Member

Secondly, it will not always be clear whether the conviction is actually related. In the case of domestic abuse, a stalking-related offence might be handled under the misuse of telecommunications legislation and therefore not identified as a domestic abuse offence. Thirdly, we know that in cases where there is bidirectional violence, there is a risk that the primary carer receives a conviction but the secondary carer does not. So I have a great deal of sympathy with the amendment, particularly in relation to direct child abuse and child sexual abuse, but maybe the Minister can clarify how many cases resulting in a child sexual abuse conviction end up with parental contact actually being allowed. In other words, is the amendment needed or are those cases already ruled out?