Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Ramsbotham (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 July 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.


Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill

rose to move, as an amendment to Motion A, Motion A1, at end insert ““but do propose the following amendment to Commons Amendment 10Z— 10AB: Line 3, at end insert- ““( ) If no order is made under subsection (1) bringing into force paragraph (d) of section 2(1), that paragraph shall come into force following the expiry of a period of three years following the commencement of the other provisions of this Act.”””” The noble Lord said: My Lords, like every other Member of this House, I am sure, I am immensely reassured by what the Minister has just told us. On many occasions in previous debates on this subject, Members of your Lordships’ House have paid tribute to her, not just for her willingness to engage in discussion with us but for the way she has represented the case in this House and, more importantly, within government and behind the scenes, as it were. I am sure she must have played a considerable part in enabling this satisfactory conclusion to be reached. I am sure we all pay great tribute to her. I also pay great tribute to the Secretary of State in another place, because he has changed his position considerably over the last four weeks, influenced, I am sure, by the noble Baroness. Nevertheless we have been given his assurance as well as hers, so it would be churlish to press for more. My reason for tabling this amendment was my concern that seven years was too long. It represented more than the life of this Parliament and probably the life of the next Parliament as well. As an ex-soldier, I could not help remembering that D-day was planned and executed in one-quarter of that time. I suspect that the complexities of the Bill are nothing compared with that operation. The noble Baroness rightly mentioned that there are things to be done and issues to consider with the police and prisons. Like me, my noble friend Lord Dear was delighted to hear what has happened. If possible, he will want to be involved in any discussions in which he can help to take the matter forward. It is right to recognise that this has been a long time in coming. When we last debated it, the noble Baroness said that she hoped that this would not be the way in which business was conducted and that discussion about such matters before they reached the Floor of the House was much more satisfactory. I agree, but it has been very interesting that this House has consistently stuck to this line without wavering. I am sure that victims up and down the country will be very glad of the outcome. I must admit that as a novice I am not sure of the procedure involved. Other Members may wish to speak. I think that it would perhaps be courteous and sensible to bid to withdraw my amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
694 c557 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Custodial treatment Compulsorily detained psychiatric patients Corporate manslaughter Private sector Police Prisoners Prisons Police custody Public sector Prisoner escorts Secure accommodation
Legislation
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill 2005-06 to 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk