| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
5 Feb 2009 : Column 809
Lord Malloch-Brown: My Lords, the noble Lord is passing words. We have made it clear that the information around this case became available to us only from 2007. In that sense, there was a period when we were speaking without full information being to hand. We have acknowledged that to this House in the past. Without wanting to go too deeply into the details, I again make it clear that the case of the intelligence services is that, if any interviews of the defendant took place, they did so under circumstances where our services were utterly unaware that torture might have taken place.
Baroness Manningham-Buller: My Lords, I declare the obvious interest that I was director-general of the Security Service at the time when some of the events of this case occurred. However, it would be wrong of me to speak of that in this House, not only because of the Attorney-General’s work but also because I have no access to the papers and cannot remind myself of the details and chronology of this case. However, all those details were shared by me and, I believe, my successor with the parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee.
I shall make three points not directly related to this case as background. The first is to endorse the comments of the noble Baroness, Lady Ramsay, about the third-country rule. I sympathise with those who think that rules are there to be challenged and checked for continuing validity. However, it is pretty well impractical always to check whether something has been derived from torture unless you have reason to suspect it at the beginning. Literally thousands of pieces of intelligence are shared daily between the UK, our allies and people who might not so reasonably be described as our allies. That intelligence would dry up if we did not honour the third-country rule. Not all other counties honour it; in that case, we deny them our intelligence. The second—
Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: You have to ask a question.
Baroness Manningham-Buller: My Lords, I am being reminded that I have to ask a question. I hope that the Minister will be able to confirm my comment on the amount of material that is going around the place and the impracticality of checking each bit for torture. I apologise to the House for not getting these things quite in the right order.
Lord Malloch-Brown: My Lords, it must be a source of great comfort to this House that the noble Baroness was involved in some of the earlier decisions about information going to the appropriate UK institutions. She has already in her short time in this House demonstrated her commitment to the rule of law and to, above all else, not detaining prisoners for the wrong reasons without the right legal basis to do so. Our intelligence services have in recent years always been in the hands of individuals who very much understand the obligations and values under which they are expected to operate.
5 Feb 2009 : Column 810
Fortunately, this Minister does not have to see the several thousand pieces of intelligence that move each day, and always has a suspicion that some are of better quality than others. However, I equally agree with the noble Baroness that any breach of the third-country rule risks drying up that stream in a way that would seriously jeopardise British national interests.
Lord Dubs: My Lords, I welcome Her Majesty's Government’s continued commitment to oppose torture in all its forms. I ask my noble friend two questions. First, when did we last approach the American Administration—not the security services but the Administration—about whether they would be prepared to release this information or allow us to do so? I ask that because, of course, there has been a complete change of heart on torture and Guantanamo since President Obama took office. Whereas approaching the security services in the United States may give us the same answer as we got under Bush, I wonder whether approaching the American Administration might not give us a more positive answer now. Secondly, is the issue about whether Mr Mohamed has been tortured—and, therefore there are fewer security implications as regards the fact, even while there is political embarrassment—or about the whole raft of evidence against him?
Lord Malloch-Brown: My Lords, the most recent direct contact at the political level was this week between the Foreign Secretary and the Secretary of State. There is no lack of understanding at the highest reaches of the new Administration of this case and the issues that it raises. Again, however, the decision must rest with the new Administration on whether it chooses that it is in the American public interest to make that information available. We cannot breach the third-country rule and make that decision for them. On the issues of concern about the withheld information, I really do not think that it is appropriate for me to comment. I hope that noble Lords will understand why.
Lord Hurd of Westwell: My Lords, will the Minister clarify one point? Nobody as I have heard it has suggested that we should breach the third-country rule; its importance has been emphasised in the most authoritative way. Would he confirm, however, that there would be no breach of the rule, or breach of convention or practice, if Her Majesty's Government in confidence expressed to the United States Government their view about publication of material which they, as the Minister confirmed, have themselves seen in confidence?
Lord Malloch-Brown: My Lords, I absolutely confirm that there would be no reason why we would not do so. Indeed, it would be completely consistent with our position. Again, the decision lies in their hands. Just as we pressed for the release to us of Mr Binyam Mohamed, in the same way we think this case would be served by as much release of information as possible.
5 Feb 2009 : Column 811
Violence against Women and Children
Debate
2.34 pm
To call attention to measures to tackle violence against women and children; and to move for Papers.
Baroness Gale: My Lords, once again we debate violence against women and children, a topic to which your Lordships' House often returns. I welcome the opportunity to do so today, if only to send a message to all the women and children who are suffering from violence in this way.
The UN defines violence against women as,
- “any act of gender-based violence that is directed against a woman because she is a woman or that affects women disproportionately”.
It includes rape and sexual violence, domestic violence, forced marriages, stalking, trafficking and sexual exploitation, forced prostitution, crimes in the name of honour, female genital mutilation and sexual harassment.
The figures of violence against women make depressing reading. Three million women across the UK experience violence each year. There are many more women coping with the legacies of abuse experienced in the past as children or adults. Almost half the women in England and Wales experience domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking in their lives. Research for the Government estimates that in England and Wales in one year, domestic violence alone costs £23 billion; £17 billion is the human and emotional cost and £6 billion is the direct cost to the state.
Violence that women experience is usually committed by men they know—partners, family members, friends or work colleagues. One imagines our home to be a haven of peace and safety, but for many women and children it can become a prison and a place of fear. Sexual harassment in public is widespread, and contributes to women's fear of crime, and whether or not they feel safe in public spaces at night. Women are twice as likely as men to be worried about violent crime.
Violence affects females of all ages. Girls and young women are more likely to experience sexual violence; older women are more likely to be abused by carers than are older men. Women with mental health problems and learning difficulties are particularly vulnerable to sexual violence. Ethnic minority women face additional barriers to accessing support and experience particular forms of violence, such as forced marriage, female genital mutilation, and crimes in the name of honour.
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has an excellent record of taking measures to eliminate violence against women. At present, it is putting forward ideas and suggestions to establish a Council of Europe convention on combating violence against women. In a recommendation towards this end it says:
“Despite the progress made and the international instruments already in existence, the Assembly considers that action to combat violence against women must be intensified. It is convinced that the drafting of a legal instrument which embodies the “three Ps” (protection of victims, punishment of perpetrators and prevention)
5 Feb 2009 : Column 812
The assembly is now inviting the Committee of Ministers to draft a convention on the severest and most widespread forms of violence against women, associating the Parliamentary Assembly, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, the Council of Europe and the NGOs in the drafting process. I believe that it would be an advantage to have such a convention. Does my noble and learned friend agree with this idea? Will the Government, as represented by the Foreign Secretary at the Committee of Ministers, sign up to the convention at the appropriate time?
Last week the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the End Violence Against Women campaign published the second Map the Gaps report. This is a detailed report on all aspects of violence against women and what is happening regarding the provision of services from the Government across the UK. What hit the headlines were the remarks of Trevor Phillips, chair of the commission, who said that the commission will target more than 100 local authorities with the threat of legal action as they have failed to provide specialised services for women who have experienced violence.
The report says that one in four local authorities in Britain have no specialist support services at all. This must be a concern to a Government who are committed to assisting women who are the victims of violence. How can these local authorities be persuaded to provide support? Does it pose the question: will threats of legal action work? It must be difficult for women in these local authority areas who have no support whatever. I am not sure exactly what the Government can do, but I am sure that my noble and learned friend will do her utmost.
I praise the Government for the initiatives they have taken to deal with this huge problem of violence against women. Many organisations have called for an integrated strategy to combat violence against women in all its forms, including the Women’s National Commission, the End Violence Against Women campaign and Welsh Women’s Aid.
Welsh Women’s Aid has called on the Welsh Assembly Government to develop and implement an integrated strategy on violence against women based on the gender equality and human rights. A recent YouGov poll showed overwhelming public support in Wales— 84 per cent—for such a policy. The Equality and Human Rights Commission in Wales supports the call for a violence against women strategy and it is taking steps to link up the work on prevention, the criminal justice system and those who provide protection and support for women such as the 24-hour Wales Domestic Abuse Helpline and sexual assault referral centres. As there have been so many calls for a violence against women strategy, I was pleased to learn that my honourable friend Maria Eagle MP has announced that the Home Secretary has confirmed to the Home Affairs Select
5 Feb 2009 : Column 813
I have concentrated my remarks in the main on violence against women. I am aware that other noble Lords—or noble Baronesses, I should say, as most of our speakers today are noble Baronesses, although I am pleased that one noble Lord is to speak—will be speaking about children. I will confine my remarks to a campaign that the NSPCC is running calling on the UK Government, the Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly to see domestic violence from a child’s point of view. In its petition it says that it wants to see:
“Adequate support services for children and families affected so that when they are brave enough to speak out, they know that they will be safe and supported... Training for professionals to identify children living with domestic violence so that whenever adults are working with domestic violence they think about the children affected... Education about domestic violence in schools and other youth settings so all children learn that the violence is not their fault, and how to stay safe”.
The Department of Health estimates that every year 750,00 children experience domestic violence but estimating numbers is difficult given that so many women do not report domestic violence, so it is possible that the true figure is higher; it is a big problem. Children need protection. It is well documented how violence in the home can affect children, and for young boys seeing their father hit their mother means that to a child this is the norm; it is acceptable, as most behaviour is learnt at home. Will my noble and learned friend give her response to the NSPCC’s campaign; and what initiatives are the Government undertaking to support children who are victims of violence in the home and outside the home such as bullying in school?
One successful government initiative has been the specialist domestic violence courts. They bring together police, prosecutors, court staff, the probation service and specialised support services so that more offenders are brought to justice. The courts were first established in 2005-06 with 25 courts receiving accreditation. There are now more than 100 and they are spread across England and Wales. I believe that there will be more announcements in the future. This is a great initiative and gives women victims much greater faith in the system by bringing the perpetrators to justice.
Since 1997 the Government have taken violence against women seriously, and have brought in many measures and new laws to try and tackle this problem, which affects women and children throughout the world. As I read, learn, and speak to women in this country and abroad, sometimes I feel that the problem is so big that whatever measure is taken, the biggest problem of all is what measures can be taken to stop men from being violent towards women?
Organisations such as the White Ribbon Campaign run by men whose aim is to stop men being violent towards women is a way forward. This is not just a matter for women; we need many more men involved. On the topic of prevention, one way would be to start
5 Feb 2009 : Column 814
Despite the diligent work that the Government have undertaken and the work that the NGOs are carrying out in this area, there is still so much more needed. Women cannot achieve equality if they are constantly living in fear of violence. We have made great progress in terms of awareness, in speaking openly about violence and encouraging women to come forward and report any incident, but of course there is so much to do before we can eliminate the scourge of violence that men perpetrate on women.
2.49 pm
Baroness Walmsley: My Lords, I start by congratulating the noble Baroness, Lady Gale, on raising yet again this vitally important issue—an issue which affects the whole of society and not just the immediate victims and perpetrators. In order to justify that claim, I would like to concentrate my remarks on the effects of domestic violence on the 750,000 children in our country who experience it every year. The Home Office definition of domestic violence does not take account of the effect on children, although we know that 30 to 60 per cent of men who are violent to their female partners also hit the children. The Welsh Assembly has a much more inclusive definition. Does the Minister have any plans to change the definition for England?
The main difference between a woman and a child is pretty obvious: the former is an adult and fully developed, the latter is not fully developed. That is the crucial point that I would like to make. I am afraid that I will get a little technical in order to explain the consequences of this. It is a clear case of cause and effect.
We now know a lot about the development of a child's brain, particularly in the first three years of life. The structure of the developing infant brain is a crucial factor in the creation, or not, of violent tendencies, because early patterns are established, not only psychologically but at the physiological level of brain formation. Indeed, we also know from a research paper by Cummings et al in 1989 that male aggressive behaviour is highly stable as early as the age of two.
At birth, the infant brain is not fully developed. We now know that development is completed in the first three years of life. The human infant brain is uniquely plastic. That has enormous survival value for the human species, since it allows the human child to adapt to its environment. But there are dangers in that if the environment in which he finds himself causes his brain to develop in certain undesirable ways.
The child has about 100 billion brain cells or neurones at birth; indeed, I believe that they start to die off as soon as we are born. But what has not yet developed fully is the amazing network of connections, synapses and pathways that connect those neurones together in a veritable cat’s cradle. We need these pathways in order to think, feel and make choices. At birth there
5 Feb 2009 : Column 815
Synapses are strengthened and reinforced by experience and our early-life experiences determine which of these pathways through the brain live on and which fall into disuse. The scientists call it pruning. Some of the pathways become hard-wired by repeated use. It is a bit like when you first go to the home of a new friend, you need a map. After one or two visits you hardly look at the map, and then you do not need it at all. If you go frequently, you get to the stage where you could probably find your way blindfolded. But if you do not visit for some years, you may need the map again.
Such reinforcement makes the things that we learn when we are young very resistant to change. I find it very hard to leave food on my plate because my mother always told me to eat it all up because the poor children in China and Africa did not have any and I was very lucky. I am sure that your Lordships can think of similar examples. The way that child becomes attached to its mother or main carer is explained by this and by other, even earlier factors, since the child sees the face and hears the voice of that person most frequently and associates those things with being nurtured and his various needs being met.
The downside of all this adaptiveness is that the human brain is very vulnerable to trauma. That is why the slogan “Not in front of the children” is a good one. The way it works is as follows. The development of brain cells is affected by the chemicals that surround them. If the early experience is predominantly fear and stress, the stress hormone cortisol washes over the brain like acid and affects its development by reducing the number of connections made. By using CAT scans, scientists have found that in abused or neglected children the brain is smaller than normal and the parts governing emotion are 20 per cent to 30 per cent smaller and tend to have fewer connections. The part responsible for memory is also smaller. Bremner et al, in papers written in 1995 and 2003, stated that that is because of the toxic effects of cortisol. It is obvious, therefore, that a child whose brain develops like this will have less emotional maturity and his learning will be affected.
On top of that, in 2002, Eisler and Levine found that the normal hair-trigger effect is enhanced when the brain develops in a high-cortisol environment. You might expect this to happen in a child who is under frequent threat of violence, because it is a protective mechanism; but it means that, for such a child, the slightest stress unleashes a surge of stress hormones causing anxiety, hyperactivity and impulsive behaviour. He cannot help himself. Trauma also scrambles the signals that tell the growing neurones where to go, so
5 Feb 2009 : Column 816
A large research project in the USA called ACE has identified the specific effects on the child's health and behaviour and on society of early childhood trauma, such as violence and sexual abuse or witnessing violence. In the case of the child, it causes: violent personality and anti-social behaviour; poor mental health; lower intelligence and impaired ability to learn; low emotional intelligence; poor physical health, such as an increased chance of heart attack and liver malfunction; career failure; and reduced happiness. The effects on society are: violence and anti-social behaviour; school underperformance, so that greater resources are needed to deal with it; economic underperformance and a lower tax take; poor personal relationships, leading to more broken families; high health expenditure on physical and mental health; and reduced societal happiness, leading to all kinds of effects, including more crime.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |