Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

It is always a privilege and an education to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Stern—as the noble Lord, Lord Judd, has said. It is also a privilege to listen to the wisdom and humanity of the speakers in this House on this important issue. I was very interested that the noble Lord, Lord Judd, mentioned one of the two boys involved in the Bulger case. I also went to see one of these boys and discovered, through talking to the psychologist and psychiatrist who had looked after him through the trial, that, although he was 10 at the time of the incident, his developmental age was four. In order to deal with him, she had to act as if he was four and take toys from her four year-old son to engage him. She said, ““I have never stopped wondering how this country could put somebody with a developmental age of four into a High Court situation at the age of 10.”” I am very glad that the issue of the age of criminal responsibility has been raised again, because I think that it is a disgrace that this country continues with that particular situation. I strongly support the amendment because it reflects my experience as Chief Inspector of Prisons. I found that an awful lot of what was put out by government was prepared by officials who had absolutely no experience of what they were talking about and therefore no idea of the principles and standards that they needed to underpin what they said. As Chief Inspector of Prisons, I produced a document, which I called Expectations, setting out precisely what those principles and standards should be for all the prison rules. Having prepared one for adults, we then did another for children and young people, because they were very different. The guide and leader of that process was a remarkable man, who was my deputy at the time. He had governed a young offender institution and, before that, had been the housemaster at a borstal. He said that borstals were positive places, where those sentenced at Her Majesty’s pleasure had to earn their way out and the staff had to help them to do that. He clearly came away with the idea that there was a need for principles to govern the justice. We have just been taking the Children and Young Persons Bill through this House. I have been struck by the fact that the contributions to this debate so far are very similar to those on the other Bill, which concerns another group of people of the same age going not into custody but into care and preventing them getting involved in the criminal justice system. I could not help wondering why there was a disconnect, with similar people with similar needs being dealt with by different ministries and different Bills. Why is that? It seemed to me symptomatic of this monster Bill, which I can only describe as the ““and another thing”” Bill because it looks as though everyone has dumped their in-tray into it and added a mass of incoherent subjects. However, if there is one subject that has coherence, it seems to be youth justice. At the moment, I am also involved in helping a number of people to come up with ideas for an academy. It is an attempt to produce a new style of establishment for young offenders and young people where those who are homeless, those who are sentenced to community work and those sentenced to custody can come together on one site. There will be a custody element with something called a ““foyer””, of which there are 100 in the country, dealing with the homeless, and there will also be people from the community so that the young people can be given work, education and other treatment locally on site so that they do not have to go too far. Guiding this academy have been my former deputy—the person whom I mentioned earlier—and another former young offender establishment governor, who said that, before going any further, the principles of the establishment had to be clearly set out. To complement what the noble Baroness has proposed, I should like to read out the core principles that these two experienced people have come up with. They illustrate what is badly needed—coherence in the way that youth justice is administered at present and which is missing from too much in life. The core principles are: "““The achievement of continuity of experience with family and friends, in education, work training and health care … Connecting effectively with as wide a spectrum as possible of people, agencies and organisations in order to create positive developmental experiences for each young person … Encouraging dignity and respect in relationships by valuing difference, cultural and spiritual interests and in creating space for self expression … Offering differential responses and experiences that reflect age, maturity and developmental needs … Provision of leadership that embraces education and personal challenges to reduce dysfunctional and delinquent behaviour, manages those synergies that most contribute towards fulfilling the purpose of the academy, generates and sustains a narrative of creative expectation and responsible practice, provides a resilient and continuous improvement culture in work and relationships””." Added to the voice of experience and wisdom, which is behind the amendment, I think that the management of youth justice in this country would be better if these principles were clearly laid down for the people who are responsible for producing the legislation.