Offender Management Bill

My Lords, I, too, think that words are important. It is important that we also have regard to the fact that this amendment relates to a clause in the Bill that is meant to shape the issues that the Secretary of State should have regard to in terms of probation purposes. It is difficult to counter many of the arguments that my noble friend Lord Rosser set out so clearly. I am genuinely puzzled about the amendment and why so many noble Lords are apprehensive about the word ““punishment””. In my five years as chairman of the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, I spent a lot of time thinking about and discussing the issueof punishment and its contribution to changing behaviour and—this is also worth bearing in mind—how victims viewed punishment as part of the process of change. ““Punishment”” is certainly a word that enters into conversations between staff and offenders, whether they are young or old; we delude ourselves if we think that it is not. The dictionary meaning of the word encourages one to be a little less squeamish about it. The term embraces several concepts in the Oxford English Dictionary. My recollection is that the courts themselves tend to use dictionary meanings of words in their interpretation of the law. One concept of punishment is, "““infliction of a penalty in retribution for an offence””," so there is some sense of paying back. Many of my conversations with victims and their families strongly suggest that there is some expectation of offenders facing consequences for their behaviour and making some kind of retribution or payback. That is often explicit in court orders and is part of the conversation that probation and youth offending team staff have with offenders. A second concept in the definition of the word—again, I turn to the Oxford English Dictionary—is an, "““unpleasant consequence … experienced … under specific conditions so that, through avoidance, the desired … behaviour becomes established””." If that is not about rehabilitation and changing behaviour, I am not sure what is. I think that we all agree that the management of offenders should have trying to change behaviour at its heart, but that is an integral concept within the term ““punishment””, too, as I have tried to show. The Government seem to have the words right in the Bill. The words ““proper punishment”” reflect an appropriate aim that the Secretary of State should have regard to. That is a more constructive aim than simply being an enforcer of a court order. The amendment would weaken, not strengthen, the role of probation staff, and the House would be wise not to go down that route.