CIVILIAN ENFORCEMENT PRIVATISATION

That this House believes that work currently undertaken by civilian enforcement officers employed by HM Courts and Tribunals Service should remain in the public sector where they consistently outperform bailiffs employed by authorised enforcement agents in the private sector; notes that the majority of financial penalties enforced by such staff relate to motoring issues, failure to obtain a television licence and other similar matters often involving defaulters who are among the most vulnerable in society; is concerned that the report Taking control: the need for fundamental bailiff reform, published in March 2017, concluded that in the absence of an independent bailiff regulator, the Government's reforms have had a negligible impact on protecting the public from overzealous and aggressive bailiffs; is aware that civilian enforcement officers are invested with the authority to enter and search premises, to arrest and search often vulnerable defaulters and place them in custody before the court; is further concerned by Government plans to give such powers to poorly-regulated private bailiffs who are not subject to the Civil Service Code; deeply regrets that a previous attempt to privatise the enforcement of financial penalties was abandoned at an extraordinary cost to the public purse; and therefore urges the Government to retain the effective, safe and fair enforcement of criminal fines within the public sector rather than risk the safety and finances of the public through privatisation.