UK Parliament / Open data

Serious Crime Bill [Lords]

Proceeding contribution from Tony McNulty (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 12 June 2007. It occurred during Debate on bills on Serious Crime Bill [Lords].
I am fully aware of those points, and they go to my opening remarks. I suggest that the hon. and learned Gentleman get out more, if that is the best he can do for a pastime. There were, of course, two areas of policy introduced into the Bill in the other place that were not welcomed by the Government—for reasons I will come to—concerning a power to search for firearms and provision to allow intercept to be admissible as evidence. I will return to both topics shortly after I have dealt with the substance of the Bill, as is appropriate for Second Reading. On serious crime prevention orders, we need to provide law enforcement with a flexible means of preventing the harm caused by serious crime before it can have an impact on our communities. Someone who brings heroin on to our streets must be caught quickly, brought to justice effectively and punished appropriately. However, is it not better to ensure that the heroin does not hit the streets, with the attendant harm, in the first place? Clause 1 creates such a tool in serious crime prevention orders. The name makes it clear: they will prevent the harm caused by serious crime before it occurs. They are not a punitive measure. They will be used only against those who have been proved to be involved in serious crime.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
461 c661-2 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top