Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 26 February 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.


Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

I cannot fault the Minister on the clarity of his response, which I entirely understand although I completely disagree with it. I think the public will find this unacceptable, and I am surprised that the Government have not thought that aspect of the proposal through. It would be much more understandable if people in a bail hostel were allowed to use part of their time there as a set-off against the ultimate custodial sentences. However, where someone is living at home—and will probably spend a lot of time on curfew at home anyway—it is inexplicable that that should entitle them to reduce their ultimate custodial sentence by 50 per cent. However, the Minister has been quite clear about this issue, although we shall certainly come back to it on Report. Clause 21 agreed to. Clauses 22 and 23 agreed to. Schedule 7 agreed to. Clauses 24 to 26 agreed to. Clause 27 [Application of section 35(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 to prisoners liable to removal from the UK]:


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
699 c643-4 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Criminal proceedings Administration of justice Armed forces Deportation Offenders Powers Magistrates Navy Sentencing
Legislation
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk