ESorry to disagree. I do not accept the principle of ‘collective punishment’.  Those who lawfully participate in trail hunts should not have their sport banned because others break the law.

Since the introduction of the Hunting Act 2004 many hunts have turned to trail hunting as an alternative to live quarry hunting. This involves a pack of hounds following an artificially laid, animal-based scent. It closely mimics the hunting that took place before the ban, but does not involve a hunt for a live fox, so is not banned.

If an offence to be committed it is necessary because  a wild animal has been hunted intentionally, then the penalty can be an unlimited fine. Between 2013 and 2019, a total of 471 individuals were prosecuted under the Hunting Act and 227 individuals were found guilty.

Of course, anyone who believes that an offence has taken place during a trail hunt, should report the matter to the police.

DS.

I understand that the Copyright (Rights and Remuneration of Musicians, Etc.) Private Members’ Bill, sponsored by Kevin Brennan MP, is making its way through Parliament. I am aware that the Bill is scheduled for its second reading on 3 December and it will have my support.

I am aware of the concerns that many musicians have expressed over the revenues they have been able to obtain from these services in recent years. Streaming has revolutionised the music industry and been a great benefit for many listeners, and although the actual contracts are private commercial agreements between the parties concerned, I would not wish to see this come at the expense of the artists’ livelihoods.

The Government will continue working closely with music creators, record labels, and streaming services to develop a programme of work to better understand the issue, including through the establishment of a contact group with senior representatives from the music industry. This group will meet regularly over the coming months to drive action and examine stakeholder views on the key issues such as equitable remuneration, contract transparency and platform liability rules.

DS.

I would like to assure you that I am committed to protecting our uplands, the wildlife that thrives there, and the people who live there too.

I agree that restoring nature is crucial and I am pleased that the Prime Minister has committed to protecting 30 per cent of the UK’s land by 2030. As well as this, the Environment Bill has now been amended to require a historic, new legally binding target on species abundance for 2030 with the aim of halting the decline of nature in England.

As you may know, the UK is moving to a new agricultural system which will reward farmers and land managers for the work that they do to enhance the environment. The environmental land management schemes being introduced will pay for sustainable farming practices, the creation and restoration of habitats, natural flood management, species management, and making landscape-scale environmental changes, among other things. I know that the uplands provide rich opportunities for the provision of environmental public goods and will be well placed to participate in these schemes.

Peatlands are our biggest terrestrial carbon store and it is welcome that ministers have published an England Peat Plan which provides an ambitious framework to improve the management of these areas. Alongside this, a Trees Action Plan sets out the long-term vision for the planting and management of woodlands and trees. These plans are underpinned by the £640 million Nature for Climate Fund which will support a trebling of tree planting across England by the end of this Parliament and help to restore 35,000ha of peatland by the end of this Parliament. 

Finally, I would like to assure you that raptor persecution is one of six national wildlife crime priorities. The Raptor Persecution Priority Delivery Group considers what action should be taken to prevent crime, gather intelligence on offences and enforce against. The National Wildlife Crime Unit also gathers intelligence on illegal activities and provides assistance to police forces when required.

DS.

Please allow me to assure you that research, ensuring early diagnosis, and providing support are the Government’s key priorities for helping those living with MND.

I am encouraged that the Government has recently committed at least £50 million over the next five years to MND research, and I welcome the commitment to launch a National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) led Research Unit which will coordinate research applications for this funding. This unit is backed by £4 million and is co-funded by the NIHR, UK Research and Innovation, Life Arc, MND Association and My Name’5 Doddie Foundation. This coordinated funding commitment will accelerate progress across the UK to find better treatments for MND, and give people living with the condition the chance of a better quality of life, and more good years with their loved ones.

With early diagnosis key to treating the symptoms of MND, I am glad that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has published clear guidelines for clinicians on the assessment and management of MND. These set out the signs and symptoms of the disease, and recommend that patients suspected of having MND should be referred without delay. The Royal College of GPs and the MND Association have also worked together to produce a ‘Red Flag Tool’ which sets out key signs of MND to help GPs to identify suspected cases and ensure prompt referral. 

I believe it is important that care is as accessible as possible, and I am glad that the recent Spending Review committed £2.3 billion in funding for at least 100 community diagnostic centres across England alongside a broader £44 billion uplift in NHS funding before the end of this Parliament. This will help all those who live with MND access the care they need.

DS.

The United Kingdom has a proud record of helping those fleeing persecution, oppression or tyranny from around the world. Alongside providing £10 billion a year to support people through our overseas aid, the UK is a global leader in refugee resettlement. As a country, between 2016 and 2019 we resettled more refugees from outside Europe than any member state of the EU.

Let me assure you that the new Nationality and Borders Bill will allow the UK continue to resettle genuine refugees directly from places of danger and offer refugee family reunions. It will improve support for refugees to help them build their life in the UK, integrate and become self-sufficient members of society. The Bill also seeks to introduce a new temporary protection status for those who do not come directly to the UK or claim asylum without delay once here but who have, in any event, been recognised as requiring protection. 

I have always believed that resettlement is vital as a safe and legal pathway to protection for vulnerable refugees fleeing persecution. It is right that the Government continues to offer safe pathways for those in need, and I will continue to ensure that this is the case. The launch of a new global UK Resettlement Scheme will now build on the success of previous schemes and continue our proud record of resettling refugees who need our help from around the world.

It is also the case that refugees in the UK need to have the freedom to succeed as they settle. This means ensuring refugees have access to the tools required to become fully independent and provide for themselves and their families. This will allow refugees to be in a position to contribute and integrate into the economic and cultural life of the UK.

It is therefore good news that the Home Secretary has announced £14 million of funding to help newly granted refugees to integrate in the UK. This fund will pilot new approaches across the country to support newly granted refugees to learn English, move into work, access housing and build links in their local communities. Lessons learned from these pilots will inform future support available to all refugees.

DS.

This is a very serious issue and I know that my colleagues in the Equalities Office remain committed to tackling conversion therapy in the UK. I am absolutely clear that this practice has no place in civilised society. Being lesbian, gay or bisexual is not an illness to be treated or cured. 

I am encouraged that this view is shared by the head of the NHS, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the UK Council for Psychotherapy, the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy and the British Medical Association. Each of these bodies have concluded that such therapy is unethical and potentially harmful.

The Government Equalities’ Office commissioned a large-scale LGBT survey in 2017. Sadly, two per cent of respondents to the national LGBT survey said they had undergone conversion therapy in an attempt to ‘cure’ them of being LGBT. Unfortunately, in this survey, what conversion therapy entailed was not defined, nor were the respondents asked whether or not the conversion therapy referred to in their answer was offered in the UK.

I very much welcome the fact that the Government is delivering on its promise and will legislate to ban conversion therapy to protect LGBT people from this harmful practice.

The Government has now launched a six-week consultation, closing on Friday 10th December, on how Ministers plan to ban practices of so called ‘conversion therapy’. This consultation invites views on the Government’s proposals from members of the public, victims of conversion therapy, LGBT organisations, faith groups, psychiatric and counselling bodies, charities and other interested stakeholders to ensure we hear from all voices in shaping the ban on conversion therapy. I would therefore encourage you to take part at the following link – https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/banning-conversion-therapy.

The Government’s proposals include the creation of a new criminal offence and we will also ensure that conversion therapy is considered by judges as a potential aggravating factor upon sentencing for existing violent criminal offences. Ministers further propose a range of other supportive measures including the introduction of statutory Conversion Therapy Protection Orders to protect individuals facing imminent risk, such as forced travel abroad to receive conversion therapy.

I would like to reassure you that the results will be analysed and will inform the Government’s next steps in preparing legislation for spring 2022.

DS.

Cancer is a priority for the Government and survival rates are at a record high. Since 2010 rates of survival from cancer have increased year-on-year.  Around 7,000 people are alive today who would not have been had mortality rates stayed the same as then. I agree that we need to keep working on this, which is why I welcome the Government’s stated aim to see three quarters of all cancers detected at an early stage by 2028 (currently just over half are detected at an early stage). 

I know that the Government is absolutely committed to supporting the NHS recovery from COVID-19, recognising the need to extend the record funding already provided. Over the next three years, £36 billion will be invested in the health and care system to ensure it has the appropriate long term resources. The elective backlog will be tackled with the biggest catch-up programme in the NHS’s history and I am reassured that cancer patients will continue to be prioritised. I especially welcome the doubling of spending this year, to £2 billion, to start this important work. Additionally, more than £8 billion will be spent in the following three years from 2022-23 to 2024-25. 

Cancer patients will absolutely benefit from these commitments, which could deliver the equivalent of around nine million more checks, scans and procedures. It will also mean the NHS in England can aim to deliver around 30 per cent more elective activity by 2024-25 than it did before the pandemic. Additionally, I warmly welcome the commitment of £2.3 billion in the 2021 Spending Review to transform diagnostic services. This will support the opening of at least 100 community diagnostic centres across England benefitting millions of patients who will be able to access earlier diagnostic tests closer to home. 

DS.

I join the Government in their commitment to seeing safer roads for all road users. It is important to consider that many deaths and injuries on the roads are a consequence of tragic accidents. However, too many involve criminal behaviour and I agree that more needs to be done to ensure justice is served in cases where culpability of an offender is high.

Punishments must fit the crime. However, often families feel that this is not the case with killer drivers. I am encouraged the Government is taking action to put this right.

I welcome the fact that the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill will increase the maximum penalties for causing death by dangerous driving and death by careless driving when under the influence of drink or drugs to life imprisonment. 

In addition, it is the case that there is a gap in the law relating to serious injury. I therefore welcome the fact that the Bill will also create a new offence of causing serious injury by careless driving.

DS.

Freedom of speech, the rule of law, and equal rights define us as a society, and I am determined to promote those values actively. But what is illegal offline is also illegal online, and I am absolutely clear that harassment and abuse in whatever form and whoever the target is totally unacceptable, and that this should be reported to the police.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) recognises the importance of the right of freedom of expression. The CPS seeks to balance the right to freedom of speech and expression with the duty of the state to act proportionately against those who wish to deepen and extend divisions in the social fabric of our nation. The public statements and the guidance are clear.

I have always believed that while the internet can be an open and vibrant mode of communication and conversation it can also be a source of great harm. The UK is fully committed to a free, open and secure internet and will ensure freedom of expression online is protected. I know from discussions with my colleagues in Parliament that there is a problem with abuse directed at individuals. This is unacceptable and goes beyond free speech and free debate. Indeed, online abuse can corrode the very values on which British democracy rests.

DS.