Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page


Lord Rodger of Earlsferry moved Amendment No. 2:


Page 18, line 10, after ("24") insert ("(except subsection (2))").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, the amendment clarifies the effect of a number of provisions of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975 which have been combined in one provision in the consolidation. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 148 [Intermediate diet]:

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry moved Amendment No. 3:


Page 95, line 17, leave out ("shall") and insert ("may").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, the amendment corrects the consolidation to take account of the amendment made at a late stage to the Bill which is now the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1995. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 187 [Leave to appeal against sentence]:

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry moved Amendment No. 4:


Page 116, line 25, after second ("appeal") insert ("and make such comments in writing as he considers appropriate").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this amendment and Amendment No. 5 rectify what is an obvious omission in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1995 by bringing this provision on appeal into line with changes made by that Act to other provisions on appeal. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry moved Amendment No. 5:


Page 116, line 44, after ("appeal") insert ("and make such comments in writing as he considers appropriate").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 254 [Forfeiture of property]:

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry moved Amendment No. 6:


Leave out Clause 254

16 Oct 1995 : Column 582

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move that Clause 254 be omitted from the Bill. The clause consolidates two sections of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975 which have been repealed by the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1995. The Bill which became that Act was amended at a late stage in its proceedings to repeal the sections in question.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Criminal Procedure (Consequential Provisions) (Scotland) Bill [h.l.]

3.39 p.m.

Report received.

Schedule 3 [Transitional Provisions, Transitory Modifications and Savings]:

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry moved Amendment No. 1:


Page 28, line 19, leave out ("by regulations").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, the amendment acknowledges the fact that commencement provisions will usually be made by order rather than by regulation. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Schedule 4 [Minor and Consequential Amendments]:

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry moved Amendments Nos. 2 to 5:


Page 59, line 8, leave out ("44") and insert ("45").
Page 59, leave out lines 12 to 17.
Page 59, line 17, at end insert—
("( ) In section 50 (treatment of child's case on remission by court)—
(a) in subsection (1), for the words "section 173, 372 or 373 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975" there shall be substituted "section 49 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995"; and
(b) in subsection (2), for the words "the said section 373" there shall be substituted "subsection (7) of the said section 49".").
Page 59, line 18, leave out ("51") and insert ("52").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, Amendments Nos. 2 to 5 and 8 to 11 are required because of amendments made at a late stage in your Lordships' House to the Bill which became the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 and which affect the consolidation exercise. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Lord Roger of Earlsferry moved Amendments Nos. 6 and 7:


Page 59, line 18, after ("supervision)") insert ("—
(a)")
Page 59, line 21, at end insert (";
(b) in paragraph (g), for the words "sections 2A to 2C of the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 1976" there shall be substituted "sections 1 to 3 of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995".").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, these amendments substitute for a reference in the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 to the Sexual Offences (Scotland)

16 Oct 1995 : Column 583

Act 1976, which is consolidated in the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Bill, the reference to the consolidated provision. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry moved Amendments Nos. 8 to 11:


Page 59, line 22, leave out ("52") and insert ("53").
Page 59, line 24, at end insert—
("( ) In section 63(1) (duty of Principal Reporter where informed by constable of detention of a child) for the words "section 296(3) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975" there shall be substituted "section 43(5) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995".").
Page 59, line 25, leave out ("75") and insert ("78").
Page 59, line 32, after ("of") insert ("section 3 of").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to these amendments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Schedule 5 [Repeals]:

Lord Roger of Earlsferry moved Amendment No. 12:


Page 62, line 17, at end insert—
("1995 c.36. The Children (Scotland) Act 1995. Section 49.In Schedule 4, paragraphs 24, 27 and 29.")

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this amendment repeals certain provisions of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, which textually amend the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975 and which are incorporated in the consolidation. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Criminal Injuries Compensation Bill

3.42 p.m.

The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Blatch): My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Baroness Blatch.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly.

[The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (Viscount Allenby of Megiddo) in the Chair.]

Clause 1 [The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme]:

[Amendment No. 1 not moved.]

Lord Windlesham moved Amendment No. 2:


Page 1, line 11, at end insert—
("( ) The Scheme, and any variation to it, shall be contained in a statutory instrument; and the Scheme, and any variation to it, shall not take effect until a draft of the statutory instrument containing the Scheme or, as the case may be, the variation of the Scheme, has been laid before and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament.").

The noble Lord said: I thank the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh of Haringey, for his co-operation in agreeing that it would be in the interests of the Committee to dispose of the issue of parliamentary control of

16 Oct 1995 : Column 584

delegated legislation before moving on to the content of the Bill. The noble Lord's first amendment was a paving amendment for his important amendments of substance, which no doubt he will be explaining.

In moving Amendment No. 2 I wish to speak also to Amendments Nos. 3, 69 and 72. The purpose of this series of amendments is to draw the attention of the Committee to the 14th report of the Delegated Powers Scrutiny Committee. It was published on 21st July and therefore became available only after the Second Reading debate on the Bill. In its report the scrutiny committee stated that the power to establish a scheme for compensation for criminal injuries is a delegated legislative power (paragraph 6); that important elements of the legislation and its administration are included in the scheme and not in the body of the Bill (paragraph 7); and that the Bill is unusual in that it does not make the document embodying the delegated legislation a statutory instrument and that the exercise of the majority of the powers would not be subject to parliamentary control (paragraph 9).

In the form in which the Bill was passed by another place and debated on Second Reading in this Chamber only the tariff proposals were subject to parliamentary control. When, in Standing Committee in another place, an amendment was tabled on this matter the Minister of State declined to go any further. He said that the amendment was impractical as the scheme itself contained so many matters of routine detail and that it would impose an unnecessary burden on Parliament and introduce a cumbersome degree of rigidity. That view might be open to challenge but this is not the place to rehearse it because, spurred on perhaps by the amendments giving effect to the recommendations of the Select Committee tabled by my noble friends and myself and joined by the noble Lord, Lord Rodgers of Quarry Bank, from the Liberal Democrat Benches, the Government have had second thoughts.

The noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, has tabled amendments to Clause 10, which were printed only last Thursday. They concede parliamentary control over both the scheme itself, contained in Amendment No. 61, and any alterations in future to the provisions within the scheme, contained in Amendment No. 66. The decision is greatly to be welcomed. Perhaps the noble Baroness will confirm that, as I read her amendments, the affirmative resolution procedure applies to the introduction of the scheme and the negative resolution procedure applies to any subsequent amendments to the scheme. That seems entirely appropriate because there may well be a number of detailed amendments which are not suitable for the affirmative resolution procedure. If the noble Baroness can confirm those points, the main proposals of the scrutiny committee are met.

The remaining points in the report of the committee can be dealt with briefly. Given the significance of the delegated powers, the committee recommended that the Secretary of State should undertake a process of consultation before formally laying proposals before Parliament in draft. That has been done. During the Recess copies of the draft Criminal Injuries (Tariff Based) Compensation Scheme were circulated. A number of Peers in the Chamber today will have

16 Oct 1995 : Column 585

received the draft, as did Members of another place who took part in the debates there. The draft was also sent to a list of interested parties, including Victim Support of which I have the honour to be president. In the case of Victim Support, the opportunity was taken to express views to the Home Office, and no doubt others responded as well. There has therefore been consultation as recommended by the scrutiny committee. I hope that the noble Baroness is able to confirm that Parliament will be notified in some way of any changes made to the scheme as a result of those representations. The process of consultation may not yet be complete, but when it is I believe it is right that Parliament should ask to be kept informed.

The final point raised by the scrutiny committee dealt with transitional provisions. In paragraph 5 of the 14th report the Minister was invited—I quote the language of the report—to give an undertaking to keep the transitional period to the minimum. As she has been so willing to initiate action or proposals to meet the other matters to which the attention of the Committee has been drawn, I hope she will have no difficulty with this one either. I beg to move.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page