Domestic Abuse and Public Life

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Mark Ferguson.)

To make politics truly responsive to the needs of survivors of domestic abuse, and to address the failures that have let them down time and again, the voices of survivors need to be heard and understood in the place where our country’s laws are made. The Minister, as a survivor of domestic abuse and violence, is testament to the fact that the voices of those with lived experience are desperately needed in this place, yet the barriers can feel enormous. The cost of entering and staying in politics can mean that survivors are locked out, or pushed out, of political participation.

Given the stigma, the structural and systemic bias against us, the endless complaints and investigative processes, and the use of the courts and the law to threaten and silence us, what a survivor has to endure feels insurmountable. The Westminster Foundation for Democracy has said that democratic institutions that tolerate the exclusion of women cannot credibly claim to represent them. Indeed, I know that survivors who are already in public life have chosen not to come forward and report the abuse that they have faced, because of their perpetrator’s position of power. That is important, because politics is about power. Politics and abuse can often be closely correlated, as we have seen through the revelations of Jeffrey Epstein’s horrific crimes and his connections to British political figures and institutions.

The abuse does not end when a survivor leaves; often, it intensifies, as I know too well. The threats, intimidation, monitoring and manipulation can continue in social settings, such as sports clubs; online and offline; and, yes, in workplaces, political party settings and all across public life. In my experience, and in the experience of survivors I have spoken to, post separation harassment is shockingly pervasive. I want to illustrate that through the story of a councillor who informed me that she endured a truly staggering level of post separation harassment from an ex partner, his family and his associates during the local elections. Hundreds of abusive messages were shared on public forums during the campaign, including personal and private information, putting her at risk. Although I will not be able to relate the full extent of the police failings in her case, it is shocking that no protections have yet been put in place to allow her to conduct her public duties safely, despite the introduction of Operation Ford. How is she supposed to attend full council meetings, when her ex partner may turn up there? What about her prospects of being able to safely participate in future elections? Tragically, she says, “I’m just at the point now where I don’t think I want to stand again”.

This situation is all too familiar to me, but why should we be the ones to leave?

As I have explained to the House previously, when I first put myself forward to be Labour’s parliamentary candidate for Poplar and Limehouse, the harassment I faced intensified. My ex husband told people he was angry that I had not asked his permission to stand, and he threatened to “expose” me to the community, knowing that he had intimate details about my medical history, and pictures of me without my hijab on. Threats were made to campaign team members, who were told to tell the press stories about me. They were told that people should “make me stand down or else”. At the time, my ex husband was a Labour councillor. Then and, I understand, even now, he was well connected in local political groupings and with a small clique within my local Labour party.

Two years after my election in 2019, I was made to endure a vexatious eight day trial on criminal charges as a result of a complaint made by my ex husband’s brother in law. I was completely cleared, but I feel that that continues to haunt me, and perhaps will for the rest of my life. Why? Because even after my ex husband was expelled from the Labour party for his treatment of me, he stood against me in the general election in 2024, with the stated aim of wishing to “set the record straight”. Indeed, I found out through a press outlet less than 20 minutes before the deadline for legal nominations that he was standing. I had just 20 minutes to decide whether I should embark on my re election campaign, with the prospect of continuing to be in public life while knowing that the harassment had now rolled on from party and court processes to an electoral one.

I want to highlight to the House just what that meant in practice. I was unable to attend some hustings, and had to seek advice as to whether refusing to stand next to my ex husband at the election count would violate his legal rights as a candidate. I had to leave polling stations immediately when he was tipped off about where I was. I had to stop campaigning early on election day, because the threat just could not be managed. There appears to be little or no framework on how to manage the situation overall, because he was already confirmed as a parliamentary candidate, or even about how to protect my democratic rights and provide me with safety as a candidate. I feel a tremendous duty to survivors, and am compelled to keep speaking out about these experiences and to do something about this, because what happened to me must never happen to anyone again.

I have long been campaigning for better protections in the workplace for survivors of domestic abuse, and I have also been campaigning, cross party, for new duties to be placed on all political parties to better support candidates and representatives who are survivors of domestic abuse, so that they are not exposed to further harassment in their roles. Abuse is not always direct; survivors can experience threats made against third parties, who can be intimidated or manipulated into engaging in behaviours desired by the perpetrator. These are forms of indirect abuse, as I have come to understand through the ongoing support of my independent domestic violence advocate. I know from my experiences of my ex husband’s associates, including the small clique still active in the local party, that the abuse can persist even when the perpetrator is not present. With reports that my party is about to commence a new re selection process, I have still not been told if or how the party will prevent those people from overseeing another process.

In the years since the tragic and senseless murder of Jo Cox, which took place 10 years ago this month, numerous initiatives have been launched to tackle abuse and violence against representatives, campaigners and candidates. We know that women, and black and minority ethnic women most of all, face staggering levels of abuse, online and offline, ranging from threats of sexual violence to physical assaults. It is still a terrifying time to run for election as a woman, and 69% of women polled cite abuse or harassment as a key reason for not pursuing a career in politics. For a survivor, it is of course even more difficult to consider doing so.

The return of the Representation of the People Bill to the House gives us the opportunity to tackle the barriers that lock survivors out of our political system. I am glad that clause 32 is increasing the timescale for anonymous voter registration; that is crucial to ensuring that survivors can participate in elections as voters, but what about participating as candidates? It is for that reason that I have tabled two amendments to the Bill to address the gaps in protections under electoral law regarding domestic abuse: the schedule 9 offences for which disqualification orders must include behaviours amounting to domestic abuse; and, when charging and conviction rates for domestic abuse related offences remain so low compared to the full scale of domestic abuse, it is also necessary for courts to issue disqualification orders when granting protection orders. The amendments are supported by Elect Her and the Jo Cox Foundation. I hope the Government will consider them fully to encourage more survivors to participate in our politics and in our elections.

There is no question about the need to make sure that survivors can feel secure and confident in standing for election. There are urgent measures that political parties, the Government and the police must take to make that possible. I am sure that, to the fullest possible extent, the Minister will be looking to deliver on the promises of the Government’s violence against women and girls strategy. The measure of the strategy’s success will be whether it tackles the horrifying statistic that only one in five victims and survivors reports their abuse. How we enable victims and survivors to come forward is by tackling the systems that can be used to manipulate and silence them and prevent their voices from being heard. Political parties, including our own, must truly assess how well they themselves do that internally.

We have a duty to make inclusive, democratic and safe environments that make it possible for everyone to participate. It saddens me deeply to be in a position where I am prevented from being able to participate fully in public life. I still have to risk assess every event and meeting, and I cannot participate if the risks cannot be mitigated. I have spoken from my own experience today, but I know that my experience is actually far from unique. I have been contacted by women and survivors from all across the country for whom I am determined to work for a society where survivors feel confident that they will be believed, listened to and treated supportively. This country must become one where survivors are not thwarted by ongoing harassment and abuse, including if they choose to enter public life, as surely should be their right.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum) for raising this vital issue, and for her continued advocacy for victims and survivors of domestic abuse everywhere.

There are parts of this job that I find really difficult, and I know that my hon. Friend shares that. And then there are parts of being here, in this Chamber and on these Benches, that are the most incredible privilege. As I sit here, as a Minister, to be able to hear your testimony as a survivor—sorry, I mean my hon. Friend.

Order. I know the Minister is new to the Dispatch Box, but no “you” and “yours” because it is not my story. To help, she must look into the microphone and speak through the Chair.

Thank you for your patience, Madam Deputy Speaker.

It is the most incredible privilege to be here in this Chamber to hear how my hon. Friend triumphed against the most horrendous abuse and to see her surrounded by her colleagues in the most supportive way possible. That feels like a real privilege, and I am very grateful to have been here for that moment.

My hon. Friend championed the importance of a whole system approach to domestic abuse and violence against women and girls more broadly. I also know how hard it is to come forward and share experiences of abuse. I am proud to use my platform to shine a light on the challenges many victims and survivors face, and I know that so many will have been listening to my hon. Friend’s account this evening and will take strength from it.

I want to reassure my hon. Friend that tackling VAWG is a top priority for this Government. We have made it a mission to halve these crimes in a decade. Domestic abuse and violence against women and girls are the source of untold harm. The abuse can remain hidden, regardless of a person’s lifestyle, their social circles and their profession, including people in public life. It is something that affects every single part of society, and too often it is still hidden and accepted as part of everyday life. That is why this debate is so important, and I am so grateful for my hon. Friend’s testimony and campaigning on this issue. Her bravery and honesty, and that of other survivors, is crucial. Only by listening to those who have first hand experience can we continue to champion and advocate for victims of these crimes.

The Government have been clear that things must change. Our violence against women and girls strategy is driving that change by strengthening early intervention, pursuing perpetrators at every turn, and giving victims the best possible support. It is about not just responding to harms after they happen but focusing on stopping them in the first place. We are taking clear steps to challenge attitudes, norms and behaviours that allow abuse to continue.

Through the updated relationship and sexual health education curriculum, we are giving our children the tools to spot and challenge unhealthy relationship dynamics. We are delivering “Enough”, our behaviour change campaign, to help young men and boys reflect on and question harmful behaviours that have absolutely become normalised. By raising awareness across our society, spotting those early signs, and teaching everyone to challenge those behaviours, I hope that we continue to reduce the shame and stigma that stop people seeking help early.

We are taking a victim centred approach to tackling violence against women and girls by investing £550 million to pay for counselling, court guidance and children’s services to support victims. In the Home Office, I am proud that this month we launched a £24 million competition for helpline and advocacy services. Those specialist helplines are for minority groups and will help victims of domestic abuse, sexual violence, honour based abuse, intimate image abuse, and stalking. We have worked hard to secure multi year funding that will give our services more certainty and reassurance.

If we are going to make real change in tackling VAWG, however, we need to transform how we work across the public sector and services. We need a whole of Government and a whole of society approach, so victims can access housing, health, justice and the support they need. We have established the National Centre for Violence Against Women and Girls and Public Protection, so that victims receive a consistent VAWG response across our forces. Our strategy focuses on pursuing perpetrators, holding them accountable for their crimes, and managing them, wherever they are, to prevent further harm.

An example of that is our domestic abuse protection orders, which bring together the strongest elements of protection orders into a single flexible order. That means that they can impose behaviour change programmes on perpetrators. The pilot has seen more victims protected and perpetrators held to account, with prison sentences able to be handed down where breaches occur. We are rolling out DAPOs across England and Wales as soon as we can, so that more victims can benefit from the impact it is having in pilot areas. Though we are taking active steps to combat all forms of violence against women and girls and domestic abuse, there is so much more to do.

My hon. Friend raised post separation abuse. I found out today about the interventions that have been made in this area—it blew my mind that they were not always a thing. But they were not. Too often, abuse continues after a relationship has ended. That is why, in our changes to the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, we extended the offence of controlling and coercive behaviour to former intimate partners. We have also removed the requirement for the victim and perpetrator to live together, to reflect that this can happen once the ex partner has left the property.

As technology advances, it amplifies the scale, severity and reach of abuse. That is why the VAWG strategy includes ambitious commitments to tackle online and technology facilitated harm. We are already taking decisive action to protect all of us online. The Crime and Policing Act 2026 introduced measures to ban nudification apps, and requires platforms to remove non consensual intimate image abuse within 48 hours. On 8 June, the Prime Minister announced that Britain will be the first country to prevent children from taking, sharing and viewing nude images on their devices.

My hon. Friend mentioned how difficult it is for people like her to hold public office because of the challenges she has faced. Our democracy is richer with Members like her in this House. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] Democracies across the world need women and survivors within them. In fact, public office should be open to everyone, regardless of background. All our democracies are better for it. Again, I thank her for her campaigning in this area. My hon. Friend mentioned our sister Jo Cox and her legacy more than once. The work taking place in this space to ensure that we support each other to be here is absolutely vital.

The Government absolutely recognise that MPs face abuse and intimidation, and that they have a disproportionate impact on minority groups in politics, including women and those from minority ethnic backgrounds. Through the defending democracy taskforce, we are working with policing and electoral partners to ensure that candidates and elected officials are safe while campaigning and when in office. The taskforce is driving a whole of Government approach to tackle abuse targeted at elected officials and has taken steps to make it safer to stand for and be elected to public office. We continue to review and develop our approach, working with partners across law enforcement, Parliament and the third sector to identify and address any gaps in our response.

On vexatious civil court proceedings, the Government are absolutely committed to preventing courts from being used as tools of abuse by perpetrators. We recognise the damage that vexatious litigation has on individuals. In England and Wales, the courts have several mechanisms to protect individuals from being subjected to repeated meritless or abusive litigation. Most commonly, a party can seek a civil restraint order, which restricts a person from making further applications or issuing claims without the court’s permission where those applications have been found totally without merit. CROs can range from limited orders, which apply only to current proceedings, to extended or general orders to prevent wider use of the court system without prior approval. In more extreme cases of persistent abuse, the High Court may declare an individual a vexatious litigant under section 42 of the Senior Courts Act 1981. If this happens, the individual must obtain permission before bringing forward any new proceedings.

Along with those measures, courts must also strike out baseless claims and impose cost sanctions. In certain circumstances, where litigation forms part of a pattern of harassment, injunctive relief may be available. Together, these remedies help to ensure that individuals are protected from repeated unfounded claims while preserving the integrity of the justice system.

Once again, I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. I have refrained from commenting on any individual case, but I will say that listening to the personal accounts in this debate has been an incredibly moving experience. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for not just the powerful and thought provoking contribution we heard tonight, but the contributions she continues to make across the House. I have heard her.

As I hope has been clear from my response, the Government’s commitment to tackle domestic abuse and violence against women and girls is total. We have taken important steps forward, especially with our VAWG strategy to improve criminal justice outcomes, restore trust in policing and ensure that tackling domestic abuse and violence against women and girls is everyone’s problem. However, we all know that there is more to do. Across Government, Parliament, policing and beyond, we all must now step up our efforts to prevent abuse and protect the vulnerable as we work towards halving VAWG in a decade.

I have been able to set out the measures that the Government are taking and where there is more that we can do, but I cannot overstate how powerful it is for survivors everywhere to see a survivor raising this issue here, surrounded by a group of her peers who support her without question. I thank my hon. Friend for her contribution tonight.

Question put and agreed to.

House adjourned.