I accept what the hon. and learned Gentleman says, but I am not convinced that further delay to the process and further consideration would be valuable. My colleagues in NOMS and I will obviously take a keen interest in the roll-out of the waves of trust applications. We will take a keen interest in the development of NOMS at probation trust/board level, and we will monitor it carefully as a matter of course. I do not believe that the further delay proposed in the amendment would be of great assistance to the process, or that the super-affirmative procedure would add anything to parliamentary scrutiny that the affirmative procedure proposed in the Bill will not add. For those reasons, I regret that I must disappoint the hon. and learned Gentleman, much as I enjoyed visiting his constituency to discuss matters with his constituents. I urge the House to reject the amendment.
Question put, That this House disagrees with the Lords in the said amendment:—
The House divided: Ayes 286, Noes 159.
Offender Management Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hanson of Flint
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 July 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Offender Management Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
463 c378 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:56:27 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412305
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412305
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_412305