Select Committee on Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Twenty-First Report


Clause 161: Sentencing Guidelines Council: supplementary provisions.

Power conferred on:    Lord Chancellor

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Negative Resolution

Clause 160 sets out that members may only be drawn from the judiciary dealing with criminal cases and from those with experience in five areas specified in the clause and that the Chairman of the Council is to be the Lord Chief Justice.

Clause 161 enables the Lord Chancellor to deal by order with the term of office, appointment and removal of Council members, and with Council proceedings. This is best left to delegated legislation given the level of detail likely to be required.

As the composition and functions of the Council are set out in the primary legislation and the order deals with subsidiary matters, negative resolution procedure would provide an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 162: Does not contain a delegated order or rule making power but provides for the continuation of the Sentencing Advisory Panel, originally constituted under the Crime & Disorder Act 1998.

Clause 163-166: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 167(4): By order, confer exemptions to allow the reasons for sentence to be given in the absence of the offender in certain cases.

Power conferred on:    Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Negative Resolution

This clause imposes a general statutory duty on courts to give reasons for sentence in a way that the offender and other interested parties can understand. In doing so, it seeks to bring together in a single provision many of the obligations on a Court to give reasons when passing sentence which are currently dispersed across sentencing legislation. Subsection (4) enables the Secretary of State by order to confer exemptions from this duty or to allow the reasons for sentence to be given in the absence of the offender or in written form in certain cases. An example of the sort of case where this might be appropriate is where the reaction of the offender to his sentence is such as to make it impossible to go into much detail.

Delegated legislation is considered to be the appropriate vehicle because it will enable a flexible response to any concerns raised by sentencers. The new duty to give reasons is not intended to impose any unreasonable burden, and if it did prove to raise any unexpected difficulties, the order making power could be helpful. Because the duty is a new one, it is not possible to specify with any certainty what all the cases may be. It is intended to consult with practitioners on their experience of operating the provisions.

The negative resolution procedure would provide an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny given the uncontroversial nature of the material.

Clauses 168-170: Contain no delegated powers.


Clause 171: By order, allows or requires a court to review the progress of an offender under a community order, to attach or remove a review provision, and regulate the timings of reviews.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

This clause enables the Secretary of State to make an order allowing or requiring a court to review the progress of an offender under a community order. The Secretary of State can also allow a court to attach or remove a review provision from a community order, and regulate the timing of reviews. Such an order may in particular contain provisions similar to those applying to reviews of suspended sentences.

The Halliday Report recommended "review courts" so that sentencers could gain a better idea of the outcomes of their sentencing decisions. Due to the burden this would place upon the courts, it was not thought practical to impose such a requirement across the board at one time. The Bill therefore provides for a court power of review for suspended sentences but enables court review of community orders to be introduced by way of delegated legislation in light of the suspended sentence experience and the availability of resources. It is envisaged that the provisions would be similar to those contained in clause 183 and 184.

The decision would be based on consultation with the courts. The affirmative resolution procedure has been chosen because it is recognised that a change to court powers of this type should be debated in both Houses.

Clause 172-175: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 176(8): By order, make provision about license periods that the court may specify.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Negative Resolution

This clause provides for Intermittent Custody. It enables a court passing a sentence of imprisonment of under 12 months to specify the number of days the offender must serve in prison, and at the same time provide for his release on licence, subject to specified conditions, at set intervals throughout his sentence. Subsection (8) enables the Secretary of State to prescribe the duration, times, or parts of the week of these license periods. This is to ensure that the Prison Service and Probation Service are able to administer the sentence effectively.

The details of the length and timing etc. of licence periods is best left to delegated legislation given the need to respond flexibly in light of the experience of two Intermittent Custody pilots to ensure smooth operation.

Future decisions about the details of license periods under the new sentence of intermittent custody will be based on consultation with practitioners. It is therefore considered that the negative resolution procedure would provide an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny, given the non-controversial nature of the subject matter.

Clause 177-187: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 188 (3): By order, enables power to amend meaning of 'responsible officer' or a 'qualifying officer' in relation to a relevant order (i.e. community order, custody plus order, suspended sentence order, or an intermittent custody order).

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

This clause defines who the responsible officer is in relation to an offender to whom a relevant order relates. Under subsection (1)(a), if an order imposes a curfew requirement or exclusion requirement but no other requirement, and if that curfew or exclusion order is electronically monitored, the responsible officer is the person responsible for the electronic monitoring. If an offender is 18 or over and under 25, he may be given an attendance centre requirement as the only requirement of the order, in which case the responsible officer is the officer in charge of the attendance centre. In all other cases, the responsible officer is either an officer of the local probation board, or alternatively for under 18s, it can be a member of a youth offending team.

Subsection (3) allows the Secretary of State to amend by order the definitions of a responsible officer, and to amend any other sections in Part 3 which would need amending due to a change in the definition of the responsible officer. The need for an order could, for example, arise as a result of greater involvement by the voluntary sector in delivery of services.

Any changes would be subject to consultation with practitioners. Affirmative resolution procedure is necessary because an order under this clause would amend primary legislation.

Clauses 189-191: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 192: Does not contain a delegated order or rule making power but allows the Secretary of State in relation to community rehabilitation centres to approve facilities suitable for persons subject to relevant orders imposing supervision requirements.

Clause 193 (3) (b): Provides for an accreditation body to be designated by order for the purposes of accrediting the programmes which will form part of the programmes which will form part of the programme requirement under clause 193.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  None

This clause provides for a programme requirement to be attached to a relevant order. A programme requirement is a requirement that the offender must participate on a certain number of days in an accredited programme addressing his or her offending behaviour.

Accreditation must be given by an accreditation body, to be designated by order for the purposes of this section by the Secretary of State.

This is best left to delegated legislation as alteration of the list of accredited bodies will be required from time to time and the level of detail would make it inappropriate for primary legislation. For example, currently the accreditation body is called the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel, but until recently it was called the Joint Accreditation Panel. This order-making power is similar to the power relating to electronic monitoring providers in clause 206.

Clauses 194-199: Contains no delegated powers.

Clause 200: Does not contain a delegated order or rule making power but ensures that courts exercise the function of determining the provision of samples (for drug testing) under provisions included in a community order or suspended sentence order in accordance with guidance issued by the Secretary of State.

Clauses 201-205: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 206 (3): requires a person responsible for monitoring an electronic monitoring requirement to be of a description specified in an order.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  None

This clause provides that the court can order the electronic monitoring of the compliance of an offender with any of the other requirements set out in a relevant order. Subsection (3) requires the Secretary of State to specify by order those persons who maybe responsible for such monitoring. This is best left to delegated legislation as amendments to the specification of the description of electronic monitoring providers will be required from time to time and the level of detail would make it inappropriate for primary legislation. This provision re-enacts similar provisions in the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. (See for example section 36B of that Act.) SI 2001/3346 is an example of a current order (enclosed). It is not anticipated that the contents of any order made under this clause would be significantly different, save for possible changes in electronic monitoring providers.

Electronic monitoring has been available since 1999 (e.g. as part of Home Detention Curfew, curfew orders etc.) following a series of pilot projects which operated in selected areas during the previous ten years. As the description of providers of this service is unlikely to be of public interest no further parliamentary scrutiny is considered to be necessary.

Clause 207: Contains no delegated powers.

Clause 208(3): By order, enables the Secretary of State to further restrict the courts in making a relevant order that imposes requirements.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Negative Resolution

This clause requires the court to ensure, as far as is practicable, that any requirement of a order does not conflict with the offender's religious beliefs, education or employment. It re-enacts existing restrictions on courts contained in the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000; see for example section 38(5).

Subsection (3) gives the Secretary of State an order-making power to add further restrictions upon the courts beyond the avoidance of conflict with the offender's religious beliefs, education or employment. This power is not contained in the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act, but has been taken to enable changes to be made.

In the light of the experience of operating the new sentencing framework a need for further provisions may become desirable. For example, it may become necessary to introduce additional restrictions on the making of orders for offenders with particular domestic responsibilities should it become clear that the way in which courts were using the new sentences was interfering unreasonably with the offenders' lives. For example it might be considered necessary to make special provision for cases where the offender was the sole carer of a disabled dependant.

As the power would always be exercised in favour of the offender and would be based on consultation with practitioners the negative resolution procedure would provide an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Cause 209: Does not contain a delegated order or rule making power but ensures that before a court attaches certain requirements such as attendance at an attendance centre or electronic monitoring, to a relevant order, that it has been notified by the Secretary of State that facilities are available in the local area.

Clause 210-211: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 212: Does not contain a delegated order or rule making power but re-enacts section 62 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 allowing the Secretary of State to make arrangements with local authorities and police authorities regarding premises to be used in order to provide attendance centres.

Clause 213: Power to make rules to regulate a number of aspects of the different requirements

Power conferred on:    Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Rules by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Negative Resolution

This clause gives the Secretary of State the power to regulate a number of different order requirements. These are: the supervision of persons subject to relevant orders; the arrangements to be made by local probation boards for persons subject to unpaid work requirements to perform work and the performance of such work; the provision and carrying on of attendance centres and community rehabilitation centres; the attendance of offenders at activity requirements, attendance centre requirements and attendance records; electronic monitoring; the duties of persons responsible for securing electronic monitoring. Subsection (2) provides that the rules may make provision for limiting the number of hours of work to be done by a person on any one day; the reckoning of hours worked and the keeping of work records; and the payment of travelling and other expenses relating to unpaid work. This is a partial re-enactment of section 55 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act, which contains a similar power that is subject to negative resolution procedure.

This is best left to delegated legislation given the need to respond quickly and flexibly to operational experience, and the level of detail likely to be required. It is intended to consult with practitioners with regard to any rules made under this section.

The negative resolution procedure would provide an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 214: By order, enables power to amend certain limits of specified requirements.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

This clause gives the Secretary of State power to amend the maximum number of hours which may be imposed under the unpaid work requirement, and to alter certain time limits (minimum and maximum durations) attached to specified requirements. (The curfew and exclusion requirements, the alcohol treatment requirement, in relation to relevant orders, and the drug rehabilitation requirement in relation to a community order or suspended sentence order.) As well as the overall duration of the curfew requirement, the maximum length of each daily curfew may be amended.

This is best left to delegated legislation as amendments will be required from time to time in the light of experience, and developments in technology. The Secretary of State currently has this power relating to Community Rehabilitation Orders, Community Punishment Orders, Curfew Orders, and Drug Treatment and Testing Orders.

Given the likely public interest, and the fact that any order would amend primary legislation, affirmative resolution procedure is considered an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 215-225: Contain no delegated powers

Clause 226: Does not contain a delegated order or rule making power but provides that a juvenile sentenced to a sentence of detention for public protection or an extended sentence may be detained in such place as may be determined by the Secretary of State, or by such other persons as may be authorised by him.

Clause 227: Does not contain a delegated order or rule making power but stipulates that in relation to conversion of a sentence of detention into a sentence of imprisonment, that rules under s.47 of the Prisons Act 1952 may provide that any award for an offence against discipline made in respect of an offender serving a relevant sentence of detention shall continue to have effect after the Secretary of State has directed that the offender may be treated as if he had been sentenced to a term of imprisonment (if he has reached the age of 21 or, if he has reached the age of 18 and has been reported by the board of visitors as exercising a detrimental influence on the other inmates). This would apply in the case of the new sentence of detention for public protection and the new extended sentence.

Clause 228-229: Contain no delegated powers

Clause 230(5): Power to make rules with respect to the proceedings of the Parole Board, including proceedings authorising cases to be dealt with by a prescribed number of its members or requiring cases to be dealt with at prescribed times.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Rules

Parliamentary Procedure:  None

This clause re-enacts section 32 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991. Its effect is to continue in being, and make provision for the constitution of, the Parole Board. The statutory duty of the Parole Board as set out in subsection (2) is to advise the Secretary of State on the release and recall of prisoners. In undertaking this function the Board must consider any evidence which the Secretary of State puts before it and any other evidence which it obtains. Subsections (5) and (6) give the Secretary of State the power to make rules concerning the proceedings of the Board and to give directions to the Board with regard to protecting the public and preventing further offences being committed.

Schedule 16 contains supplementary provisions about the Parole Board. Paragraph (10) ensures that the Secretary of State, with the approval of the Treasury, can direct the form of the statement of accounts.

This is best left to delegated legislation given the need to respond quickly and flexibly to any need for further guidance, and the level of detail likely to be required.

It is intended to consult with practitioners with regard to any rules made under this section. They are unlikely to be of public interest and therefore no further parliamentary scrutiny is considered to be necessary. This procedure is already well established and these provisions replicate an existing rule-making power. This rule-making power has been used twice and the rules made under it relate to hearings conducted by the Parole Board under section 28(6)a, section 28(7) and section 32(4) of the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997.

Clause 231 (4) (a): Under rules, allows court not to give a direction with regard the number of days for which the offender was remanded in custody in connection with the offence or a related offence to count as time served as part of the sentence.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Rules made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

This clause re-enacts (with amendments that do not affect the rule making power explained below) section 87 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. The clause provides for time spent in custody on remand to count towards time that would otherwise be spent in custody post sentence.

Subsection (4) enables the court to disregard the provisions within clause 224 where the Secretary of State has made rules excepting remands in custody that are wholly or partially either concurrent with a sentence of imprisonment, or sentences of imprisonment that are for consecutive terms.

This power has never been used because section 87 itself was not commenced.

This is best left to delegated legislation given the need to respond quickly and flexibly to new case law, or new sentence calculation issues. The level of detail likely to be required also makes this an appropriate subject for delegated legislation.

Whilst any rules that were made under this section would be based on consultation with practitioners as it is likely to be of public interest and affirmative resolution procedures is regarded as an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 232-235: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 236 (4): By order, enables power to amend both the period available for HDC and the eligibility of certain prisoners to HDC.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

This clause provides for the early release of prisoners on home detention curfew (HDC). It builds on current provisions within the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Criminal Justice Act 1991 so that an offender may be released on HDC up to 135 days early after having served at least three-quarters of the custodial period. Subsection (4) gives the Secretary of State the power to amend by order both the period available for HDC and the eligibility of certain prisoners for HDC. This power re-enacts existing provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 1991.

This is best left to delegated legislation given the need to respond quickly and flexibly to operational needs. A draft order under the corresponding power in the Criminal Justice Act 1991 is currently before Parliament which seeks to raise the existing limit from 90 to 135 days, and is expected to come into force in July. The limits in the Bill reflect the provisions of the draft order.

HDC came into operation in January 1999. No prisoner is placed on HDC without first passing a risk assessment and early release provisions under this clause will not apply to those serving the new sentences for dangerous offenders. However given the likely public interest affirmative resolution procedure is considered an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 237-239: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 240(1) and (8): By order, prescribe standard conditions for licences.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Negative Resolution

This clause makes provision in relation to the conditions which may be attached to a licence following a prisoners' release. All licences must include the standard conditions as defined insofar as they are all compatible with the licence conditions. The standard conditions may be determined by the Secretary of State by order. For custodial sentences of 12 months or more the licence may also include any additional conditions of a kind prescribed by the Secretary of State by order. When prescribing the standard conditions and other licence conditions by order, subsection (8) requires the Secretary of State to have regard to the protection of the public, the prevention of re-offending and the successful re-integration of the prisoner into the community.

This is best left to delegated legislation given the need to respond quickly and flexibly in light of operational experience, and the level of detail likely to be required.

Standard conditions would be based on consultation with practitioners and are likely to be similar to those which are currently attached to all licences. (These require the offender to: keep in touch with their supervising officer as necessary; to receive visits from their supervising officer; to live where is reasonably approved by their supervising officer and notify them of any change; to undertake only such employment as the supervising officer reasonably approves of; not to travel outside the United Kingdom and to be of good behaviour). Therefore negative resolution procedures is regarded as an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 241: Contains no delegated power.

Clause 242 (5): Provides for the persons responsible for monitoring an offender's early release on license to be specified by order.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  None

This clause provides for a curfew condition to be attached to a licence granted under the "release before required to do so" provision in clause 236. The two clauses together provide for the release from prison on Home Detention Curfew (HDC).

The curfew condition specifies periods during which the offender must remain in a specified place, and includes a requirement that the curfew is electronically monitored. The Secretary of State may by order, specify a description of a person made so responsible.

This is best left to delegated legislation as amendments to the specification of the description of responsible persons will be required from time to time and the subject matter is not appropriate for primary legislation. For example new types of electronic monitoring technologies are being developed which may necessitate change to the description of monitoring providers, and the electronic monitoring contractors also change description from time to time.

Home Detention Curfew with electronic monitoring has been available since 1999 following a series of electronic monitoring pilot projects which operated in selected areas during the previous ten years. As the description of the responsible person is unlikely to be of public interest no further parliamentary scrutiny is considered to be necessary and the procedure is well established.

Clause 243-245: Contains no delegated powers.

Clause 246: Does not contain a delegated order or rule making power but re-enacts s.42 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991, which enables rules under the Prisons Act 1952 to provide for additional days to be added to prisoners' sentences if they are found to be guilty of disciplinary offences whilst in custody.

Clause 247-251: Contains no delegated powers.

Clause 252: By order, gives the power to amend the proportion of a custodial sentence of 12 months or more which must be served in prison before release, and the proportion of an extended sentence for certain sexual or violent offences which must be served before a prisoner is eligible for release on the recommendation of the Parole Board.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

This clause re-enacts (with modification to reflect the new custodial sentencing structure introduced by the Bill) provisions within the Criminal Justice Act 1991 enabling the Secretary of State to amend by order the proportion of a custodial sentence of over 12 months which must be served prior to release, including the proportion of the new extended sentence for certain sexual and violent offences which must be served before a prisoner is eligible for release on the recommendation of the Parole Board.

Given the likely public interest and as this would amend primary legislation, affirmative resolution procedure is considered an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 253: Contains no delegated power.

Clause 254 (6): By order, enables the determination of minimum term in relation to life sentence fixed by law.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

Subsection (6) enables the Secretary of State to amend Schedule 17. Schedule 17 sets out the starting points and other criteria to be applied by courts determining the minimum term to be served by a person convicted of murder.

Given that any amendments in this Schedule would attract considerable public interest it is considered that the affirmative resolution procedure provides an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 255-265: Contain no delegated powers.




Clause 266 (2): By order, enables amendment of the maximum penalties for summary only offences currently carrying a maximum custodial penalty of 5 months or less, in relation to offences which are not listed in Schedule 20 or 21 and are contained either in an Act passed before or in the same session as the Bill, or any subordinate legislation made before the passing of the Bill.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

This clause makes provision for the necessary changes to the maximum penalties for summary offences that are required as a result of the wider changes to the sentencing framework.

Subsection (2) gives the Secretary of State the power to amend by order the maximum penalties for summary offences which are punishable with a term of imprisonment of 5 months or less and are not listed in schedules 20 or 21. It is necessary so as to ensure that all summary offences have maximum penalties that are compatible with the new sentencing framework following commencement of the relevant clauses. The power may be exercised in relation to offences contained in a "relevant enactment", as defined in subsection (7).

Whilst an extensive exercise has been conducted to identify the relevant summary offences whose maximum penalties must be changed in line with the new sentencing framework, given the magnitude of the task every relevant offence may not have been identified. Should any additional relevant offences come to light then their maximum penalties may need to be altered. A similar exercise will also need to be undertaken to identify and change those summary offences created, prior to the passing of the Bill, in secondary legislation.

Given that an order may amend primary legislation, and that the offence may be of public interest affirmative resolution procedure is considered an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 267: Contains no delegated power.

Clause 268 (3): Power by order to amend enabling powers within any Act (passed before or in the same session as the Bill) which allow for making offences punishable with imprisonment on summary conviction.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

This clause ensures that where there are provisions within primary legislation enabling the creation of new offences through subordinate legislation ("enabling powers"), those provisions can be changed to fit with the summary maxima required under the new framework. Subsection (2) gives the Secretary of State the power to amend by order the relevant enactment containing an enabling power so as to prevent the creation of offences punishable with imprisonment or to increase the maximum term of imprisonment to 51 weeks. Subsection (3) also enables an order under subsection (3) to amend enabling powers which make a triable either way offence punishable with imprisonment on summary conviction.

Whilst an extensive exercise has been conducted to identify the relevant enabling powers (Schedule 23) given the magnitude of the task every relevant power may not have been identified.

Given that the enabling power will be contained in primary legislation affirmative resolution procedure is considered an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 269-274: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 275: Power to remove the requirement for a mandatory minimum sentence of 3 years' detention for a 16 or 17 year old convicted of the possession of a prohibited weapon

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

Clause 271 makes provision for a mandatory minimum sentence of 3 years' detention for a 16 or 17 year old convicted of the possession of a prohibited weapon. The Government believes this is needed to tackle the growing gun culture among young people. But it does not wish juveniles to be detained any longer than is necessary. If it judges at some stage in the future that the mandatory element is no longer required, it wants to be able to remove it swiftly and return discretion to the courts. Clause 275 provides the power to do this and to make any necessary consequential amendments.

As this concerns the penalty for an offence, the affirmative resolution procedure is considered an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.

Clause 276-277: Contain no delegated powers.

Clause 278 introduces Schedule 25: Paragraph (5) - By order, amend the number of hours or days of unpaid work or curfew that can be imposed upon a fine defaulter.

Power conferred on:    The Secretary of State

Power exercisable by:    Order made by Statutory Instrument

Parliamentary Procedure:  Affirmative Resolution

A 'default order' enables unpaid work or curfew to be imposed upon a fine defaulter, in lieu of imprisonment. Paragraphs (2) and (3) of Schedule 25 set out the number of hours of work or curfew that correspond to the level of the fine respectively. Paragraph (5) provides the Secretary of State with an order making power to amend the number of hours or days of unpaid work or curfew in paragraphs (2) and (3) or the amount of money default of which attracts the penalty.

This power is necessary given the need to respond quickly and flexibly, and the level of detail likely to be required. For example in time with inflation the number of hours and days equating to a particular fine amount may need to be revised downwards, and equally the levels of fine referred to may become outdated.

Given that default orders may be likely to be of public interest, and that the order would amend primary legislation, affirmative resolution procedure is considered an appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Lords home page Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2003