UK Parliament / Open data

Offender Rehabilitation Bill

Proceeding contribution from Jeremy Wright (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 14 January 2014. It occurred during Debate on bills on Offender Rehabilitation Bill.

The point I am making is that the rules, which pre-existed this Government by the way, are very clear: investigation is not the same thing as

conviction. We have made it very clear, however, that we have initiated our own investigations. I have warned the hon. Lady before that she is sitting in a very large glass house and that she should think before throwing stones. This is a contract negotiated by her Government and substantially abused, it would seem, during her Government’s term in office. That abuse was discovered by this Government and acted on by this Government. She is hardly in a position to suggest that we have behaved in any way improperly. In any event, I remind the House that both organisations, Serco and G4S, are not on the list of lead providers.

The hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington raised the question of whether those organisations could act in a supporting role. The answer is that we will want to look very carefully not just at the process of corporate renewal those companies are undergoing at the moment but at the specific bids they are making. However, they are not on the list of lead providers. I remind Opposition Members that we were told not so very long ago that the proposals could never work without G4S and Serco, that no one would be interested in bidding. We have a list of 30 different bidders, comprising 50 different organisations at lead bidder level. The Opposition are simply wrong about the level of interest.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

573 cc767-8 

Session

2013-14

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top