Offender Management Bill

I think that I now understand what the Government are seeking to achieve. I am pleased that they are prepared to accept Lords amendment No. 14. I shall have a few things to say about Government amendment (a). First, may I establish what we are talking about? We are discussing a power given to the Secretary of State to establish probation trusts, the successor bodies to probation boards, which have been happily doing their work over the last few years following the Government’s changes to the probation system in 2000. Clause 5 states:"““The Secretary of State may by order…establish a probation trust…alter the name or purposes of a probation trust…dissolve a probation trust.””" The Secretary of State can require the probation trust to do all sorts of things, which are set out in the clause, in line with the purposes that he will decide for it. Interestingly enough, clause 5(3) states:"““The purposes of a probation trust may include all or any of the following…the making or performance by the trust of contracts with another probation trust or any other person which provide for the carrying out by the trust of activities which contribute to the achievement of any purpose mentioned in section 2(1)…the making or performance by the trust of contracts with the Secretary of State for the carrying out by the trust of activities anywhere in the world””—" well, I have heard of ambition, but that seems to take it to an extraterritorial dimension—"““which…are to be carried out in connection with persons who are or have been subject to proceedings in service courts…correspond to activities which, if carried out in connection with persons charged with or convicted of offences, would contribute to the achievement of any purpose mentioned in section 2(1)…any other purpose specified for the purposes of this section by regulations made by the Secretary of State.””" So the Secretary of State wants us to give him a collection of powers, which he can then mess around with through secondary legislation. Clause 33, in part 4, deals with orders and regulations, so it ties directly back to clause 5. Clause 33(1) states:"““Any power of the Secretary of State to make an order or regulations under this Act is exercisable by statutory instrument." Subsection (2) states:"““An order or regulations under this Act my make…different provision for different purposes or different areas””—" unspecified and unseen—"““(b) incidental, supplemental, consequential, saving or transitional provision.””" So, under clause 33(2), the Secretary of State will be given huge powers to alter the legislation and the arrangements made between himself and probation providers. No doubt all this will be divvied up by the regional offender manager, as the lead provider or commissioner. As there will be lots of probation trusts and as the Secretary of State no doubt sees himself making lots of provisions,"““incidental, supplemental, consequential, saving or transitional””," he would find it rather more convenient for that to be done under the negative, as opposed to the affirmative, procedure. I am sorry, but I am not here for the convenience of the Government. Parliament is not here for the convenience of the Government. The Government are here for the convenience of the people and the people’s representatives in the Chamber, elected by electors. If it is convenient for the Minister to require the Secretary of State to push all that through using the negative, as opposed to the affirmative, procedure, I am afraid that he does not carry me with him. I wish to apply such negative proceedings as I can to Government amendment (a), so I might ask you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to allow me to test the opinion of the House on Government amendment (a), even if I am delighted that the Government accede to Lords amendment No. 14. It is highly important that Parliament, even by the very tips of its fingers, maintains some purchase on the Executive; otherwise, the Executive will just run away with themselves by using secondary legislation to change laws, particularly laws that affect the criminal justice system. I really do think that from time to time, the Government ought to condescend to allow Parliament to hold them to account.