Proceeding contribution from Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 26 March 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill
My Lords, I am sorry that my noble friend Lady Linklater is unable to be with us, which is, as the House will know, for health reasons. Will rejecting the amendment mean that the position of reparation orders in the hierarchy as the Minister has explained it has less bite in relation to funding? One of the difficulties of supervising reparation orders is that there is just not the funding for supervisors. In a scheme fairly local to me, the young offenders were engaged in almost exactly the sort of activity that the Minister described: cleaning up a wall. The person who had initiated the activity ended up having to do some of the basic things himself, such as providing lunch. Will the Minister comment on the funding of reparation orders? Is he satisfied that there is sufficient funding in place for them to be a practical provision?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 700 c570
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Criminal proceedings Alcoholic drinks Administration of justice Legal aid scheme Misuse Probation Rehabilitation Sentencing Young offenders
- Legislation
- Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 01:58:57 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_458281
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_458281
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_458281