Part of Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 11:00 am on 13 January 2005.
Jonathan Djanogly
Shadow Minister (Home Affairs)
11:00,
13 January 2005
I rise on an point of clarification. We fully support the formalisation through written undertakings of plea bargaining and turning Queen's evidence. However, subsection (2) says:
''the court may taken into account the extent and nature of the assistance given or offered.''
I note the use of the word ''may'', which presumably means that the court could ignore the written plea bargain agreement if it so wished. Might not that create a problem? Could not the offender turn round and ask why he should take the risk of turning Queen's evidence if the court may turn round and say that it will take no notice of the agreement? In fact, could not the offender say, ''I won't sing unless I get immunity under section 65''? A bizarre situation could then arise. It would be in the public interest for the offender to take a lesser sentence and at least go away for some time, but, in the event, he might get immunity because of the lack of certainty.
A parliamentary bill is divided into sections called clauses.
Printed in the margin next to each clause is a brief explanatory `side-note' giving details of what the effect of the clause will be.
During the committee stage of a bill, MPs examine these clauses in detail and may introduce new clauses of their own or table amendments to the existing clauses.
When a bill becomes an Act of Parliament, clauses become known as sections.