My Lords, I am again grateful for that helpful explanation of the Government’s position. The difficulty, as I see it, is something that I hope that we can consider between now and Report. As the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, pointed out, we are entering an entirely new era in the provision of probation services. The Minister is entirely right to say that best practice and sentencing guidelines require the courts and responsible officers—who are now in the public sector probation service—to have regard to caring responsibilities. However, there is a risk that in the new regime, which is a new world for probation provision, there will be a departure from best practice or, at any rate, a temptation to depart from it. I hope that, by amending the Bill in a similar way to our amendments, we could send out the message that family commitments have to be taken into account just as faith and education commitments are. In those circumstances, I invite the Government to consider these amendments carefully and sympathetically before we come back. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Offender Rehabilitation Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 11 June 2013.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Offender Rehabilitation Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
745 c1543 Session
2013-14Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2013-11-29 09:27:53 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2013-06-11/13061174000198
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2013-06-11/13061174000198
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2013-06-11/13061174000198