Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page


Lord Bach moved Amendment No. 116:


The noble Lord said: My Lords, Amendment No. 116 which I move and Amendment No. 117 to which I speak are minor drafting amendments to Schedule 8, the schedule of repeals. I do not need to go into further explanation unless noble Lords require me to do so. I beg to move Amendment No. 116.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Bach moved Amendment No. 117:


    Page 107, line 7, at end insert--


    ("2000 c.Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000.In section 30(1), paragraph (b) of the definition of "qualifying sentence". In section 66(9), paragraph (b) of the definition of "relevant sentence".")

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 77 [Commencement]:

Lord Bach moved Amendment No. 118:


    Page 50, line 33, at end insert ("and different areas").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I move Amendment No. 118 and speak to Amendment No. 120. These two amendments deal with the commencement of the provisions of the Bill. Amendment 118 enables the Lord Chancellor or the Secretary of State to appoint different days for the commencement for the provisions of the Bill for different areas.

As the Bill stands, different days may be appointed for commencement only for different purposes. Amendment No. 120 has the effect of removing paragraph 137 of Schedule 7 to the Bill from the list of provisions that will come into force on Royal Assent. I beg to move Amendment No. 118.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

31 Oct 2000 : Column 937

Baroness Hanham moved Amendment No. 119:


    Page 50, line 33, at end insert--


("( ) No day may be appointed for the commencement of sections 40 to 42 until the results of the review of the sentencing framework of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 can be taken into account.").

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in view of the lateness of the hour, I shall be brief. It is our understanding that the review of the sentencing framework of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 will encompass community orders. It would be confusing and unhelpful to both the courts and the Probation Service if there were to be more than one change to either the nature or name of such orders. For that reason, we propose delaying the implementation of the name changes under this Bill until that review has been completed and has made known its recommendations so that they may be taken into account by this House. I beg to move.

Lord Bach: My Lords, I congratulate the noble Baroness on her ingenuity in bringing back the famous Clauses 40, 41 and 42 in this particular form towards the very end of our proceedings.

I am afraid that I cannot agree with her. The sentencing review must be distinguished from what we seek to do in the Bill. The sentencing review has been asked to look at the sentencing framework, which includes looking at the rationale for sentencing and at creating different types of sentences. That is a relatively long-term process.

The reason for renaming the orders is to deal with what we are sure is the public's current lack of understanding of what the existing community penalties mean. That does not pre-empt any of the issues being considered by the review. We believe that

31 Oct 2000 : Column 938

it is right to change the names as soon as is convenient in order that the public will get a better sense of what we want the existing orders to be.

One consequence of agreeing to the noble Baroness's amendment would be that the dreadfully named "combination order" might last a lot longer. No one knows what combination orders are, apart from the professionals who deal with them. The sooner that is changed, the better.

As I said, I congratulate the noble Baroness on her ingenuity, but we shall not fall for her suggestion. I ask her to withdraw the amendment.

Baroness Hanham: My Lords, I suppose that at this hour of the night, it is better to be called ingenious than incoherent. The noble Lord clearly understood where I was coming from and where I hoped to go. In view of the lateness of the hour, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. I shall perhaps return to it at a later stage.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Lord Bach moved Amendment No. 120:


    Page 50, line 40, after ("136") insert (", 138").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 78 [Extent]:

Lord Bach moved Amendments Nos. 121 and 122:


    Page 51, line 13, at end insert--


("( ) this Chapter,").


    Page 51, line 22, at end insert--


("( ) For the purposes of the Scotland Act 1998, any provision of section 63 and Schedule 5 and, so far as relating to those provisions and extending to Scotland, any provision of this Chapter is to be taken to be a pre-commencement enactment within the meaning of that Act.").

On Question, amendments agreed to.

        House adjourned at eight minutes past midnight.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page