Home Department written statement – made at on 8 November 2006.
John Reid
Home Secretary, The Secretary of State for the Home Department
I am informing the House of my intention to publish shortly a consultation document entitled "Making Sentencing Clearer". This document meets the commitment I made in July, in the review of the criminal justice system, to bring forward with the Lord Chancellor and the Attorney-General a consultation on a number of sentencing and related issues.
The consultation outlines proposals for building better public understanding and confidence in the way sentences are handed down by judges and magistrates. The consultation also makes proposals for providing sentencers with more flexibility in sentencing dangerous offenders and proposals designed to focus probation resources on the more serious offenders.
Copies of the consultation will be placed in the library and on the Home Office website.
This phrase is often used in written answers to indicate that a minister has deposited some relevant information in the House of Commons Library. Typical content includes research reports, letters, and tables of data not published elsewhere.
A list of such depositions can be found at http://deposits.parliament.uk/ along with some of the documents. The Library is not open to the public, but copies of documents can be requested if they are not on that website. For more information, see the House of Commons factsheet: http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/P15.pdf
Annotations
kenneth conner
Posted on 9 Nov 2006 2:49 pm (Report this annotation)
Before ministers talk about protecting the public from crime they should first explain the part the government played in the success of this phenomenally successful fraud. "The Great Phone Call Con" http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4397308.stm We now know that OFCOM and Icstis had no evidence or reason to believe the services they were allowing BT to bill for ever existed. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/bulletins/comp_bull_index/comp_bull_... Ofcom are now using the "Freedom of Information Act" to prevent the victims from discovering that the Telecom One service providers in this Icstis/Ofcom case are the same service providers who were responsible for the telecom fraud the BBC exposed. Ofcom are using the "act" to prevent the victims from discovering that throughout 2004 Ofcom were allowing BT to bill families for nonexistant fraudulent services.
Throughout 2004, the regulator Icstis claimed the services appeared to be compliant with their code of practice. Due to the high level of complaint they claimed they were working closely with Ofcom, the DTI and the police.
What did Icstis tell them? Did they tell them that Telecom One refused to supply details of what the services were or how they were being promoted? Did they tell them that this group of service providers were responsible for 20% of all complaints alleging fraud. Did they tell them that each of the 3,000 numbers they were using had each recieved several hundred identical complaints?
Why didn't Alun Michael want BT, Telecom One, Premium Media Communications and the other companies involved investigated?
Pauline Campbell
Posted on 9 Nov 2006 3:20 pm (Report this annotation)
It is essential that the forthcoming consultation on sentencing and related issues takes into account recent comments made by Lord Phillips, the Lord Chief Justice, who has reiterated his plea for more community punishments to unblock overcrowded prisons so that serious offenders [who must be kept in custody] can receive help in tackling their offending behaviour and rehabilitating themselves. Lord Phillips argues for restricting prison to dangerous and serious offenders, and it is important that John Reid, Home Secretary, adopts this principle. The taxpayer cannot be expected to endlessly finance New Labour's penal policy of "obsessive imprisonment" - around 20,000 more people in prison today, compared to when Labour took office 9 years ago. And overall crime has fallen 44% in the last decade.