Proceeding contribution from Baroness Anelay of St Johns (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 14 March 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Serious Crime Bill [HL].
Serious Crime Bill [HL]
I hope that I made it clear that I am trying to find out not just the level of seriousness expected but why the Government think that those offences—in this case, environmental offences—cannot be dealt with properly by existing criminal offences. Why are they being left to be dealt with according to the civil burden of proof used in serious crime prevention orders? I hope that he will address that underlying question.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 690 c777
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Criminal proceedings Crime prevention Crime Charities Companies Crown Prosecution Service Firearms Environment Exemptions Insolvency Pollution Property Mental health Poaching Registration Serious Fraud Office Robbery Serious Organised Crime Agency Angling High Court Northern Ireland Department of the Director of Public Prosecutions Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office Serious crime prevention orders
- Legislation
- Serious Crime Bill (HL) 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:34:35 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385171
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385171
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385171