Clause 17
Serious Crime Bill [Lords]
11:45 am
Vernon Coaker (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Home Office; Gedling, Labour)
I do not accept that at all. The hon. Gentleman pointed out the first part of the test, which is a criminal conviction for involvement in serious crime. I do not want to read out again clause 1(1)(b), but the judgment of the Court has to be taken into account. Involvement in serious crime is one part of the test. The second part of the test is that the Court believes that such action would protect the public by preventing crime. Is the hon. Gentleman really saying that a serious crime prevention order should not be put in place if the Court believes that somebody will commit crime in future?
My hon. Friends and I think that if a court judges that applying a serious crime prevention order to an individual who has been involved in serious crime will prevent crime and harm, the vast majority of people in this country will say, “You impose that order.” As my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley said, the individual can choose to obey the law, as the vast majority of people in this country do, and not be made subject to a serious crime prevention order.