Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Linklater of Butterstone (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 18 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Police and Justice Bill.


Police and Justice Bill

moved Amendment No. 15: Leave out Clause 25. The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in view of our earlier debate, it is perhaps somewhat perverse of me to move Amendment No. 16. I do so because there are one or two aspects of the matter that I wish to place on the record and about which I wish to hear the Minister’s reply. The amendment means that the Secretary of State would not have the power to provide by order that local authorities may subcontract to specific types of body their powers to enter into parenting contracts or to apply for parenting orders; the powers would be retained by the local authority. As we have already discussed, the scope of the legal power to apply for a parenting order or to enter into a parenting contract gives enormous discretion to those who exercise it and requires skill, knowledge, expertise and objectivity. Tenant-run management organisations, which are one of the bodies proposed, would, by definition, be very close to the issue, and that would run the risk of inappropriate applications being made. The Government’s view is that the process would be more efficient if local authorities could relinquish responsibility for applying for parenting orders or for entering into contracts, but that argument is not good enough when the issue is serious. The Minister assured the House that there will be conditions in the parenting order to protect families and ensure good practice, but since no draft parenting order has been presented for scrutiny we do not know whether the conditions specified in it would give us any comfort. Furthermore, any order would be subject to the negative resolution procedure. It is worrying that this House is expected to use its time to scrutinise legislation without being in a position to do so. There are risks here that need not and should not be run. However, I agree with the Minister that agencies can and should work together and I look forward to her reply. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
685 c796-7 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Children Courts Bail Detainees Anti-social behaviour City of London Cooperation Bureaucracy Best value Aircraft Human rights Inspections Functions HM Inspectorate of Constabulary Landlords HM Inspectorate of Prisons Local government Police Recruitment Public appointments Prisons Police custody Police authorities Standards Social rented housing Right of search Torture USA Rendition Parenting contracts Video conferencing HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate
Legislation
Police and Justice Bill 2005-06