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]

As the Minister has said that he is prepared to consider my Amendments Nos. 48 and 50 as a sensible addition, it would be churlish to say that I am not very happy with the rest of his reply; but I am not. So much still needs to be explained here. The core of my question was why these offences are in the Bill on the basis that they cannot be successfully criminally prosecuted. That was my underlying question. There is a gap here. We are being told that a civil order must be available, one assumes because a criminal prosecution will not be successfully pursued.

Secondary information

Type: Proceeding contribution
Reference: 690 c778
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

Serious Crime Bill [HL]

Secondary information

Librarians' tools