Police and Justice Bill

This issue was discussed in some detail in Committee, so I shall be brief. However, I shall begin by welcoming the three new Ministers to their Front-Bench responsibilities. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, the hon. Member for Enfield, North (Joan Ryan), used to be a Whip, so I am pleased that her promotion allows her to speak on Home Office matters. The direction of policy in respect of summary justice has brought conditional cautions into closer focus. The obvious change that the Bill introduces is that the conditions attached to cautions are intended to punish the offender. That is the aspect of the Bill that has caused most disquiet when it comes to the intended operation of the cautions, and the comments of John Thornhill, the chairman of the Magistrates Association’s judicial policy and practice committee, are interesting in that regard. He said:"““We consider it contrary to the principles of justice for prosecutors and police to be able to impose punishment without the involvement of the judiciary. A democratic legal system ensures that an independent tribunal—the judiciary—should sentence and impose punishment, thus preventing bias from prosecutorial authorities.””" Is it right for the police or prosecutorial authorities to extend their jurisdiction much further? If so, how far do we go? That is the substance of the debate on these amendments. However, if conditions that in essence are sentences or punishments are to be imposed, is a person from the police or the CPS the right person to impose them? Two possibilities arise. First, a person might accept a caution with conditions less stringent than would be the case if the matter were referred to the magistrates court or some other judicial body. Secondly, and alternatively, a person might be advised or required to accept a caution without realising that the conditions are more draconian than those that a court would impose. Other amendments in the group apply to police bail, to which a similar quasi-judicial approach should be adopted. The Magistrates Association believes that bail conditions must be examined very carefully, and that as much information as possible is obtained when the conditions are set. Sufficient training must be given to officers, and the proper safeguards put in place, to ensure that the conditions that are attached are appropriate. In that way, the people on the street who use street bail can do so in a way that is both effective and fitting.