| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I could not disagree more profoundly with my noble friend's comments. My noble friend talked about the halcyon days of the present system, of which I know my noble friend was an architect. What we have at the moment is wholly unacceptable. We have people who are the most dangerous--those people whom my noble friend Lord Belstead and his colleagues on the Parole Board would refuse parole on the ground that they are not safe to release. When they come to 66 per cent. of their sentence they are released--released knowing that the Parole Board says they are dangerous, the Prison Service says they are dangerous and the probation officers working with them say they are dangerous--and there is nothing anyone can do. For a very small window--between 66 per cent. and 75 per cent.--they are recallable. But beyond that 75 per cent. they have to commit another crime before they can be dealt with in the courts. That is wholly unsatisfactory. We also have a very large number of other prisoners who are released at the half-way point and at the two-thirds point with no proper risk assessment when they come to those automatic points of release. I cannot believe that my noble friend thinks that satisfactory.
I am sorry he does not agree with those noble Lords who have welcomed the amendments providing for a proper risk assessment over a longer period before people are released into the community. The package must be taken together. When the custodial part of the sentence is deemed to have been served we have a much tougher supervision arrangement, which is increased for sex offenders--from 50 per cent. of a sentence right up to a 10-year supervision period--and it will be increased for violent offenders, if my amendment is accepted later this evening. That is what is right. If the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, and my noble friend Lord Carlisle had their way with the amendments that they would wish to pass in the House, all the supervision period would be deemed to be within sentence, which would mean that prisoners would be eligible for release at least at the 50 per cent. point. If one is talking about a supervision period up to 10 years for sex offenders, how could that possibly be considered to be deemed within sentence? I really cannot disagree more profoundly with my noble friend.
Lord Carlisle of Bucklow: My Lords, I deliberately did not say anything because I support and welcome what has been said about the extended period of release for sex offenders. However, my noble friend said that under the present system people are released at 66 per cent. and that that is unacceptable. Since the proposal in the Bill is that in future sentences shall only be 66 per cent. of that which they are at the moment, surely they will still have to be released at that stage.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I argued that one should take the whole package. Therefore, the supervision period begins at that point. When it begins at that point it can be,
as I said, 50 per cent. of the sentence right up to a 10-year supervision period, during which time offenders do not have to commit an offence other than to breach conditions. That is very different from committing another act of violence, another burglary or drug-dealing offence. If they simply display the kind of behaviour that would constitute a breach of conditions, they can be brought back before the courts and dealt with again with a much bigger variety of disposals available to the court than at the moment. At present one can only return people to prison and there is no way in which minor breaches of conditions can be dealt with. Therefore, I argue most strongly that the package in this Bill is much more acceptable.I now return to the other point. I have made no secret of the matter whatever. I have been entirely open with the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, and it is a matter to which I have already referred. I answered a Written Question in Hansard and I have referred to that today. There is an impact on prison places in this Bill which I virtually spelt out. Perhaps I may repeat that. It is estimated that there will be an eventual increase of around 11,000 places in the prison population some 12 years after implementation of Parts I and II of the Bill. On that basis, it is estimated that about 82 per cent. of that increase, which is 9,000 places, is attributable to Part I of the Bill and the remaining 18 per cent. (2,000 places) to Part II of the Bill. I was not hiding that or being dishonest about it. We have made that absolutely clear to the House from the beginning.
I now turn to the questions posed by my noble friend. The seven-year ceiling disappears. The effect of the Bill is that there will not be such a ceiling. There is no need to make provision in the Bill to make that clear. Conditions can be varied by a parole board after release. That is also the effect of the Bill by Amendment No. 35 as regards Clause 14(3)(b). The Parole Board will continue to assess risk under the existing powers, but there will be fresh instructions to the board. Again, I believe that that is welcome. My noble friend rightly identified a lacuna in the system and that is that there should be proper risk assessment before people are released from prison, particularly as regards long-term prisoners.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 11 [Award of early release days for good behaviour]:
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 19:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Carlisle of Bucklow moved Amendment No. 20:
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I believe that we have gone through this debate often enough in the course of the Bill. The purpose of this amendment is to attempt to meet the Home Secretary's stated intention in the White Paper; namely, that although the proportion of time that a prisoner should stay in prison is being changed, it was not intended thereby to increase it. Despite saying that in the White Paper and the Home Secretary's comments to that effect, a Bill has been brought in which has a different result, and this amendment would provide for the desired effect. As I say, it is clear--I hope without too much anger--that the noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, and myself are in total disagreement over this matter. Therefore, I do not wish to pursue it further unless the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, wishes to speak. In that case I shall formally move the amendment to enable him to do so. For myself, I believe that we have been around this argument so long that only time will tell.
The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Nicol): My Lords, does the noble Lord wish to move the amendment?
Lord Carlisle of Bucklow: My Lords, I formally move the amendment.
Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, I do not wish to pursue this amendment, but I take the opportunity to congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Carlisle, on all the hard work that he has put into this Bill, the views that he has expressed and his achievements in positively improving the Bill.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I can be brief. We are opposed to automatic release. Therefore, I oppose the amendment.
Lord Carlisle of Bucklow: My Lords, as my noble friend knows, I do not accept the phrase "automatic release". I believe that that is an unfair description. However, I do not wish to press the amendment further and I beg leave to withdraw it.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 22:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendments Nos. 23 to 26 not moved.]
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 27:
Page 7, line 6, at end insert ("and less than three years").
Page 7, line 7, leave out subsections (2) and (3) and insert--
("(2) For--
(a) the period of two months beginning with the day on which he was sentenced, and
(b) each successive period of two months ending before his release,
a prisoner serving a sentence of imprisonment for a term of three years or more shall be awarded twelve early release days and a prisoner serving a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than three years shall be awarded fifteen early release days.").
9.45 p.m.
Page 7, line 19, at end insert--
("( ) Where at any time this section applies in place of section (Release on Parole Board recommendation), 25 or 26 below because a sentence is set aside or varied on appeal, then, for each assessment period for the purposes of this section beginning before that time, the prescribed person shall assume, for the purposes of subsection (2) or (3) above, that the prisoner's behaviour was such as to entitle him to the maximum number of early release days available under that subsection.").
After Clause 11, insert the following new clause--
(" .--(1) This section applies where a prisoner is serving a sentence of imprisonment for a term of three years or more.
(2) As soon as the prisoner has served five-sixths of his sentence, the Secretary of State shall, if recommended to do so by the Parole Board, release him.").
The noble Baroness said: I beg to move.
Lord Thomas of Gresford moved, as an amendment to Amendment No. 27, Amendment No. 28:
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page