Proceeding contribution from Baroness Linklater of Butterstone (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 21 May 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Offender Management Bill.
Offender Management Bill
I want to ask a brief question arising out of my understanding of this amendment, which I see as a probing amendment. As I understand it, the Committee on Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform gave a cautious report on the delegated powers in Clause 1(5). Under it, the Secretary of State will be enabled to extend probation purposes by order, subject to the negative procedure. Clause 2 requires him to make sufficient provision for probation purposes. The committee observed that the powerin Clause 1(5) was similar to that conferred inClause 1(3) of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000. But—I emphasise this—without that precedent, the committee would have been inclined to consider that this power should be subject to the affirmative procedure. Can the Minister explain why the negative procedure should apply in this case?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 692 c486-7
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Crime prevention Crime Administration of justice Offenders Lord Chancellor's Department Police cautions Probation National Offender Management Service Rehabilitation Trusts Reoffenders Local area agreements Probation boards Probation trusts
- Legislation
- Offender Management Bill 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:12:22 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398504
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398504
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398504