Proceeding contribution from Lord Bassam of Brighton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 6 July 2006. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Police and Justice Bill.
Police and Justice Bill
I understand the point that the noble Lord makes. He and I are equally Members of your Lordships’ House but I am sure that he makes a greater contribution than I do. I see the membership in that light. I am grateful to him for reminding me of the importance of the matter. We are consulting on the detail behind the implementation of the policy and will aim to use this power to reflect the best way forward as set out by stakeholders. Amendment No. 122 redefines what is meant by implementation and excludes the process of the CDRP monitoring and reviewing its strategy. The Crime and Disorder Act review 2006 highlighted the good practice being undertaken around the country where CDRPs were reviewing their strategies annually to reflect changing trends and circumstances. As a consequence the review findings concluded that there was substantial benefit in the review process, as it assisted CDRPs to continue to reflect on their achievements and establish new objectives to continue to support the reduction of crime and anti-social behaviour in their respective areas. We are aware of the burden that this might cause and the need to focus on delivery, so are consulting stakeholders over the summer on a range of issues, including how best to implement this finding through the Bill. As a result of the review, partnerships will also be required to undertake strategic intelligence assessments. It is vitally important that a provision exists that requires CDRPs to review and monitor their strategies to reflect any changes in local crime and disorder patterns and issues that these assessments might raise. In addition, the process of regularly reviewing the strategies is key to supporting CDRPs in identifying whether they have met statutory requirements, whether local objectives effectively meet local needs, and whether they continue to prioritise current and future resources according to the issues faced locally. I am conscious that I have taken some time in replying but the value of the amendments is such that they require and merit very careful consideration. I appreciated the constructive comments made by Members of the Committee on the different amendments in this short debate.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 684 c394-5
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Children Databases Accountability Crime Bail Administration of justice Arrests Anti-social behaviour Community relations Equality Fixed penalties Fines HM Inspectorate of Prisons Local government Offenders Parents Police Powers Membership Prisons Publicity Police authorities Police cautions Race relations Victims Social rented housing Anti-social behaviour orders Parenting contracts Parenting orders Crime and disorder reduction partnerships Hate crime
- Legislation
- Police and Justice Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-02-02 10:09:15 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_335478
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_335478
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_335478