Offender Management Bill

That would be helpful. As my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Gerrard) said, we would like more of an incremental approach to the way in which those matters evolve. The comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Blaydon (Mr. Anderson) would fit in with that. Local knowledge is important. When people know each other and have built up professional relationships of trust over several years, they can fine-tune the services that they agree to provide, often for one or two individuals. That may not appear significant on a national scale, but it makes a difference to our constituents. As we all know, much of the crime that takes place in this country is perpetrated by a handful of individuals, who are known to the authorities. It is a handful of people who need particular attention. We therefore have to work with those in a local area who deal with them. That is an important point, which the Government have rightly agreed to secure. Securing the continuation of that will make all the difference to improving offender management. However, I have taken some time and trouble to listen to people working in the probation service in Bedfordshire on the issue, and I have not met anyone who is trying to defend something without any change, or who does not concede that improvements are needed. Indeed, many are committed to continuing to make improvements. However, they saw that that process would be blocked if commissioning at a local level were no longer to take place, because neither the Secretary of State nor the regional offender manager is in a position to have that local knowledge. I therefore sincerely welcome the words, carefully used, of my right hon. Friend the Minister in opening this debate. My hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow said that he would certainly not vote against the Government’s position, but I urge him to vote for it, because we have seen a significant improvement, which is about the best we are going to get. The alternative position, put forward in the Lords—mainly by the Conservatives, but it was perhaps supported by some others—would be to exclude the possibility of regional and national commissioning. That is a dogmatic approach. Not everything needed to improve offender management can be delivered only at local level, even if, in my view, much or most of it can. We need to make the best use of the national expertise, often specialist, which is available by definition on a national and possibly regional basis.