I did say that I would try not to stray into the realms of later Liberal Democrat amendments, even though the noble Lord tempts me to do so. It certainly appears from the Bill that the Government intend what the noble Lord suggests to happen. There appear to be provisions to enable someone who has been acquitted then tobe subject to an application for a civil order. Wewill consider that when we come to particular amendments that deal with the supervisory role of the DPP and that of other directors and the Attorney-General. I assure the noble Lord that I shall address those questions, too.
On Amendment No. 48, I am grateful to the Minister for at least trying to flesh out the Government’s approach to the list and how they ended up with this rather odd collection of crimes that are all serious in some respects, depending on the level at which they are committed. I was rather alarmed that at one stage the Minister said that the Government were now consulting stakeholders on the content of the list, and said later that some aspects such as environmental issues were added after consultation. His response to my original question about the consultation and where it was was rather mixed, unless I misheard him.
Serious Crime Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Anelay of St Johns
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 14 March 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Serious Crime Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
690 c779-80 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:34:36 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385180
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385180
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385180