Clause 20
Serious Crime Bill [Lords]
12:15 pm
Jeremy Wright (Rugby and Kenilworth, Conservative)
Briefly, I, too, would like to support the amendment that my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham has moved, for the reasons given by him and, from the Front Bench, by my hon. Friend the Member for Hornchurch.
A substantial imbalance would be created if subsection (7)(b) were to remain in the Bill, because somebody receiving a conditional discharge can receive such an order in consequence of a criminal conviction only if either their involvement in the offence was minimal or their personal circumstances were so remarkable that that was thought to be the appropriate decision in the case. In either situation, for that to be the criminal penalty and for a civil order placing extraordinarily onerous restrictions then to be imposed would give the lie to the argument that the provisions are only preventive and not punitive, and that they are designed purely to ensure that those with a serious and detailed involvement either in a previous commission of serious crime or in a likely future one need to be controlled. Those are not the individuals who are likely to be subject to such an order. If the Minister were to insist on retaining the provision in the Bill, I suspect that his other arguments would be substantially undermined.