FiLiA RESPONSE TO THE 2ND READING OF THE DOMESTIC ABUSE BILL
By Sally Jackson
It’s positive to hear the 2nd reading of the Domestic Abuse Bill discussed today in Parliament. We support the 4 main areas the bill addresses and many of the recommendations that MPs made to improve its ability to protect all women.
We support the widening of the definition to include economic abuse, and recognise the long-term impact economic abuse has, we are thankful for the work of Surviving Economic Abuse in addressing this issue and the huge strides they have already made.
The use of Domestic Abuse Protection Orders to bring together the various orders available for protection will be helpful if the police and justice system are trained; not just on the process but also the nuances of how women may be abused by a perpetrator.
The introduction of a statutory duty to Local Authorities to develop local accommodation strategies is useful only if it is accompanied by sufficient funding to ensure holistic provision, including allocation of support during a crisis and in the long term. Currently women often have the choice of homelessness or returning to an abusive relationship; this must end.
We welcome the recognition of Specialist Domestic Abuse Courts and how some of the learning from them could improve the Family Justice system. We support the automatic implementation of Special Measures in domestic abuse criminal cases and the ending of cross examination from the perpetrator in the family court. We agree that results of the Family Justice Review Panel should be made available before the committee stage to aid discussion.
We have been impressed at the difference Nicole Jacobs the Domestic Abuse Commissioner has already made and the introduction of her statutory powers will aid her in holding authorities to account. We are pleased to hear that she will be mapping the service provision and gaps nationally as we must end the post code lottery of support.
In this second reading it was also positive to hear that the government has recognised how problematic the rough sex defence is and is looking at how the law could address this. The horrific case of Natalie Connolly was remembered by many in the hope that her memory will ensure that action will be taken against this misuse of the justice system. Also, to see the recognition that domestic abuse is everybody’s business and it is society’s job to prevent, protect and prosecute domestic abuse. Women and children subjected to abuse must be supported, believed and listened to, and perpetrators must be held to account.
In the discussion following it was good to hear the recognition of pressure on services which has been exacerbated by the pandemic, and how that effect was even greater on specialist ‘by and for’ services for minoritized communities. We support the request for at least 10% of the £750M allocated for charities to respond to Covid 19 to be ring-fenced for specialist VAWG services and within that especially for those ‘by and for’ services already mentioned.
Many parliamentarians mentioned the need to abolish No Recourse to Public Funds, not just during the pandemic but in the long-term – support to escape domestic abuse must be available to ALL women regardless of immigration status. At the very least there must be a distinct barrier between immigration and criminal reporting so that women are able to report without fear of immigration policies taking priority over their suffering. Mention was also made of the provision of hotel accommodation to women escaping abuse and we support Southall Black Sisters campaign to urgently persuade the government to provide funding for this.
The increase in reporting to the police and contacting helplines was raised, but also importantly provision following lockdown when access to support (and the threat that is to the perpetrator) will see another increase in women experiencing abuse. Services must have capacity to work with this and that requires funding now.
Reference was made to the missed opportunity to ensure that Universal Credit is made in separate payments so that women being financially abused do not have to risk further abuse by asking for the separate provision which should be standard in all cases. Another missed opportunity is the ratification of the Istanbul Convention, and the fact that in 2020 we are not able to ratify this important instrument in combating violence against women. This also in the absence of a violence against women bill would at least formally show that domestic abuse is both a cause and consequence of sex inequality.
The discussion also gave opportunity for calls for the register for stalkers and serial perpetrators to be included in the bill.
It does seem as though there is a real opportunity for improvement in provision to women with this bill but opportunities must not be missed. Migrant women must be recognised equally through this legislation and we must use this as a chance to work together across parties, between the Women’s sector and government to really make a difference in Women’s lives.