With permission, Mr Speaker, I should like to make a statement on the Parole Board’s decision to release John Worboys and the government’s response to the issues raised by this case.

I should like to start by echoing the statement made by my predecessor at the weekend, and to express my unreserved sympathy to all of the victims. They will never erase the emotional trauma of his crimes and the Parole Board’s decision to order his release must have brought back painful memories. These were horrific crimes and I take the concerns raised, including by many colleagues of this House, very seriously.

John Worboys was convicted of 19 offences in 2009, and received an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum tariff of 8 years in custody. Following the expiry of the tariff, he was eligible for review by the Parole Board, which was required to consider whether to release him.

The Board reviewed his case at a hearing on 8 November 2017, by which time he had served 10 years in custody including a period on remand. A three person panel considered a detailed dossier of evidence. Its subsequent decision to release him was communicated to my department on 3 January.

There are two main concerns in respect of the contact with victims that I think it essential to address today: whether the correct procedures were followed in this case; and whether those procedures are right, or whether improvements are needed.

Turning first to whether procedures were followed in this case, all victims of the crimes for which he was convicted have a statutory right to receive information about parole hearings and decisions under the Victim Contact Scheme (VCS). On the basis of the information I have received since arriving in the department yesterday, it appears that in relation to these victims, those who opted to remain in contact via the VCS were informed of the parole hearing. Of the victims currently in contact with the Scheme, those who chose to be informed of the Parole Board decision by phone or email were contacted immediately on 3 January, although I have just become aware of a case where a victim did not receive the email. Letters were also sent immediately to those who chose to be informed that way, but these of course took longer to arrive. Some victims entitled to this contact chose not to opt in, which of course is their right.

Any victims whose crimes were not prosecuted do not fall within the statutory remit of the VCS, and so the arrangements are different. Discretionary contact can be considered, but in this instance, the National Probation Service has no record of any requests for discretionary contact.

However, while it appears that the correct procedures were followed, the fact that some victims learned of the decision from the media suggests that there is a need to review these procedures and examine whether lessons can be learned and improvements can be made.

It is a priority for this government that victims of rape and sexual assault have full confidence in the criminal justice system. Sentence lengths for these horrific crimes have increased by over 30% since 2010 and more victims are coming forward, but there is still more to do.

I should be absolutely clear that I think that that the Parole Board should remain an independent body, responsible for making decisions about the ongoing risk that individuals pose after serving their tariff.

But I agree with my predecessor’s assessment that there is a strong case to review the case for transparency in the process for parole decisions and how victims are appropriately engaged in that process, and consider the case for changes in policy, practice or the Parole Board Rules, or other guidance or procedures including the Victims’ Code. With that in mind, I can confirm that I have instructed my officials to establish a review to examine these questions and I will share more information on this shortly.

I think it is appropriate that the department leads this work, but that it consults victims’ groups and others. I have spoken to the Victims’ Commissioner, Baroness Newlove, and the Chair of the Parole Board, Nick Hardwick, to discuss what changes we could make and how best to draw on their expertise and insight in this review.

Finally, I note that the Chair of the Justice Select Committee has announced his intention to hold an evidence session. My department stands ready to provide the committee with any information it may require.

Mr. Speaker, I intend to prioritise this review and it will conclude before Easter. I hope that this course of action reassures the House of the importance and priority I attach to this. As such I commend this statement to the House.

L-R Phil Rothwell, Chair of the Northumbria Regional Flood and Coastal Committee, Martin Lawlor, Chief Executive of Port of Blyth, and Tristan Drought from the Environment Agency.

£100 million deal to provide future support to the Royal Air Force’s fleet of Puma HC Mk2 helicopters. Crown copyright.

[unable to retrieve full-text content]The Redundancy Payment Service helpline is operating as normal once again.

International Trade Secretary Dr Liam Fox today sets out how the government’s Trade Bill will benefit businesses and consumers, as the UK progresses towards leaving the EU and shapes its own trade policy for the first time in 40 years.

Dr Fox will explain during the second reading in Parliament today (Tuesday 9 January), how the bill will provide continuity and stability for businesses and consumers by creating the powers necessary to replicate existing EU trade arrangements in UK law.

It will also establish a Trade Remedies Authority to take back powers from the EU to protect UK industry from unfair and injurious trading practices, such as dumping.

This comes after the Treasury’s Customs Bill received its second reading yesterday (Monday 8 January), which will allow the government to create a standalone customs regime and amend the VAT and excise regimes. Together the bills will deliver the necessary powers for the UK to be prepared from day one of leaving the EU.

International Trade Secretary Dr Liam Fox said:

International trade creates jobs, helps lower prices for consumers and contributes to a growing economy – our Trade Bill will provide maximum certainty and continuity for business and consumers.

As an international economic department our priority is to ensure that we continue to benefit from the trade agreements that the EU already has with other countries, and that we maintain the flow of free trade in both directions at the point we leave. Stability now with the flexibility to seize new opportunities in the future is what we seek.

Measures in the bill will only be used to implement any changes needed as a result of transitioning existing trade arrangements that the UK is part of through our membership of the EU. These have already been scrutinised at an EU level and have been overseen in the UK by the EU Select Committees.

Countries with this type of trade agreement with the EU account for some 12% of UK trade. Ensuring that this trade continues will provide certainty and stability for workers, consumers, businesses, and our international trading partners.

The bill will also provide the legislative basis for UK businesses to continue to have guaranteed access to global public procurement markets worth £1.3 trillion every year, by enabling the UK to implement its obligations as an independent member of the multi-national Government Procurement Agreement (GPA). This will protect continuity of access for UK companies overseas and ensure that we can still tap into international expertise and obtain the best deal for UK taxpayers.

Once the UK leaves the EU, it will take up an independent seat at the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Geneva – allowing the UK government to shape global trading policy. DIT has already set up 14 Trade Working Groups across 21 countries to progress existing trade and investment relationships.

Further information

The Trade Bill does not provide for the implementation of trade agreements with countries that the EU does not have an existing trade agreement with and the powers in the bill cannot be used for the implementation of future free trade agreements with new countries.

The Trade Bill provides the necessary powers so that trade arrangements transitioned with third countries can be fully implemented within UK law, and remain operable over time after EU exit.

Since the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 came into force, the agreements the UK has ratified have already been through a domestic Parliamentary scrutiny process under that Act. The Government has made clear its intention to ratify all EU free trade agreements entered into during our EU membership.

Parliament can approve the terms of the UK membership of the GPA via the process under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

DIT has already sought views on the UK’s approach to its future trade policy and published responses to the White Paper published last October and we continue to seek views as we develop our trade policy.

The government is preparing for when the UK operates its own independent trade remedies system to protect domestic industry injured by goods being unfairly traded, or by unforeseen surges in imports. It has introduced legislation in the Trade Bill to set up a new, independent, arms-length body, the Trade Remedies Authority, to carry out these investigations and make recommendations for duties to be imposed. The framework for the new system that the TRA will operate is set out in the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill.