I am grateful for the infamous letter that I sent because it has provided a backdrop to a number of our discussions today. The noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, is absolutely right that one of the reasons we feel that it is important to address the issue of the Crown Court is not to put a perverse incentive into the system in the way that he described. He will know that the last thing I want is shortly to have to introduce a similar Bill, not least because of the difficulty of finding a slot for it, but also for the reasons that the noble Lord gave. We could miss a real opportunity to address the issue.
I am very happy to reiterate the commitment that I gave the noble Lord in my letter. Our plan is to work up in great detail the scheme and the regulations that would need to go with it, along with the regulations for the magistrates’ courts, so that noble Lords will have those details before Report. Noble Lords have been helpful in enabling Report stage to be postponed until after the summer Recess. I was very concerned that we should have two bites of the cherry, not one, as noble Lords often come up with something with which I can help between legislative stages, but it is more difficult to be helpful at Third Reading.
As noble Lords will know, my ambition is to send the Bill to another place in good order, preferably with no need to send it back. Our commitment is to work up the regulations and the scheme. I am not against primary legislation, if it is needed, but I do not know at this stage whether it is. Much of what we already have needs to be contained in secondary legislation, not least to address the point about which the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, is rightly exercised: ensuring that the scheme is fit for purpose and enabling us more quickly to deal with anything that arises that we have not predicted. With the best will in the world, that is always a possibility—remote, I trust, in this case.
I hope that I have met the objectives of the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, and trust that what we come up with will also meet his aspirations for the scheme. We will put it forward in the way that makes greatest sense with, if necessary, primary legislation and certainly regulations. On that basis, I hope that the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw his amendment.
Criminal Defence Service Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 28 June 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Criminal Defence Service Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
673 c21-2GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:55:29 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260819
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260819
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260819