UK Parliament / Open data

Climate Change Bill [HL]

I hope I will be able to answer the noble Earl on the devolution point, because it might be quite inappropriate to say that separate provisions apply in Scotland and Northern Ireland, which the Bill reflects. There is a reason for the Bill being drafted as it has been. Until the passing of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, legislation conventionally provided for a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment or less in the magistrates’ court. Section 154(1) of that Act states that the maximum sentence that a magistrates’ court may pass for any one offence is 12 months’ imprisonment. In addition, there are also provisions in Section 280 and Section 281 for raising the maximum penalty on conviction of existing summary offences to 51 weeks’ imprisonment. This is to enable a court to pass the new sentences of custody plus and intermittent custody under Section 181 and Section 183 of the Act. These provisions are not yet in force and nothing in the 2003 Act prevents a later Act that creates a new summary offence making a different provision about the penalties on conviction for that offence. Yet it is consistent with the policy behind the 2003 Act for the Climate Change Bill to provide for a maximum penalty of 51 weeks for summary-only offences so that the new sentences will be available, with a transitional reduction to six months, until the relevant provisions of the 2003 Act are in force. As I say, separate provisions apply to Scotland and Northern Ireland, which the Bill reflects. That is a matter for legislation in Scotland and Northern Ireland. They are devolved matters, and not matters that I am competent to comment on. If there is any serious concern about this—there should not be on what I have said—then officials are more than happy to meet noble Lords on this issue.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c253-4 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Back to top