That point was made by the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle, but I pray in aid Professor Fraser's report. I appreciate that the right hon. Gentleman says that the terms of reference were not wide enough and that it is not appropriate to rely on the report, but those terms of reference took account of available information and experience elsewhere when the appropriateness of the Scottish system was considered. Indeed, it was the right hon. Gentleman's colleague in the other place, Lord Bach, who said:"““In determining the appropriateness of the current legislation, Professor Fraser considered data on reoffending rates and conducted a wide consultation. He did not uncover any evidence to suggest that this approach to retention has caused any detriment to the detection of serious crime in Scotland.””"
I therefore think it is appropriate to look to Professor Fraser's investigation, as he is a learned expert on forensics, rather than simply trying to skate over and ignore it as the right hon. Gentleman appears to be doing.
Protection of Freedoms Bill (Programme) (No. 3)
Proceeding contribution from
James Brokenshire
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 10 October 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Protection of Freedoms Bill (Programme) (No. 3).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
533 c107 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:12:41 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_771013
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_771013
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_771013