My Lords, I would deeply wish to be able to support the amendment, but in fact I oppose it, for quite different reasons from some given in the debate. I am utterly committed to local services where local services are appropriate. I understand the way in which the wording of the amendment has been put—to try to ensure that the Secretary of State can intervene when other services need a more centralised service. It is for very different reasons from those that I oppose the amendment; I think that it is all about change. It is about ensuring that the services we have on the ground are much more effective.
The noble Baroness said that the Probation Service had been meeting its targets. I have some questions about the targets that are met, when we all know that reoffending is going up. What are the targets? Have the Government set the right targets? That is the challenge that I would put if the targets are being met and reoffending is increasing. Something significantly different needs to happen in the behaviour of the services on the ground. The argument for the mixed economy has been made, and the Liberal Democrat and Conservative Benches have said that that is not an issue in this debate; but I believe that it is. As the noble Lord, Lord Warner, pointed out, there has always been the capacity for this change, and it has not taken place.
Offender Management Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Howarth of Breckland
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 27 June 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Offender Management Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
693 c634 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:13:48 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_406133
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_406133
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_406133