Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Turner of Camden (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 11 June 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Offender Management Bill.


Offender Management Bill

I understand that Napo supports this amendment. As has been said, Clause 4 exempts court work from the threat of contracting out. Napo fully supports this clause and believes that there would be a conflict of interest should the private sector be involved in giving information to the court. Currently, the Probation Service provides nearly 200,000 reports for the courts, including pre-sentencing reports and fast-track reports, which are normally provided on the day. It seems essential that the Government should ensure that there is no conflict of interest. The super-affirmative resolution would provide a number of safeguards to ensure that the exclusion of court work could not be reversed merely by statutory instrument. The main safeguards would be that a draft of the order would have to be laid before each House and a report containing the proposal would be published. The Secretary of State would have to give reasons for the proposal and the report wouldhave to be approved by each House. I support the amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
692 c1469 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Conflict of interests Legislative process Judiciary Offenders Parliamentary procedure Probation Sentencing Witnesses Statutory instruments
Legislation
Offender Management Bill 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk