Proceeding contribution from Lord Bach (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 7 February 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill
I follow the noble Baroness’s argument, which she has made very clearly. Indeed, I was not aware that the law was changed in 2008 so that non-imprisonable offences could not receive a community order, but I see the noble Baroness's way around that. However, to describe it as a breach power seems to be wrong on the basis of how the 2003 Act is phrased. It refers to a person who, "““wilfully and persistently failed to comply””." In one sense, that is about a breach but not a breach on one occasion. It is the court having to find that there has been a wilful and persistent failure to comply and I hate to see that lessened to a mere breach, if I may call it that.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 735 c176
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Children Abuse Curfews Alcoholic drinks Bail Alternatives to prison Debt collection Women Domestic abuse Harassment Discrimination Offenders Mothers Rehabilitation Sentencing Young people Young offenders Sexuality Testing Stalking Community orders Youth offending teams Transgender people
- Legislation
- Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:01:00 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_808043
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_808043
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_808043