Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 10 March 2026. It occurred during Debate on bill on Victims and Courts Bill.
Victims and Courts Bill
My Lords, I will focus on the amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Hacking, and the noble Baroness, Lady Jones. We seem to have done a bit of mini-regrouping within the group, but I checked with my noble friend Lady Brinton and I think she will wind up the group while introducing her own amendments at the same time.
At the last stage the Minister resisted the proposal for more victim navigators on the basis that the service is already provided, but victim navigators are quite distinct in what they do from the Salvation Army and their subcontractors funded by the Home Office. As I said, I supported the amendment in Committee but I did express a reservation about the ambitious six-month period within which they could be rolled out. Victim navigators are collocated with police in the forces where they work—the term “embedded” with the police seems to be used quite often.
I was a member of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 Committee, and the comments on victim navigators in our report were under the heading “Evidence gathering”. That describes quite a lot of what they do. I will try not to repeat what other noble Lords have said, but the link between support of the victims and the criminal justice system is their job, filling a very specific gap with access to details of cases but with the independence to build trust. They are of great value to the police—and we know how difficult it is to get convictions in this area.
4.45 pm
The report quoted the chief exec of the GLAA, one of the organisations with which navigators are collocated, as supporting their rollout. The then National Police Chiefs’ Council lead on modern slavery said that the police
“dearly hope [they] will be rolled out across the country”.
It was very sad and surprising that the then Minister, when we took evidence from her, had not heard of victim navigators. Justice and Care, which developed the scheme and runs it, commissioned an independent cost-benefit analysis. As the noble Lord said, it was found that one victim navigator has an economic benefit per year of just under £150,000. I found that quite staggering, but it is what we were told.
I asked Justice and Care why more forces do not involve victim navigators; I was told that modern slavery and human trafficking have not been a political priority. They have dropped down the priorities of some in police leadership, who are unwilling to pay for them. Those who work in Scotland are in fact funded by the Scottish Government. In England, most are funded by Justice and Care’s own charitable funds. A couple have funding or co-funding from their host agency, or from a mayoral office or PCC.
To answer the point made from the Dispatch Box at the last stage, support available under the victim care contract does not continue throughout the case. Participation in an ongoing criminal case is not regarded as justification for ongoing support after basic recovery. I understand that the Salvation Army has a reach-in service for people who are in that position, but it only gives signposts. It does not reconnect the victim with a support worker. Given the courts backlog and the increased speed of NRM decisions, victims are very likely not to receive Salvation Army support for quite a long period before the case comes to trial.
I have a question for the Minister, which is possibly not the one that she would expect. It is really an invitation. Assuming that her brief says “resist”—I know she will interpret that as “resist nicely”—would she be prepared to meet representatives of Justice and Care, who can explain the scheme much better than I can? I checked with them this morning and the answer was, “We’re very happy to meet the Minister. We could even host a visit with victim navigators and the police they work with”. I do not expect her to get her diary out now; I will leave that with her.
I just want to comment on the amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Polak. Personally, I have often found that the best value for money in providing support comes from the third sector, which I wish was much better funded. Generally, they are specialists and they do a lot with very little.
What connects police, health services and local authorities? One thing is budget, or lack thereof. I thought the phrase used by the noble Lord, Lord Farmer—a “whole-society approach”—was very apt. I declare that I chaired the domestic violence charity Refuge for many years, although it was in a rather different place, certainly in my early years, from where it is now. We must continue to pursue support for people who have been abused, exploited and victimised—that is coming from right round the House.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 854 cc193-4
- Session
- 2024-26
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- ICT Music Disclosure of information Compensation Admissibility of evidence Codes of practice Appeals Bail British nationals abroad Criminal injuries compensation Crown Court Evidence Homicide Domestic abuse Human trafficking Legal costs Law reporting Internet Ethnic groups Offenders Mentally disordered offenders Prosecutions Rape Prisoners' release Offences against children Parental responsibility Victims Sentencing Sexual offences Slavery Time limits Victim support schemes Reparation by offenders Private prosecutions Economic crime
- Legislation
- Victims and Courts Bill 2024-26
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on hansard.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-05-21 15:13:33 +0100
- URI
- http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2026-03-10/26031051000077
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2026-03-10/26031051000077
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2026-03-10/26031051000077