The AYJ has responded to the Children’s Rights Alliance for England’s (CRAE) call for written evidence to inform the Civil Society Alternative Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child 2022.

AYJ has responded to the Ministry of Justice’s Prisons Strategy White Paper which sets out the government’s 10-year vision for a reformed prison system. At the AYJ, we welcome that the MoJ has not included the children’s secure estate in its strategy for prisons. However, we also recognise that a comprehensive, long-term vision for the children’s secure estate is desperately needed and long overdue.

At the AYJ, six principles for youth justice policy underpin our way of working. We have used these as a framework for our response to the Commission’s call for evidence which focuses on children in, or at risk of involvement in, the justice system. Thank you to all AYJ members who took the time to support our submission.

Our extensive second reading briefing, examines the impacts of the Bill, identifying where new measures should be added to address missed opportunities; where provisions stand to reverse recent progress in youth justice and must be removed; and where existing proposals should be amended to maximise their positive potential or address unintended negative consequences.

The AYJ has published written evidence to the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) on the implications of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Bill for children.

AYJ responds to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Bill, introduced to the House of Commons on 9th March 2021 and due to have its second reading on 15th and 16th March 2021.

The Government’s sentencing white paper outlines plans to reform the criminal records system. While we warmly welcome these reforms, we believe we can and should go further for children, and are calling on the Government to conduct a wide ranging review of the system to ensure it is child-specific and better reflects the nature of childhood offending.

The Government’s sentencing white paper sets out proposals for reform of the legislation governing remand to custody for children. We support the decision to revisit the threshold for the remand of children into custody, particularly given the Government’s stated aim that remand to custody should be used only as a last resort for children.

We welcome the opportunity to respond to the Home Office consultation on Serious Violence Reduction Orders (SVROs). We consulted widely with our members to ensure that the breadth and depth of their expertise informs our submission to the consultation.

We responded to the Justice Select Committee inquiry into children and young people in custody. Our response covers a range of topics including custody as a last resort; Black Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) children in custody; the harm of the secure estate; staffing; restraint; placements; and resettlement.

We welcome the opportunity to respond to the Home Office consultation on the Knife Crime Prevention Order (KCPO) guidance. We worked closely with the Prison Reform Trust (PRT) during the parliamentary stages of the Offensive Weapons Bill to assist parliamentarians on scrutiny of the bill’s provisions. Our work helped to secure the consultation on the guidance on KCPOs as well as the piloting of KCPOs, with a report on the pilot to be laid before Parliament prior to the further roll out of the orders.

Both the Labour Party and Liberal Democrats have recently consulted on their criminal justice policy. We responded to the consultations setting out our position and recommendations around priority areas of the youth justice system.

We have held longstanding opposition, as a point of principle, to the deliberate infliction of pain on children as part of any system of restraint. We have submitted a statement to Charlie Taylor’s independent review of pain-inducing restraint, urging the Ministry of Justice and the Youth Custody Service to prohibit the use of pain-inducing techniques on children and across child custody as a whole. We join a wide range of bodies and organisations that have called for a ban.

Violence is the product of multiple, complex and deep-rooted issues within society, it is not inevitable. From our research, it is clear that various government policies over the last decade have exacerbated many of the root causes of children becoming affected by, or involved in, serious violence. In this paper we explain our position and recommendations for the Government response to serious violence.

We have responded to the Home Office consultation on a new legal duty to support a multi-agency approach to preventing and tackling serious violence. We support a public health approach to tackling serious violence which seeks to address its root causes and welcome the government’s acknowledgement of the need to shift focus from a punitive response towards a multi-agency, more preventative approach. We welcome the intention to encourage organisations to share information, data and intelligence, and work in concert rather than isolation to identify children at risk as early as possible.

We have responded to the Justice Select Committee inquiry into the Access to Justice impacts of courts and tribunals reform. Our response focuses on the HMCTS Reform Programme in the criminal courts as it affects child defendants, especially on the use of video links and online pleas.

We welcome the Charlie Taylor review of the youth justice system and the government’s response. We agree with the principles stated by, and implicit in, Taylor’s work, and with many of his recommendations. A number of the government’s commitments set out in its response are welcome; however, we are disappointed that it has not gone further and that it has failed to respond to some of Taylor’s proposals at all.