UK Parliament / Open data

Serious Crime Bill [HL]

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Scotland of Asthal (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 25 April 2007. It occurred during Debate on bills on Serious Crime Bill [HL].
My Lords, these amendments seek to change references made to the Secretary of State to the Lord Chancellor. I should say to the noble Lord that we do not think that is either necessary or appropriate. The amendments really relate to the power to make changes in Part 1 of Schedule 5, which lists the reference to the common law offence of inciting the commission of another offence. As my right honourable friends the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary have made clear, the focus of the Home Office will be very much on public protection and the reduction of crime. These orders will play an important role in that by giving law enforcement a flexible new tool with which to prevent harm being caused to the public by serious criminals. As a result, the order-making powers in relation to the orders will be exercised by the Home Secretary as the Secretary of State for the Home Department. During the extensive debates on the Constitutional Reform Bill, this House considered carefully which functions it thought should fall to the Lord Chancellor. Those functions relate to the maintenance of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, relations with the judiciary, judicial appointments and discipline, and the support of the judiciary in the execution of their duties. Those are all very different areas fromthe matters set out in relation to the orders or in relation to Schedule 5, and we suggest that they do not belong together. I turn to Amendment No. 75. The appropriate person to make the order in the future will be the Secretary of State who is responsible for Part 2. It may be that this is for a future Secretary of State for justice, or whatever title he or she may carry, but that would depend on a future transfer of functions. As things stand, the matter is clearly for the Home Secretary, and even if it was transferred to the person who also happens to hold the office of Lord Chancellor, it remains a function which does not sit with the very clearly defined list of responsibilities belonging to that post. As a result, the reference to ““Secretary of State”” is clearly to be preferred, and so we invite noble Lords not to insist on their amendments. There has been no slippage in the timetable, which still stands.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

691 c701-2 

Session

2006-07

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top