Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Jonathan Djanogly (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 31 October 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.


Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill

Those numbers may overlap to some extent; in other words, someone might not have been prosecuted as there may have been a civil injunction, or perhaps a multi-agency risk assessment conference made the decision. The forms of evidence we intend to accept will meet a high standard of objectivity. We are concerned that many of the additional forms of evidence suggested in the amendments would rely on the word of those involved and would provide an incentive for allegations where none currently exists. Let me make it clear that I am not questioning the integrity of genuine victims. However, during the legal aid consultation many people were concerned about providing an incentive for unfounded allegations, and the Government share that concern.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
534 c644 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Children Compensation Abuse Fees and charges European Convention on Human Rights Legal aid scheme Immigration Domestic abuse EU law Legal opinion Family law NHS Personal injury Patients' rights Negligence Vetting Vulnerable adults Reform Squatting Self-defence Civil law
Legislation
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk