Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Viscount Bridgeman (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 May 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Offender Management Bill.


Offender Management Bill

I am most grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Judd, for raising this important point. We on these Benches certainly share his high regard for the work of NGOs in many fields. I listened with great interest to the definition of ““negotiated partnership”” that was presented. While partnership between probation providers of all sectors is greatly to be encouraged in principle, the best way of achieving this is through contestability—I acknowledge the noble Lord’s concern about the less worthy applicants. Nevertheless, my noble friend Lady Anelay will speak at much greater length on the role of charities. In responding to the noble Lord’s amendment, I note that improvements are clearly due in the way in which contracts with charities are made and implemented, including the arrangements for, and consistency of, funding. It is important to get these matters right in the context of making contractual arrangements through contestability, but I suspect that the noble Lord’s amendment, in widening the way in which agreements are made to extend to negotiated partnerships, would drive a coach and horses through contestability.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
692 c671-2 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Contracts Charities Women Equality Ethnic groups Offenders Private sector Public sector Probation National Probation Service for England and Wales Rehabilitation Standards Voluntary organisations Reoffenders Non-governmental organisations Probation trusts
Legislation
Offender Management Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk