.--(1) The Lord Chancellor may by regulations provide for the separate representation of children in proceedings in England and Wales which relate to any matter in respect of which a question has arisen, or may arise, under--
(a) Part II;
(b) Part IV;
(c) the 1973 Act; or
(d) the Domestic Proceedings and Magistrates' Courts Act 1978.
(2) The regulations may provide for such representation only in specified circumstances.'.--[Mr. Boateng.]
Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.

17 Jun 1996 : Column 593

New clause 15

Provision for third parties to act on behalf of victims of domestic violence (No. 3)


'.--(1) Rules of court may provide for a prescribed person, or any person in a prescribed category, ("a representative") to act on behalf of another in relation to proceedings to which Part IV applies.
(2) Rules made under this section may, in particular, authorise a representative to apply for an occupation order or for a non-molestation order for which the person on whose behalf the representative is acting could have applied.
(3) Rules made under this section may prescribe--
(a) conditions to be satisfied before a representative may make an application to the court on behalf of another; and
(b) considerations to be taken into account by the court in determining whether, and if so how, to exercise any of its powers under Part IV when a representative is acting on behalf of another.
(4) Any rules made under this section may be made so as to have effect for a specified period and may make consequential or transitional provision with respect to the expiry of the specified period.
(5) Any such rules may be replaced by further rules made under this section.'.--[Mr. Boateng.]
Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Boateng: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this, it will be convenient to discuss Government amendment No. 59.

Mr. Boateng: We have now reached that part the Bill that seeks to address specifically an issue that is of considerable concern and reflects a growing phenomenon--that of domestic violence. One in four crimes of violence reported to the police is the result of a woman being assaulted in her home by the man with whom she lives. A woman is four times as likely to be the victim of violence in the home as of mugging, and yet research suggests that only 2 per cent. of attacks on women in the home are reported to the police.

Within the context of those horrific statistics, upwards of 750,000 children are caught in the crossfire of domestic violence. That is the scale of the problem that we are required, as a House, to address. Zero tolerance of domestic violence must become the norm.

I am pleased to say that, throughout the country, examples are multiplying of local authorities developing, in conjunction with a broad cross-section of agencies in the voluntary and statutory sectors, effective policies designed to combat this especially pernicious form of violence--in very many cases, as a result of initiatives taken by Labour-controlled councils. I am glad to say, however, that they are increasingly supported by the cross-party alliance.

I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Batley and Spen (Mrs. Peacock), who was outstanding among her colleagues in Committee for being the only one of their number prepared to support the precursor of the amendment that we are discussing. That is a matter of record, and it is one that the House and the country should note, because the time has come for us to be prepared, as a House, to take strong measures in support of existing multi-agency initiatives and to extend police and other agency powers in that regard.

17 Jun 1996 : Column 594

That is what new clause 15 seeks to do. It seeks to build on a recommendation of the Law Commission, following its consideration of domestic violence, and to build on the work of the Home Affairs Select Committee--on which my hon. Friend the Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Mrs. Roche) served with such distinction--to create, on a pilot basis, an opportunity for local strategies to develop geared towards combating domestic violence.

The new clause will enable a third party--usually, but not necessarily, a police service--to take legal action on the part of the victim of domestic violence. The need is obvious, because all too often the victim of domestic violence feels peculiarly vulnerable and therefore unable, because of the oppression she faces daily, to take action herself. It is a radical proposal--a departure from the existing processes and procedures of the court.

Mr. Marlow: I know that the police are very wary of getting involved in domestic disputes. Has the hon. Gentleman any evidence from the police that they would be happy to have this power?

Mr. Boateng: Certainly. Interestingly, when the Home Affairs Select Committee took evidence on that subject, support was expressed, not least, the hon. Gentleman will be pleased to hear, by the Police Federation, the representative of the men and women working on the ground, which said that it would welcome such a power.

The Association of Chief Police Officers properly mentioned resource implications. We have sought to tackle the resources issue as follows. It is our proposal, contained in this amendment, that several pilot schemes should be conducted by the Lord Chancellor at the instigation of his Department. Such schemes would be conducted in areas where there was already good practice, where there was a multi-agency approach involving the local social services, the local police and the refuge movement, and build on the co-operation that is already developing along those lines in many places.

8.15 pm

Obviously, the local authority, the police authority, chief police officers and chief officers of social services would consider their role and take resource implications into account before making an application to the Lord Chancellor for exercise of authority given to the Lord Chancellor under new clause 15. Similarly, the Lord Chancellor would satisfy himself that the resources were in place alongside the policy in order to make the new clause an effective vehicle for bearing down on those who persist in using violence as a means of terrorising and oppressing their partners.

I pay tribute to those working in this area. I am grateful for the advice and briefing given by the Northampton Domestic Violence Forum, which, as the hon. Member for Northampton, North (Mr. Marlow) may know, is working in this area. It has developed an inter-agency strategy group for domestic violence in Northamptonshire. It is designed to provide a variety of co-ordinated responses, including encouraging women to seek advice and support, providing information and advice to victims of domestic violence and protecting women in their homes, as well as providing emergency and longer-term accommodation for victims, recognising

17 Jun 1996 : Column 595

the special needs that exist by virtue of disability or cultural or religious distinctions and recognising the importance of working to change the behaviour of violent men.

It was suggested sometimes in Committee that to talk about domestic violence was to be anti-men. Nothing can be further from the truth. To talk about domestic violence and the need to combat violence in the home is to recognise that some men have a real problem about violence against women and need to be set right. They need to understand that, if they persist in beating up on the people with whom they live, they will be subject to the full rigours of the law, that the people they live with are entitled to the full protection of the law and that they need to get help for the problems that they have in that regard.

One of the attractive things about the work being done in Northamptonshire is that it is not only about protection of the woman, vital although that work is and although it must be given top priority; it also recognises that men have a job of work to do in looking at themselves and changing their own conduct so that they do not repeat it with other women in future after the woman they happen to be violent to at the moment has been protected.


Next Section

IndexHome Page