The proposal to merge the prisons inspectorate and create a combined inspectorate rightly caused great furore. My noble Friends in the other place made a cogent case against the proposal, which we have not been allowed to do in this place because the Government prevented debate by not allowing adequate time on Report. That was a shameful avoidance of proper scrutiny in the House. The Government are clearly without scruples about the democratic process.
Were it not for the Lords amendment, we would be faced with an unscrutinised and damaging programme for a combined, slapped-together inspectorate, steamrollered through. It is typical of the Government to try to use their brute strength of numbers rather than force of argument to get their way. Their seriously misguided proposal was, thankfully, averted, except that, as the hon. and learned Member for Harborough (Mr. Garnier) said, despite the Government’s apparent volte face we are now presented with a restoration of power to the Secretary of State.
It cannot be right for the Secretary of State to be able, by order, to specify the form that inspection programmes or inspection frameworks are to take. That goes against the necessary independent nature of the inspection regime and its purpose. Neither should the chief inspector have to consult the Secretary of State before preparing such a regime. Each of the amendments that changes the word ““shall”” to ““may”” puts back independence—
It being Ten o’clock, Mr. speaker put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair, pursuant to Order [this day].
The House proceeded to a Division; but no Member being willing to act as Teller for the Noes, Mr. Speaker declared that the Ayes had it.
Government amendment (c) agreed to.
It being after Ten o’clock, Mr. Speaker put the remaining Questions required to be put at that hour.
Government amendments (d) to (f) agreed to.
Motion made, and Question put, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment, as amended.—[Mr. McNulty.]
The House divided: Ayes 302, Noes 216.
Police and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Featherstone
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 24 October 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Police and Justice Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
450 c1486-7 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 19:15:47 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354520
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354520
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354520