All 2 Debates between Lord Clarke of Nottingham and Thérèse Coffey

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Clarke of Nottingham and Thérèse Coffey
Tuesday 11th January 2011

(13 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Thérèse Coffey Portrait Dr Thérèse Coffey (Suffolk Coastal) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

2. What definition of a long-term custodial sentence his Department uses.

Lord Clarke of Nottingham Portrait The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Kenneth Clarke)
- Hansard - -

The Criminal Justice Act 1991 defines a long-term prisoner as

“a person serving a sentence of imprisonment for a term of four years or more”.

There are still some prisoners serving sentences under the 1991 Act, but the term has not been in use since 2003.

Thérèse Coffey Portrait Dr Coffey
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that answer. I am sure he is aware that another Department is relying on the definition he provides. A lot of my constituents will be concerned that some serious offences are not attracting the term of four years that he refers to. For example, a rape recently carried a sentence of three and a half years and an armed robbery in which the offender brandished a knife carried a sentence of under four years. If we want to be serious about crime, we have to be serious about sentencing.

Lord Clarke of Nottingham Portrait Mr Clarke
- Hansard - -

Nobody draws an arbitrary line. However, I quite agree that serious offences do not always attract four years’ imprisonment. I suspect that my hon. Friend’s reference to another Department concerns the Deputy Prime Minister and a prisoner’s right to vote, which I believe is the subject of the next question. The four-year divide is used for some purposes in the Prison Service: people with more than four years are regarded as unsuitable for home detention curfew before release. The approach to prisoners’ voting rights is an attempt to find a rational threshold above which it makes sense to draw the line. No doubt we will return to that issue—perhaps in a few moments.

Rehabilitation and Sentencing

Debate between Lord Clarke of Nottingham and Thérèse Coffey
Tuesday 7th December 2010

(13 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Clarke of Nottingham Portrait Mr Clarke
- Hansard - -

I realise that the hon. Lady is a new Member of the House—[Interruption.] If the Labour party cannot move on from reacting to every social problem by saying that there must be more public expenditure and borrowing—Labour Members think that if we demonstrate that, we are tackling the problem effectively—it has no role in the government of this country for many years to come.

Thérèse Coffey Portrait Dr Thérèse Coffey (Suffolk Coastal) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I very much welcome my right hon. and learned Friend’s announcement that those who commit a crime using a knife can expect to be sent to prison. However, will he elaborate on another part of his statement? He mentioned having a sentencing framework that is comprehensible to the public, which I hope also applies to victims. I found during the general election that a number of my constituents do not understand why, when somebody is sentenced to six years, they automatically go home after three.

Lord Clarke of Nottingham Portrait Mr Clarke
- Hansard - -

I have no anecdotal recollection of anybody who has stabbed somebody not going to prison. Actually, people who do not stab someone because they are stopped in time should go to prison too. A serious knife crime justifies a prison sentence, and I think that we can rely on judges to give serious prison sentences. They do not have to be told that the use of a knife in a crime deserves a serious sentence. However, if they want to be told, I and my hon. Friends will tell them.

Public understanding of the system is important. We will consider how sentences can be expressed in terms that the public understand. People do not understand that when someone is sentenced to a certain number of years in prison, they serve the first half in prison and the other half on licence, which means that they will be recalled to prison if they start falling down in their behaviour. There are many other aspects of our incomprehensible sentencing arrangements that are difficult to get across to the public. The rules given to judges for explaining sentences are a hopeless mess and need to be simplified, and I agree with my hon. Friend that we need to make it more transparent and clearly available to the public.