Draft Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (Legal Aid: Anti-social Behaviour and Prevention and Investigation Measures) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Order 2026
House of Commons · General Committees · 1 Jul 2026 · 32 speeches · Official Report
The Committee consisted of the following Members:
Chair: Paula Barker
† Asser, James (West Ham and Beckton) (Lab)
Brown-Fuller, Jess (Chichester) (LD)
† Collier, Jacob (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)
† Costigan, Deirdre (Lord Commissioner of His Majesty's Treasury)
† Francis, Daniel (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)
† Goldman, Marie (Chelmsford) (LD)
† Long Bailey, Rebecca (Salford) (Lab)
† Madders, Justin (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough) (Lab)
† Mullan, Dr Kieran (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)
† Obese-Jecty, Ben (Huntingdon) (Con)
† Powell, Joe (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)
† Quigley, Richard (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)
† Richards, Jake (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice)
† Smith, Jeff (Manchester Withington) (Lab)
† Tugendhat, Tom (Tonbridge) (Con)
† White, Jo (Bassetlaw) (Lab)
† Wood, Mike (Kingswinford and South Staffordshire) (Con)
George James, Committee Clerk
† attended the Committee
Sixth Delegated Legislation Committee
Wednesday 1 July 2026
[Paula Barker in the Chair ]
Draft Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (Legal Aid: Anti-social Behaviour and Prevention and Investigation Measures) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Order 2026
I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (Legal Aid: Anti-social Behaviour and Prevention and Investigation Measures) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Order 2026. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. The statutory instrument makes a series of technical but important amendments to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 and associated regulations. Its purpose is to ensure that legal aid legislation remains consistent and aligned with wider changes to the law around anti-social behaviour orders and national security measures. The instrument makes changes in three main areas. First, it updates the scope of civil legal aid to reflect the reforms to measures tackling anti-social behaviour introduced by the Crime and Policing Act 2026. Secondly, it clarifies the legal aid framework for terrorism prevention and investigation measures, otherwise known as TPIMs. Thirdly, it aligns the legal aid framework for state threats prevention and investigation measures, or STPIMs, with the framework for TPIMs. Taken together, the changes ensure that legal aid will continue to support the vital principle of access to justice while maintaining a coherent and accessible system. I will briefly discuss each of the main changes, starting with measures that tackle anti-social behaviour. The Crime and Policing Act 2026 introduced respect orders, youth injunctions and housing...
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mrs Barker. On the application of ASBIs, I noted in the equalities statement that according to a Department for Work and Pensions survey, in 2022-23, around 66% of those receiving legal aid had a disability. Some 40% had a mental health condition, and around 10% had some kind of learning disability. Those figures seem alarmingly large. I wonder whether the Minister has any thoughts on that, or perhaps he could go away and look into it.
That is certainly something we can look into. As my hon. Friend knows from his previous life before becoming a parliamentarian, legal aid is vital for access to justice, especially for those vulnerable groups. Although we are talking about antisocial behaviour measures and terrorism prevention orders, that still applies across the civil and criminal order regime. He is absolutely right, and I will make sure that the relevant Minister comes back to him with the details in due course. Civil behaviour orders can have significant consequences for those subject to them, which is why legal aid access is so important. The change will make sure that individuals facing an order can continue to access civil legal aid, subject to the usual means and merits tests. I turn to the amendments relating to national security. TPIMs are civil measures imposed by the Home Secretary to prevent an individual’s involvement in terrorism-related activities. STPIMs are a parallel regime designed to prevent and disrupt hostile state threat activity. Both place significant restrictions on an individual’s daily life, including where they can go, who they can meet and who they can speak to. Given the seriousness of those powers, it is right that the legal aid framework around them is coherent, clear and fair. Civil legal aid is already available for those who are subject to TPIMs and STPIMs, and that will not change. The instrument ensures consistency in legal aid availability for those two measures and...
It is a pleasure to speak on behalf of the official Opposition in support of this statutory instrument. Over a million anti-social behaviour incidents are recorded by the police every single year in England and Wales. That is not a statistic that should wash over us; behind every one of those incidents is a pensioner who is afraid to walk to the corner shop, a shopkeeper who has been harassed and threatened, or a community that has been slowly ground down. When the Government brought forward the Crime and Policing Act, we supported the creation of respect orders; in fact, we wanted them to go further. My hon. Friend the Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) tabled amendments in Committee that would have lowered the age of eligibility from 18 to 16. We argued for a fine on a second order, for a maximum prison term of five years for repeated breaches and for those who receive repeated orders to be deprioritised on social housing lists. The Government did not accept all those amendments; I still think they were right and the legislation would have been stronger, but we are where we are, and what matters now is that the respect order regime works as intended and in line with our other measures. What makes respect orders different from what came before is simple: a breach is now a criminal offence and police can arrest immediately. There are no more long waits for civil contempt proceedings and no more watching someone breach their order again and again with no immediate...
Briefly, the Liberal Democrats are supportive of this statutory instrument. We wanted to make the case that having fairness in the system through legal means is all very well, but the problem is that if there are not enough duty providers to provide legal advice, it is almost pointless; we are not actually serving justice because we are not allowing people to get the support that they need, even though they are legally entitled to it. We need to ensure that the wider system is fair and that people have the ability to access the support that they are legally entitled to.
I am grateful for hon. Members’ contributions. I appreciate the uncharacteristically constructive tone from the official Opposition-there was a party-political barb in there, but none the less, it was a welcome contribution. I greatly respect the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle’s previous career in the police; I know he comes to these issues with some expertise. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Chelmsford, is absolutely right: there is no point having access to legal aid if there are no legal aid lawyers. The Government have taken huge steps to try to ensure that there are no legal aid deserts, including a huge upgrade in legal aid investment, but there is a lot more work to be done, and we will get on and do that. With that, I commend the statutory instrument to the Committee. Question put and agreed to.
Committee rose.