I have some concerns about the desire for a much higher sentence because of the limitation

on the offence. There are abundant other offences in the legislation with penalties that will punish and keep off the streets people of exactly the type that the hon. Gentleman talks about—active paedophiles who offend repeatedly.

When the paedophile commits the offence, it is all in his head. Nothing has actually happened and, of course, one does not want it to happen. It is, however, rather harsh that an offence by which someone has something in their head is as grave, and therefore merits the same penalty, as a completed offence in which a child has been damaged, perhaps permanently. That is a mistaken principle. At the stage in which the offence is in their head, one wants to send a shot across their bows to let them know what they face if anything else occurs. If he has committed any other offence—especially in the case of the person grooming 54 children at once—he stands to receive the maximum term multiplied by the number of charges faced. There is no problem, therefore, when someone has groomed several children.

I disagree with my hon. Friend the Member for Wirral, West, who puts clause 17 and its offence together with clause 15 and its offence. In effect, clause 15 deals with a conspiracy involving other people.

It being twenty-five minutes past Eleven o'clock, The Chairman adjourned the Committee, without Question put.

Adjourned till this day at half-past Two o'clock.