Lyn Brown (West Ham) (Lab): I join my hon. Friends in congratulating the Father of the House on this Bill. If it is enacted, it will be a worthy addition to the statute book, as is recognised by the cross-party support that it has. The Bill has undoubtedly been improved as a result of the lively and constructive debates on it in this House, and it will play an important role in addressing the serious problem of the obstruction of our emergency services. The Bill addresses an increasingly important issue. I hope that Members will forgive me if I repeat some arguments that have already been made, but the need for the Bill is worth reinforcing again.

The British crime survey shows that fire and rescue service firefighters and officers, along with police officers and prison service officers and others defined in the Bill as being in the protective services, are the people who are most at risk of experiencing violence and obstruction at work. Some 14 per cent. of workers in the occupational category report that they have experienced an incident of actual or threatened violence while working. The figure for the work force as a whole is 1.7 per cent., so there is a huge and outrageous difference. The former Office of the Deputy Prime Minister collected figures for England and Wales from 2004 at the request of the Chief Fire Officers Association. The stats show that there were almost 400 serious incidents in a nine-month period alone.

It is not only the number of incidents that is increasing, but their ferocity and seriousness. I am sure that most hon. Members in the Chamber know of at least a single incident that has occurred in their constituency or nearby that illustrates how serious the problem is becoming.

The Fire Brigades Union has published research showing that the instances of obstruction on UK fire crews runs at approximately 40 a week, and we understand that the problem may well be getting worse. I understand that the research is the first of its kind in the UK. The problem is also seriously underreported, so it is suggested that there could be as many as 120 incidents in one week. We believe that there is serious underreporting because only 18 of the 50 English and Welsh fire and rescue services responded to requests for information when the figures were being compiled. Only a third of the brigades thus added their numbers to the statistics that we have available.

Barbara Keeley: My hon. Friend raises a valuable point that was discussed substantially on Second Reading. I mentioned that the Greater Manchester fire authority has an apparently appalling record in respect of attacks on its firefighters and I am sure that I speak for Salford Members when I say that we want to lose that record. I have read the material about the situation and my hon. Friend is right that underreporting is a problem. Does she agree that we should send out the message that the job of recording attacks that is carried out by the Greater Manchester fire authority and police should be done by other fire authorities?

Lyn Brown: I thank my hon. Friend for her timely intervention and agree with her. I understand that the arrangements for reporting have been tightened and improved so that the data that we have will reflect better the situation as a whole. However, the Bill will enable firefighters and fire officers to appreciate the importance of collecting such data because they will realise that it might be possible to do something about the problem.

My hon. Friend told us earlier about an attack that occurred in her constituency. It seems clear to me that the young man who was involved in the incident was not committing a first offence because it would not have been the first time that he had seen emergency workers as a legitimate target to allow him to have some fun. My guess is that his behaviour had been escalating up to the age of 17. If the Bill had been in place, perhaps his behaviour could have been addressed when he was 10 or 14 years old. The Bill would have imposed penalties, and perhaps the dreadful incident in my hon. Friend’s constituency could have been avoided. We need to nip things in the bud as early as possible and say that certain behaviour by members of our community is totally unacceptable. If we can do that early enough, we can hopefully prevent such incidents.

The FBU states that fire crews in some parts of the country are served a diet of bricks, bottles and missiles as they fight fires. In some cases, firefighters have been lured to an incident, ambushed and attacked, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Swansea, West (Mr. Williams) pointed out. Scaffolds have been thrown through the windows of emergency vehicles and crews have been attacked with concrete blocks. Bricks and bottles have been thrown, and crews and vehicles have been spat at.

Mr. David Anderson (Blaydon) (Lab): The serious problem that my hon. Friend describes is a long way away from young people acting out of order. Does she agree that instead of hugging a hoodie, we should perhaps hug a firefighter?

Lyn Brown: My hon. Friend gives me the opportunity to say that I have taken a leaf out of the book of the experiences of my hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge (Lynda Waltho) over the past year. I have been out for an eight-hour shift with my local police force. I am in the midst of arranging a similar night out—if one can call it that—with my firefighters and ambulance crew. I look forward to seeing their experiences at first hand, although I am not sure that I will go as far as hugging them, unless, of course, they wish that to happen.

Dr. Iddon: My hon. Friends the Members for West Ham (Lyn Brown) and for Stourbridge (Lynda Waltho) sound like prime candidates for the police parliamentary scheme, which I have undertaken myself. I spent 30 days with the Greater Manchester police, so, like other hon. Members, I have seen it all. I strongly recommend the scheme to both my hon. Friends.

Lyn Brown: I am looking forward to taking part in the scheme. In fact, I have the papers on my desk as I speak. My only concern is that I might be expected to become fitter than I am. Once I have received clarification on that point, I will sign and submit the papers.

As I said, we unfortunately all know of incidents in our constituencies or neighbouring areas. I remember an incident that took place in a neighbouring constituency on a Guy Fawkes night when youths fired rockets at two firefighters as they responded to a call. Their injuries were so bad that they were both hospitalised.

At this juncture, it is useful to recall the words of the FBU’s general secretary, Matt Wrack. He said in March this year that the union welcomed the Bill and the cross-party support for it because the

“number and ferocity of the attacks has been getting worse and there have been several attacks this week.”

The Bill is thus central to firefighters’ concerns about their working conditions.

I wanted to speak about the Bill because I received representations from my constituents to ensure that I supported it. I thus read the FBU website and paramedics’ websites to find out what they said about the Bill and people’s experiences. It is clear that assault and abuse causes great concern because they take up many pages of those worthy websites.

As Matt Wrack said:

“If we can’t do our job because of violent assaults then it is our communities which are being put at risk. We are the targets, but it is our communities which are deprived of an emergency response which are the victims.”

He believes that the Bill must be part of a package of measures and that central to that package should be a wide range of educational measures to try to stop such attacks. The union is keen for statistics to be collected on such incidents. In some brigades, fire crews are being encouraged to record every single incident. However, as the union points out, the crews will be encouraged even more if they understand how the figures can be used.

The union also wants co-ordination and evaluation. I understand that various initiatives are being introduced throughout the country, including community-based projects with offenders and possible offenders. I know that we would all agree that there is a need for such initiatives to be properly monitored and evaluated nationally so that brigades can learn more quickly what works and what does not. Frankly, what works in one area will not necessarily work in another.

We need to understand the nature of the problems in our own communities and find remedies suited to our particular needs.

The Fire Brigades Union has also accurately pointed out that the end result of the continuation of these incidents could well be the effective withdrawal or diminution of services from certain areas. Unless the problem is dealt with, we run the risk of depriving parts of the UK of access to the first-class emergency services that we have all come to expect and appreciate. After all, if we have to wait for the police to accompany an ambulance worker or a firefighter into a certain part of the country, it means waiting for two emergency services rather than one, which will slow down our ability to respond to incidents. That would be a real shame, and would mean that there would be a postcode impact on 999 services.

Anne Milton (Guildford) (Con): Does the hon. Lady agree that we have reached a truly appalling state of affairs when these attacks threaten services that are so badly needed? Does she have any ideas about how to stop them, or what provokes them? Is it something specific—men in uniform, for example—that provokes them?

Lyn Brown: Personally, I think it has something to do with the high adrenaline and excitement associated with a blue flashing light, and the attendant drama. It may be cultural thing, with emergency services arriving at a scene, leading to a rush of adrenaline, from which some young people, unfortunately, get a thrill.

Mike Gapes (Ilford, South) (Lab/Co-op): My father was a postman, but he did not often have the experiences that I understand certain people in the postal services have today. To take up the previous intervention, I think that there is something significant about uniforms as symbols of authority. A minority of people have made it impossible for the post to be delivered in certain localities. A minority of young boys see it as an opportunity to challenge symbols of authority. Clearly, although the Bill is important we also need other measures to deal with the problem of the socialisation of young men. We need to get them to accept that there are boundaries of acceptable behaviour, and that they should respect some symbols of authority.

Lyn Brown: My hon. Friend is right to say that we cannot view one Bill as a panacea for all ills. We need to look at the provision of youth services and what happens in our schools, to build a picture of the sorts of remedies that can begin to impact on this growing social ill. In my own West Ham constituency, the council has used the Olympic games and other sporting events as an effective way of galvanising interest in sport. It has spent about £1 million each year for the last three years on sporting services for young people, and as a result, 40 per cent. fewer young people appeared in the magistrates court for the first time. I hope that the House will congratulate the London borough of Newham on that particular achievement, and thank it for continuing to invest in such services.

Mike Gapes: I am grateful to my long-standing hon. Friend for giving way again. I believe that her council should also be congratulated on its fantastic campaign to regenerate the borough and on its victory in bringing the 2012 Olympics to Stratford in the borough of Newham, which I hope will be yet another measure of—

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Lord): Order. We are now straying a little wide of the mark.

Lyn Brown: It is a shame that I will not be able to respond to my hon. Friend by saying how grateful I am for his congratulations. Let us get back to the Bill.

Let us remember that the obstruction of emergency workers is not just a worrying and unwarranted assault on our hard-working and widely respected emergency workers. At worst, obstruction in an emergency can threaten people’s lives. Obstruction of emergency workers is becoming more of a problem, and the Bill can help to deal with it.

I am reminded of a case in Hertford, which I read about just a few weeks ago. An angry motorist tried to move an ambulance that was blocking a road and assaulted a female medic who was treating a seriously ill patient. The incident happened on a Saturday afternoon, and it caused fury in the Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire ambulance and paramedic service.

The high dependency unit was called about 4 o’clock in the afternoon to help a patient with severe breathing difficulties. The patient was at home, so there was no option but to park in the road. The crew were assisting the patient into the back of the ambulance when the car pulled up. The driver could not get past, so he got out of his car, climbed into the ambulance and let the handbrake off so that it rolled back. A woman technician came out of the back of the ambulance and found a man in the ambulance attempting to move it. Being confronted, the man walked off. She asked him what he thought he was doing, which I think is a fairly reasonable and measured response to such an incident. They exchanged words, and he slapped her round the head. Because of the delay, the patient’s condition deteriorated to such an extent that they had to call the paramedics through. I understand that the police are investigating the incident but have yet to make any arrest.

Richard Younger-Ross: Does not that example support the view of Opposition Members that we should have kept the original wording of “aggravated assault”?

Lyn Brown: I suffer from the malady of not being a “learned” Member and find myself wishing that I had done a law degree, which would have been much more useful to me than literature—[Hon. Members: “No!”] Well, we do need people who understand books as well. I understand that the reference to assault was taken out of the Bill because there is already sufficient remedy in English law to tackle that problem.

Barbara Keeley: I understand that the panel that advises on sentencing is consulting on sentencing for assaults and other violent offences, including the sort that we are talking about—the use of weapons, and when victims are serving the public, for example. I ask the Minister to pass on the concern of the House about this policy area because, on behalf of their communities, Members would like to see guidelines appropriate to the seriousness of the offences that we are dealing with.

Lyn Brown: I thank my hon. Friend. The Bill puts in statute a respect for emergency services and emergency service workers that may not hitherto have been established. I believe that it will incrementally change opinion, and the perception of those workers. It is a great pity that we need to do that, but when cases are brought to court and people are accused and tried for obstructing emergency crews, it may help to bring about a certain attitude on the part of the public, who may not have a natural respect for the authority and work of emergency services staff—

Meg Hillier (Hackney, South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op): Will my hon. Friend give way?

Lyn Brown: Let me finish the sentence before I forget.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I apologise to the hon. Lady for interrupting. Now that Israel has killed scores of civilians in its disproportionate, dangerous and destructive response to events in the middle east and is behaving more like a rogue state, and given that it is a serial offender against United Nations resolutions, have you received any notice that a Minister intends to come to the House to make a statement on Britain’s response to the terrible unfolding tragedy and the dangerous situation in the middle east?

Mr. Deputy Speaker: I understand the hon. Gentleman’s point. Clearly, the matter is very serious, but I have received no indication that the Government plan to make a statement—at least, not today.

14 July 2006 : Column 1610

Lyn Brown: I believe that I was about to give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Meg Hillier).

Meg Hillier: I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and for her eloquent speech. Does she agree that it is possible under current sentencing provision for the judge to take into account the fact that the victim is a public servant? A mechanism already exists in law, although we all agree that further work needs to be done on sentencing guidance.

Lyn Brown: That is my understanding of the position. As I said earlier, we need to create and enforce respect for people who work in difficult circumstances to serve the public. It is a pity that the measure is necessary, but it will be an added bonus on our statute book.

In April, a 999 crew were attacked just after 10 o’clock at night in Westburn road, Aberdeen. The ambulance was responding to an emergency call with sirens and blue lights activated when an object was thrown at its windscreen. It shattered the glass and badly shook up the paramedic who was driving. That was such an irresponsible act. It could have significantly injured the people in the ambulance and prevented the paramedics from getting to the scene to which they had been called. The paramedic was clearly dedicated, and continued to the emergency that had necessitated the 999 call and dealt with it. I am informed that paramedics have also been attacked in Grampian, but that was believed to be the first occasion on which an ambulance was attacked. In response to what the hon. Member for Teignbridge (Richard Younger-Ross) said, I am trying to emphasise that there is an escalation.

Michael Gove: The hon. Lady may not know it, but I had the great privilege of being brought up in Aberdeen, not far from Westburn road. In Scotland, legislation provides that assaults against emergency workers constitute an aggravated offence. She has drawn attention to an incident in Aberdeen that clearly requires exemplary action to be taken against the assailants. However, the same provisions do not apply south of the border. The hon. Member for Teignbridge (Richard Younger-Ross) made that point, but the hon. Lady persists in defending legislation that is, according to her own words, inadequate for the task.

Lyn Brown: Again, I am not a learned Member, but I understand that there is a difference between Scots law and English law. The provisions in Scots law were necessary to deal with a specific matter, but their incorporation into English law would create confusion. I am sure that the Minister will deal with that point later.

Richard Younger-Ross: The hon. Lady is generous in giving way. I am not a learned Member either—my background is in architecture—but is not the problem the fact that people who hit a policeman know that that is a serious offence, but that the general public do not view hitting an ambulance worker or member of a fire crew in the same way? Surely we should try to get young people to appreciate that hurting an emergency worker is the same as hurting a police officer, and would have the same repercussions.

14 July 2006 : Column 1611

Lyn Brown: I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention, but I can only give the same answer: I understand that incorporating provisions from Scots law into English law would create confusion rather than assist. I agree with his sentiments—people must know that when they attack our paramedics, firefighters and others who attempt to assist the public, the full force of the law will bear down on them and the crime will be perceived as serious.

Amendments in Committee were thoughtful and measured. Broadening the scope of the offence to include assaulting and impeding was sensible. I am pleased that the Government have announced that several measures will be introduced to complement the new law. Such attacks can be viewed as part of a bigger picture, and it is important to include them in the Government’s general antisocial behaviour agenda. It must be made clear to people involved in such incidents that their behaviour is unacceptable. We must underline the fact that they are threatening lives, attacking brave, hard-working and committed public servants and depriving their communities of vital public services.

From the magnitude and frequency of the incidents, it would appear that some sort of national education campaign, co-ordinated with the emergency services, is required to change people’s attitudes to such behaviour.

Mrs. Betty Williams: My hon. Friend has been most generous in giving way. Like other hon. Members, she has highlighted the seriousness of the situation and the need for this important Bill. However, does she agree that the examples that we have heard tend to under-represent the seriousness of the position? My hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge (Lynda Waltho) spoke about how busy ambulance workers are, going from one emergency call to another, and there must be assaults that are not reported. We therefore underestimate the true scale of the situation and we need the Bill, which my right hon. Friend the Member for Swansea, West (Mr. Williams) is steering so carefully through Parliament.

Lyn Brown: My hon. Friend is right. There is gross under-reporting of incidents. I stress to Opposition Members who have intervened that the abuse and minor incidents go unreported, perhaps because there is no redress in law to deal with young people or other individuals who commit such acts. If there were such redress—which there soon will be, thanks to the diligence of my right hon. Friend the Member for Swansea, West—there would be a point in reporting the abuse, aggravation and obstruction. The reported figures will thus increase, but that will not mean that the number of incidents has increased. It will simply mean that people now have redress and a means of dealing with obstruction and petty violence—the small incidents that do not go to court and cannot currently be tackled.

Andrew Selous (South-West Bedfordshire) (Con): The hon. Lady has been generous in giving way and I am most grateful to her. She mentioned the need for a national education campaign. Does she agree that parents, perhaps especially fathers, play a crucial role? We must nip in the bud the sort of attitudes that we have been considering, and that must be done in people’s homes, because children first learn behaviour from their parents.

14 July 2006 : Column 1612

Lyn Brown: I agree. There is nothing to add to the hon. Gentleman’s eloquent intervention.

I sincerely hope that the incidents are happening through ignorance of their consequences rather than being malicious attacks on community services. The Bill will also help to underline the overwhelming public support for our emergency workers, and to reflect just how unacceptable attacks on hard-working law-abiding people are.

The Bill has avoided creating a range of different offences of assault applying to different groups of public servants. While I agree that any assault on public sector staff is abhorrent and to be condemned, tougher sentences for such assaults can be achieved through the Sentencing Guidelines Council. That would be preferable to risking muddying the waters with regard to the protection already offered by the law on assault, which is both universal and equal. The fact that the victim of an assault was serving the public is already taken into account by the courts when sentencing, and is regarded as a serious aggravating factor.

I am pleased that the Bill has seen fit to cover the full range of emergency workers who can conceivably be expected to respond to emergency situations, as my hon. Friend the Member for Worsley (Barbara Keeley) said. To restrict the legislation to emergency services that display a flashing blue light would be too prohibitive, and would, as has been stated at earlier stages, remove the protection provided by the Bill from a number of vital parts of our emergency services. I also accept the need for the provision allowing the Secretary of State to modify the legislation to allow further categories of emergency worker to be included under its protection.

The Bill has benefited from constructive debates, and constructive amendments in Committee, and will prove to be effective. It is a clear and comprehensive Bill, and fills an important gap in our legislation. I therefore commend it to the House.