Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Skelmersdale (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 13 October 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Policing and Crime Bill.


Policing and Crime Bill

My Lords, I am afraid that I cannot be quite as positive on this amendment from the Liberal Benches. I confess that I have not yet made up my mind which noble Baroness is Castor and which is Pollux. I agree that these injunctions should probably be limited to genuine gang violence, and that there is much improvement to be made to them in order to ensure that. Property damage is not only expensive but intimidating, and is certainly an aspect of gang-related behaviour that should be able to be addressed. We are talking, of course, not about the odd case of graffiti but about the sustained use of damage, whether to cars, property or anything else, that can blight a community and make life a living hell for the inhabitants. The Minister still has a little way to go to convince us, but I am not sure that this amendment is the right way to achieve what we seek.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
713 c214 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Children Codes of practice Crime prevention Appeals Crime Alcoholic drinks Crimes of violence Anti-social behaviour Bottles Licensing Harassment Licensed premises Injunctions Glass Local government Police Powers Public places Packaging Prices Plastics Sales Young people Anti-social behaviour orders
Legislation
Policing and Crime Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk