Offender Management Act 2007 (Consequential Amendments) Order 2008

I thank both the noble Lord, Lord Henley, and the noble Baroness, Lady Falkner, for their generally welcoming remarks and the work done in the preparation of the Explanatory Memorandum. I appreciate that, although the noble Lord, Lord Henley, is a veteran of this debate, the noble Baroness and I are very new to the matter. Of course, in our debates on the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, the critical importance of an effective probation service as part of offender management programmes has come through clearly. I note that the noble Baroness, Lady Falkner, tantalisingly almost invited me to have a Second Reading-type debate with her on the changes, but then drew back. I will not rise to that temptation. We think the changes will help us to deliver a better service. We are clearly all united in paying tribute to the tremendous work of the probation service in recent years, and their critical importance in years to come. On the timing, we are commencing the new provisions for the first six areas on 1 April 2008. Those six areas will be Dyfed Powys, Humberside, Leicestershire and Rutland, Merseyside, south Wales, and west Mercia. On contractual arrangements, I understand the point of the noble Baroness. She will know that, as always with contractual arrangements, there are commercial confidentiality issues which mean that I could not let her have the information she requests. However, the principles that should apply for service contracts and contracts with the public, private and not-for-profit sectors should be the same. The not-for-profit sector has nothing to fear from these arrangements. I said in my opening remarks that they apply to the not-for-profit sector, but am happy to ensure that there is appropriate consultation with that sector on these matters, as the noble Baroness requested. The noble Baroness also asked me about England, Scotland and Wales. Of course, the order lends itself to that question. I confirm that Part 1 of the Act is limited to England and Wales. There are references to Scottish legislation in the order because the order amends a number of Acts that relate wholly or partially to Scotland or Northern Ireland. Essentially, they relate to the transfer of offenders from Scotland or Northern Ireland to England or Wales and vice versa. So the amendments ensure that the relevant duties and obligations in those transfers apply equally to providers of probation services as they do to local probation boards. I hope that that provides a suitable explanation. I certainly agree with the noble Lord, Lord Henley, about the importance of affirmative orders when it comes to amending primary legislation, which is why we are here today. He raised the important question of gender, race and disability legislation. I assure him that the amendments to gender, race and disability legislation, ensuring that both probation trusts and other providers of probation services are required to meet statutory obligations of both the local probation boards and other suppliers of public sector services, are covered in these orders. The noble Lord then teased me about legislation and further potential changes to be made, as he often does. Obviously, we will have to see on future equality legislation. We do not envisage any further amendments in relation to this issue, although, as I have said, there is an order that will enable us to repeal references to local probation boards when the whole system is established. We already have that provision in place. If there are no other questions, I shall simply thank both noble Lords for their thoughtful and constructive remarks, and welcome my noble friend to his place. On Question, Motion agreed to.