Offender Rehabilitation Bill [HL]

Debate between Lord Haskel and Lord McNally

Wednesday 5th June 2013 Lords Chamber

[The Deputy Speaker (Lord Haskel)]

I have to inform your Lordships that if this amendment is agreed, I cannot call Amendments 9 to 12 because of pre-emption.

[Lord McNally]

My Lords, I hope I am answering the amendment that the noble Lord has moved, because I am just wondering what Amendment 8 would actually do. It would remove paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Bill, which amends the 2003 Act and sets out the conditions under which the Secretary of State may top up supervision. I have already said that top-up supervision is a useful device to ensure that there is a reasonable period of supervision to enable a change to be made to the offending behaviour. Therefore, the amendment has the unusual and perhaps unintended effect of not removing the provision for top-up supervision that is contained in Clause 2.

Legislation

Debate between Lord Haskel and Lord McNally

Thursday 10th November 2011 Lords Chamber

[Lord Haskel]

My Lords—

[Lord McNally]

I think it was the noble Lord, Lord Haskel.

[Lord Haskel]

The Leader of the House says there are fewer pages enacted. Is this because the legislation is poorly drafted and requires a lot of work by your Lordships?