Proceeding contribution from Owen Paterson (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Friday, 2 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill.
Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill
It is most important that the hon. Gentleman address the question of deterrence. We will never have enough police to cover remote farmhouses in rural areas, so it is in the interests of the police and of the general public that before burglars set out they have a really hard think. Is it worth it? Is the risk higher? Surely if the Bill deters burglars, that is in all our interests, and the hon. Gentleman must agree that it will have a deterrent effect. In response to the hon. Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Janet Anderson), my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of York mentioned those violent cases merely as evidence that violence is increasing. My point is that there is a much broader public good to be gained from the Bill if burglars think twice and stay at home watching the telly, or preferably reading a book and doing something constructive.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 440 c511
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Crime prevention Crimes against the person Crimes of violence Criminal law Buildings Burglary Criminal liability Firearms Protection Police Prosecutions Property Victims Trespass Self-defence
- Legislation
- Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:10:27 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282994
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282994
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_282994