Offender Management Bill

With the leave of the House, I shall comment on the assertions made by the hon. and learned Member for Harborough (Mr. Garnier) on the performance of the National Offender Management Service. He mentioned comments that I made when I visited Leicester race course in his constituency. On that occasion, NOMS gave me a warm welcome, and in the years in which the service has been operational, there has been significant improvement to performance. Let me give him a couple of figures to ponder while he reflects on the progress of the Bill. In 2005-06, the target was for 40,000 offenders to take part in the basic skills programme, and 44,972 offenders started the programme. The target for key work skills awards was 120,000 people, and 186,000 people achieved those awards. The target for enhanced community punishment unpaid work completion was 50,000, and over 51,000 individuals completed unpaid work. I am proud of the fact that the offender management service is delivering services, both in prison and in the community, and that it is achieving some of the targets that we have set, but we are not complacent, as was shown in our debate on the previous group of amendments. We want improvements, and we want to make sure that there are drivers to help underperforming probation services to improve. The hon. and learned Member for Harborough and the hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. Browne) seemed to suggest that the Government had been in a mad rush to get the legislation through the House, but that ““mad rush”” goes back to my noble Friend Lord Carter’s report in 2003, some four years ago. The amendments before us ask us to reconsider what Lord Carter said in 2003, and the issues considered in the consultation in 2005. Essentially, it asks us to revisit the Bill’s progress through this place and the other place over that period, and to revisit our debates to date, just in case the Government decide that what they have sought to do so far is wrong and not applicable. The hon. and learned Member for Harborough will be aware that the deadline for expressing interest in forming part of the initial wave of probation trusts has passed. Twenty-two of the 35 probation boards eligible—nearly two thirds of them—expressed an interest in becoming probation trusts in the first wave. The probation boards that have expressed an interest in becoming trusts, including in his area of Leicestershire, would not welcome a further delay to the consideration of that policy objective. They have expressed an interest, and they want to consider going on to the next stage, and we are now progressing with that stage in depth. We have had discussions and there has been progress; the Government have not rushed the proposals. The Lords amendments seek to delay still further the impact of the legislation.