As part of my work to improve protection for rape victims in the criminal justice system this month I met Rape Crisis South London to hear about their vital efforts supporting victims of rape and sexual assault through the ordeal of trial. In 10 of the recent cases Rape Crisis South London worked, on a victim’s previous sexual activity and sexual preferences was raised in court. One of the Independent Sexual Violence Advisers (ISVA) told me it was difficult to reassure victims about what awaits them in court because they can’t guarantee that they won’t be grilled about their previous sexual history. The fear of this and having it splashed across social media deters  victims from reporting to the police or giving evidence at trial.

This morning I was interviewed on BBC Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour about the unacceptable abuse of Laura Kuenssberg women MPs and journalist face and the requirement for Laura Kuenssberg to have a bodyguard at Labour Party Conference.

You can listen to the interview here.

Full interview transcript:

JG: Let’s talk to long serving Labour MP and former acting leader of the Labour Party Harriet Harman. Harriet Harman you feel very strongly about this don’t you?

HH: I do, and I think it’s a real moment where we need to really analyse what the issue is and take action. Because, there are a number of fundamental things here. One is, we should value, absolutely as a fundamental part of our democracy, that we have independent political reporting and I don’t want any reporter, man or woman, to be looking over their shoulder and fearing what they are going to be broadcasting in their commentary on the evening’s television, because somehow there might be a backlash of abuse or even threatened violence against them.

JG: I’d imagine actually that it’s just impractical for somebody like Laura to operate with a bodyguard with her the whole time.

HH: Well I think so, it is a particular issue for women, high profile women, in the public domain and in journalism. I think that Cathy Newman had problems as well with harassment and people taking against her view. And of course, if Cathy or Laura were only to stay at home and look after the children then they wouldn’t have this problem but their temerity of being out in the public domain, doing what has been hitherto a men-only job and being opinionated and out there, I think it attracts, and this really should be tackled, people trying to shut them down, silence them and push them out. And I think it is a chilling idea that at Labour’s conference the BBC’s political editor feels that she needs to have protection and this has now been highlighted. I mean it might be that she is going to feel the same at the Tory Conference and other conferences, but this is our conference they’re happening at and we’ve all got to take action together.

JG: Is it simply that some current member of the Labour Party, specifically male, are so thin skinned that they can’t live with any form of objective reporting?

HH: Well I think that it is a red herring for political parties to be deciding that the BBC is their enemy. The BBC is independent, it is highly regulated, as are the other broadcaster, and our task is to get our argument out, not to actually criticise the broadcasters. We should be supporting them in doing their jobs. Now I don’t know how much it is a problem of men in the Labour Party doing this, or whether its cross-party. We do know that Labour women MPs have been subject to vile harassment and abuse and even criminal acts, as in deed have Tory women MPs. I think that it’s a cross-party issue, but it’s a gender issue and it relates to women in politics whether they are like Laura or Cathy and are journalist and reporters or whether they be women politicians. You know in other countries we send observers, if there is an election in Africa we send observers to see whether or not there is a free press; see whether or not candidates are able to go about their business and then we report back. Well what would people make of situation where the BBC’s Political Editor has to have protection at a party conference.

JG: Can I just quote, you mentioned this on Twitter yesterday and some of the tweets in reaction to your original tweet do tell a story? Urm. Here is one… ‘What evidence is there whatsoever that Laura Kuenssberg needs protection at the Labour Conference. Is it just another example of fake news?’. Somebody else: ‘Laura is a mouthpiece for the Tories. She has no shame and is quite happy to give out misinformation to smear Momentum’. And maybe, Harriet Harman, John McDonnell didn’t help out much, he was really appearing to make light of the issue. I think he suggested that ‘anyone who harassed Laura Kuenssberg should be told that John McDonnell will sort them’. That’s not brilliant either is it?

HH: Well I think that people need to think about and you know people make those sort of remarks on twitter, but actually this is fundamentally very serious, because everyone should value a free press, fearless political reporting and a democracy where women are able to play their part on equal terms. And this is fundamental. This is about more than just Laura as an individual, it’s actually about whether we are going to have independent political reporting and whether women can work alongside men in politics, whether as reporters or as politicians. And all parties should play their part in this. And the idea that that we pick up one individual and say it’s her fault because she is a Tory, which she obviously isn’t, she’s an independent reporter, or this is a problem only of right-wing extremism or this is a problem only within the Labour Party. I mean were not going to get anywhere if we like, you know, picket it like that. We’ve got to recognise that this is an overall problem, and there are a number of organisations which need to step forward and pay their part in this, and I would say that the political parties should all sit down with the BBC and say ‘what is going on here?’, they can have a meeting with the BBC and say ‘what is going on?’, ‘what has Laura been subjected to?’ and then discuss how they themselves can address it with each of the political parties. I think Ofcom, who actually regulates broadcasting, they should be looking at women in broadcasting, why do we deal with it Cathy Newman one day, Laura Kuenssberg the next. This is across the media. We need to look at it and I think that Yvette Copper’s select committee, the Home Affairs Select Committee is looking at this and that ought to be fed in and also Maria Miller, who is the chair of the Women and Equalities Select Committee. But I think that this is very fundamental and you know I hate it when people say ‘oh we don’t what party political points scoring’ because I a very party animal and very partisan, but the truth is that this is something which is cross-parties but which is very, very specifically about gender. And we’ve got to make sure that we don’t turn a blind eye and we don’t retreat into our party identity.

JG: No one is accusing you of doing that Harriet. Thank you very much for talking to us.

Over 1000 women attended this year’s Labour’s National Women’s Conference in Brighton. We heard from Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities Dawn Butler MP,  Rosie Duffield MP, Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry MP and Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn.

There were policy debates on the NHS and Social Care, Housing, Economic and Business Policy, Foreign Policy and Brexit.

Over 100 Labour members came to the Southwark Borough Conference to plan for the 2018 Council elections. I urged everyone to leave behind "anti-Blairism and anti-Corbyinsm" and all work together to strengthen Labour in Southwark as people face hard times under the Tory government.

The Government has no idea what they’re doing and they want to muddle through behind closed doors when actually it would be better for them to face up to the fact that Parliament’s involvement will make a perilous situation better.

It is a fact of life and often in politics that you wish you weren’t starting from where you are and that’s exactly how I feel about Brexit.

Despite the fact that there was a strong remain vote in my constituency and in Southwark, by a small majority the result of the Referendum was to leave. I remain bitterly disappointed that this was the result and I am very much concerned about the future.

In the lead up to the Referendum I knocked on doors in my constituency and all around the country, urging people to vote to stay in the EU. I felt so strongly about it I even went on a Remain campaign bus with the Tory Prime Minister David Cameron (which I never thought I would do!)

Our campaign was branded ‘project fear’ but as it turns out we weren’t exaggerating – the problems we are facing are far worse than even we predicted – labour shortages including in the NHS, food prices going up at a time when people’s wages have stagnated for years, trade being hit yet further when we’re still struggling following the global financial crisis and not to mention the cost of holidays in Europe rising sharply because of the fall in the value of the pound.

Theresa May was supposedly against leaving the EU (though she didn’t do very much for the Remain campaign that I or anyone else noticed) – and now she is leading a calamitous government that is talking about being happy to leave the EU without any deal in place whatsoever.

I and my Labour colleagues are deeply worried about the prospects for protecting jobs, workers’ rights, environmental protections and fairness for EU citizens living and working here who are so important to our NHS, construction industries and universities.

Now the Government want us to vote through a Bill which would give the Government the power to bypass Parliament. Despite all the rhetoric in the Referendum being about “taking back control” – the EU Bill would take power from Brussels, not to give it to our democratically elected House of Commons but to give it to Ministers without any accountability to Parliament. As Labour’s Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer has said this is “an unprecedented Government power grab” and that is why I and my Labour colleagues voted strongly against it.

The Government has no idea what they’re doing and they want to muddle through behind closed doors when actually it would be better for them to face up to the fact that Parliament’s involvement will make a perilous situation better.

This is all unprecedented – no country has left the EU before, no country has ever turned its back on its largest trading bloc.I together with fellow Labour MPs will be looking to protect the country as best we can David Cameron, who called the Referendum, has got a lot to answer for and will because of this probably go down in history as the worst Prime Minister this country has ever had.

Published by Southwark News on 15 September, 2017

During Business Questions, the Speaker announced his support for proposals for 'Baby Leave':

"I am bound to say to the Leader of the House, to the right hon. and learned Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms Harman) and to the House as a whole that, as Members can probably tell, my cup runneth over. I am in a state of overwhelming excitement. On a formal level, I should just tell the House that as chair of the Commons reference group on representation and inclusion, of which mention has been made, I can say that we are fully seized of the right hon. and learned Lady’s proposals relating to baby leave. Indeed, we discussed them fully on Tuesday afternoon. We are committed to vigorously pursuing them with a view to an effective motion being brought before the House for its decision."

This morning, in Business Questions, I asked the Leader of the House of Commons, Andrea Leadsom, to support my proposals for ‘Baby Leave’ for MPs.

You can find my speech below:

“I ask the Leader of the House to look at yesterday’s Westminster Hall debate on the representation of women. It was led by a truly excellent speech from the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Mims Davies), which elicited a wide consensus across the parties. There are more women in the House than ever before, and that is not just welcome; it is a democratic imperative. There are more babies being born to women MPs, which is a fact of life. Since 2010, 17 babies have been born to women Members of this House, and there is no maternity leave or paternity leave.

At the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill debate on Monday, the only way for my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Luciana Berger) to record her vote was to bring her lovely new baby—just a few weeks old—to the House, and my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North (James Frith) had to leave his baby, who is just a few hours old. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking Mr Speaker for setting up a reference group to consider the matter and in supporting his work? We can square the circle to ensure that we can be good parents and excellent MPs and that constituents can be properly represented, but we need change. Mr Speaker, although you arrived in this House as a man and as a Tory, since you have been in the Chair you have really proven yourself to be nothing less than an honorary sister.”

The Leader of the House’s response:

“I thank the right hon. and learned Lady for her point. I absolutely share her passion for resolving such issues. There are many barriers to women entering Parliament and, in the centenary year of women’s suffrage, it is important that we do all we can to help resolve the matter. Many colleagues across the House, including my right hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mrs Miller), the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, are also working hard on these issues. I am sure that “Mr Sister”—otherwise known as Mr Speaker—will be keen to make some progress.”

This afternoon, in a debate on barriers for women in running for parliament, I raised the issue of ‘Baby Leave’ for MPs.

You can find my speech below:

“I warmly congratulate the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Mims Davies) on securing the debate and on everything she said. She told us that she dithered about filling in her application form to be the Member of Parliament for Eastleigh but, my goodness me, since she arrived here she has not dithered at all. I pay tribute to her. It is baffling to me when I hear Conservative women Members of Parliament making a speech that I myself might have made, but I guess that shows that daughters of the women’s movement are in all parts of the House. I warmly appreciate what the hon. Lady said.

The Minister for Women is now a woman; the first Minister for Women was a man, so that is progress. We have a Select Committee, a Women and Equalities Committee, which is ably chaired and pushing things forward. My goodness me, we even have women MPs from Scotland, and that is incredibly important. There used to be only two women MPs in the whole of the north, and I remember complaining to my Labour colleagues, who said, “Women in the north do not want to be MPs”—but oh yes, they did. One of my colleagues even said, “There are no women in the north,” which was obviously not true.

In particular, I support what the hon. Member for Eastleigh said about having baby leave for Members of Parliament; we are not doing women any favours by letting them be in the House of Commons. It is a democratic imperative that our Parliament is representative, which means of women as well as men, and it is a fact of life that women have babies. As she said, 17 babies have been born to women MPs since 2010, and more will be on the way. We set the rules for maternity and paternity leave outside this place, but we have none for ourselves. Although Whips are much more civilised than they used to be—not entirely civilised, but more civilised—what woman or man should be beholden or grateful to the Whip for letting them have time off? We need it to be on the table, transparent and as of right.

Also, the vote of such MPs should be recorded, which is why we should have proxy votes. The constituency is entitled to have its Member voting, even one who has just had a baby. That is why I suggest a system of proxy votes, so that when we go past our wonderful Clerks with their iPad, we give not only our own name but the name of someone on whose behalf we are casting a proxy vote. The constituency will then be represented.

I agree with what the hon. Lady said about IPSA. It is chaired by someone who formerly chaired the Maternity Alliance, and I hope that IPSA will look at maternity cover, so that we can have six months’ leave, as people do in the civil service. That should apply as much to men as women. Nowadays men aspire to be more involved with their children than they did in the past.

I will finish with an anecdote. I remember sitting in a Committee when one of my colleagues jumped up and said, “On a point of order, Mr Chair.” He looked at his pager and said, “My wife’s just had a baby.” Everybody said, “Hear, hear!” and I thought, “Why on earth are you here?” That is not a good example of fatherhood or motherhood. We expect fathers to be involved with their children; women need to be with their babies; babies need to be with their mothers for the early months; and the constituency needs to be represented, but we can square that circle, not least because everyone here supports it and because we have a Speaker who, despite having arrived in the House of Commons as a Tory and still being a man, is an honorary sister on these issues. I hope that this broad-ranging debate will bring about progress, and I thank the hon. Member for Eastleigh for securing it.

I ask the Leader of the House to look at yesterday’s Westminster Hall debate on the representation of women. It was led by a truly excellent speech from the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Mims Davies), which elicited a wide consensus across the parties. There are more women in the House than ever before, and that is not just welcome; it is a democratic imperative. There are more babies being born to women MPs, which is a fact of life. Since 2010, 17 babies have been born to women Members of this House, and there is no maternity leave or paternity leave.

At the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill debate on Monday, the only way for my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Luciana Berger) to record her vote was to bring her lovely new baby—just a few weeks old—to the House, and my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North (James Frith) had to leave his baby, who is just a few hours old. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking Mr Speaker for setting up a reference group to consider the matter and in supporting his work? We can square the circle to ensure that we can be good parents and excellent MPs and that constituents can be properly represented, but we need change. Mr Speaker, although you arrived in this House as a man and as a Tory, since you have been in the Chair you have really proven yourself to be nothing less than an honorary sister.”

You can read the full transcript of the debate here

The Speaker has encouraged the Commons Reference Group on Representation and Inclusion to consider my proposals and will bring forward a motion to the House soon. Such necessary reforms will go a long way to making Parliament more representative and inclusive.

Today I attended the inaugural session of the APPG on knife crime established by Sarah Jones MP for Croydon Central.

Knife crime is a problem in Southwark, and is getting worse. There were 840 reported incidents in the Borough of Southwark last year, up from 577 for the same March-to-February period in 2015-16.

The APPG aims to give a national platform to those working at a grassroots level and those experiencing the tragic consequences of knife crime. As well as working to find a cross-party consensus on new measures to combat the resurgence in knife crime. A particular focus will be on identifying the underlying causes of blade offences and the reasons why some young people decide to carry a knife.