Proceeding contribution from Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 April 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill
My Lords, I have come into this debate as a new person, and the Minister’s reply to the informed comments of my noble friend Lady Linklater make my jaw drop. The Minister implied that Liberal Democrats do not recognise that anti-social behaviour is a nuisance. Of course we recognise that. The amendment is not about whether anti-social behaviour is a nuisance, but he was implying that our line was that there was no problem with it. That is absolute rubbish. We accept absolutely that anti-social behaviour has to be confronted. Our question is: what evidence does the Minister have for continuing to allow the reporting of children under the age of 18? He keeps saying that the point is supported only on the Liberal Democrat Benches and yet it is supported on his own Back Benches in the person of the noble Lord, Lord Judd. The noble Baroness, Lady Stern, has spoken on this issue in the past—she wished me to mention the fact that she strongly supported the amendment today, although unfortunately due to the hour she has had to leave—so it is supported on the Cross Benches. Basically, it is supported by all Members of your Lordships’ House who have a lot to do with young people, on every Bench other than the government Front Bench. It is with particular regret that I understand that the Minister has simply dug his heels in and repeated the same old argument rather than moving it on. In discussing this amendment with various colleagues at local government level, I have found that, as the Minister will know, counsellors for children in care—many of which children end up in the anti-social behaviour order category—as corporate parents are often appalled at the fact that this can be reported on, because they can see that it simply adds to the cycle of the difficulties those children already face. After the Minister’s reply, we on these Benches shall certainly be encouraging all those corporate parents, all the counsellors with responsibility for those children in their care, to challenge the Government’s stance under those children’s rights because the Government are failing them. The Government have heard the response from these Benches that there is no other place that we can go tonight, other than into the Lobby to express our view on this. I shall not be withdrawing this amendment. On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 114) shall be agreed to? Their Lordships divided: Contents, 21; Not-Contents, 55. Schedule 22: [Police misconduct and performance procedures]:
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 700 c1612-3
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Children Disclosure of information Criminal proceedings Crime Asylum Armed forces Crimes of violence Deportation Army Anti-social behaviour Civil proceedings Devolution Court orders Air force Custodial treatment Hospitals Industrial relations Families Evidence Human rights Inspections Health professions Hospices Misconduct Offenders NHS Parents Police Prisons Newspaper press Police authorities Navy Mental health Anti-social behaviour orders Scotland Young people Young offenders Security Strikes HM Prison Service Hijacking Local safeguarding children boards
- Legislation
- Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-07-09 22:01:43 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_465598
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_465598
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_465598