Clause 20
Serious Crime Bill [Lords]
12:15 pm
James Brokenshire (Shadow Minister (Police Reform), Home Affairs; Hornchurch, Conservative)
I support the amendment. In this context, we have to look back at what has been said about the reason for seeking serious crime prevention orders. I referred earlier to the fact that we have been told that, in essence, it is anticipated that only 30 applications for serious crime prevention orders would be made a year. We have been told that the intent would be to use them for the “Mr. Bigs”—in other words, a small, narrowly defined group of serious offenders. In considering the Bill and how it is framed, it is appropriate to consider not only the types of offences that are specified in schedule 1 as denoting seriousness for the purposes of the Bill, but the range of punishment that might be available.
My right hon. and learned Friend has focused on the point about conditional discharges. It would seem strange that one of those 30 orders against a Mr. Big would apply to someone who had received a conditional discharge, because that would suggest that the court did not regard the offence as serious in that context. My right hon. and learned Friend has made a persuasive case and therefore certainly has my support from the Front Bench in pursuing the amendment.