{"id":2920,"date":"2019-07-04T14:11:40","date_gmt":"2019-07-04T13:11:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/empathygap.uk\/?p=2920"},"modified":"2021-07-30T16:41:32","modified_gmt":"2021-07-30T15:41:32","slug":"the-domestic-abuse-bill","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/empathygap.uk\/?p=2920","title":{"rendered":"The Domestic Abuse Bill"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

I do apologise for being the constant provider of bad\nnews. I hope that readers regularly restore their sanity with reminders that\nthere\u2019s more to life than gender politics. It helps if all sources of\nelectronic communication are turned off. I prescribe long walks and plenty of\nBach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However\u2026raising one\u2019s head from the sand\u2026the miasma of\nauthoritarian control, disguised as caring and protection, continues to\ndescend. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In March 2018 the Government set out its intentions for their new Domestic Abuse Bill and invited responses in a Consultation exercise. Over 3,200 responses were submitted. Responses from male-friendly charities included Families Need Fathers Both Parents Matter Cymru, response here<\/a>, and Mankind Initiative, response here<\/a>, plus a response from academic and expert on domestic violence, Dr Liz Bates, here<\/a>. In January 2019 the Government reported on the Consultation exercise<\/a>. This link includes the draft Bill which then went forward to the Parliamentary Committee stage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

All Bills pass through a Committee stage on their path towards Royal Assent. Committee membership is confined to the Houses of Parliament, in this case six from the Commons and six from the Lords (eight women and four men, see here<\/a>). On 11th<\/sup> June 2019 the Committee published their report<\/a>. The Committee invited evidence from the public, as is common for such Committees, obtaining responses from 86 organisations or individuals. These were overwhelmingly of feminist sympathies (with notable exceptions, such as Equi-Law<\/a>, Dr Liz Bates<\/a>, Mankind Initiative<\/a>, and Brian Malone<\/a> of FNF). Mankind Initiative also submitted a hard-hitting refutation<\/a> of some common woozles which had been repeated by others in their evidence. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Committee has recommended even more draconian changes. Mankind Initiative have responded to the Committee\u2019s report<\/a> with some dismay, noting that male victims of domestic abuse are to be treated as second class. There is a great deal more beyond that to be concerned about. Here I attempt to pull out some key issues, distinguishing between, (a) the draft Bill and the Government\u2019s responses to the Consultation exercise, and, (b) the changes recommended by the Committee. How much of the latter is ultimately adopted in the final Act remains to be seen, but Parliament tends to oblige with anything that can be presented as protecting women and girls.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The report on the consultation exercise, plus draft\nBill, is some 196 pages, whilst the Committee\u2019s report is a further 103 pages. Mindful\nof my recidivism as regards over-long posts, I will address the most important issues\nfirst and will make no attempt to address everything in this enormous mound of\nnascent legislation and Government promises. Readers should simply duck out\nwhen they get bored.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Domestic Abuse Commissioner<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The draft Bill proposes the creation of a Domestic\nAbuse Commissioner, funded by, and reporting to, the Secretary of State (which\nmeans the Home Secretary). The Commissioner would be advised by an Advisory\nBoard consisting of between six and ten people representing, (a) victims, (b)\ncharities working with victims, (c) health care services, (d) social care\nservices, (e) police or criminal justice, and, (f) academic experts in domestic\nabuse. Obviously, the nature of the influence which this new Commissioner will\nhave upon domestic abuse will depend upon the person chosen for the role, and\nthe people chosen to sit on the Advisory Board. Whether there will be any\nmale-friendly voices in the Commissioner\u2019s Office remains to be seen, though\nmore than one is beyond credibility and my expectation is for none. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the draft Bill, the powers of the Commissioner are\nexpressed in equivocal language, noting that it requires the Commissioner\u2019s\nPlan and any Reports from the Commissioner\u2019s Office to be approved by the\nSecretary of State. Key influences would be,<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“The Commissioner may request public authorities to co-operate with the Commissioner in execution of the Commissioner\u2019s functions (laid down in the Bill), and public authorities must, so far as reasonably practicable, comply. Welsh local authorities, and other functions within the jurisdiction of the devolved Welsh Government, are excepted, but Welsh police forces are included<\/em>. “<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is in the context of this new Commissioner that the\nParliamentary Committee has proposed the most important changes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Committee was not happy that the role was that of\n\u2018Domestic Abuse\u2019 Commissioner rather than being explicitly a \u2018Violence against\nWomen and Girls\u2019 Commissioner. The thrust of the Committee\u2019s report was a desire\nto focus explicitly on women and girls. (So much for any pretence about \u201cequality\u201d).\nIn a truly remarkable bid for power by the VAWG lobby, the Committee recommended,<\/p>\n\n\n\n