Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Andrew Rosindell (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 8 March 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Crime and Security Bill.


Crime and Security Bill

No doubt the Minister will respond shortly, but I agree that two years should be the maximum and that a five-year sentence is excessive. As my right hon. and learned Friend said, the insertion of the word "culpable" would clarify the difference between the deliberate commission of an offence and an oversight, which, as we all know, can happen in such circumstances. He also spoke of the merits involved in a particular situation. In Committee, the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Oaten) described the clamping of his constituents' cars when the signs were covered by snow. We need a system that would allow individuals to appeal and the authorities to take a sensible view based on the circumstances and on all the facts rather than necessarily following the legislation to the letter. We need flexibility and sensible judgment. My right hon. and learned Friend has made a number of sensible observations which the Government will doubtless consider, and to which the Minister will no doubt respond tonight.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
507 c111 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Children Disclosure of information Data protection Databases Criminal investigation Crime Alcoholic drinks Administration of justice Anti-social behaviour Fingerprints Immobilisation of vehicles Licensing Genetics Domestic abuse Licensed premises Identification of criminals Drunkenness Injunctions Protection Organised crime Opening hours Licensing laws Sentencing Young offenders Alcohol disorder zones Domestic violence protection orders Domestic violence protection notices
Legislation
Crime and Security Bill 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk