Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

I am very hesitant to stand here and criticise the work of magistrates. The noble Lord may draw that conclusion, but I am not going to stand here and criticise magistrates. It would be wholly inappropriate for me to do so. Clearly, there may be some questions about the guidance that is given to them about training. I refer the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, to his colleague, the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, who sadly for me is not in his place. He said at Second Reading: "““There is evidence that courts too often pass suspended sentences where they could have passed a community sentence … Let us hope that the Bill will at least limit this damage by prohibiting the passing of suspended sentences for minor summary offences””.—[Official Report, 22/1/08; col. 163.]" So there is an argument for what the Government are seeking to do. On the question of guidelines, the Sentencing Guidelines Council has already set out very clearly in its guidelines that an offence must reach the custodial threshold before a suspended sentence can be imposed. Yes, I accept that, clearly, the issue of suspended sentences needs to be kept under discussion with the council. I understand that the council plans to review its guidelines on general seriousness and on the new sentences arising from the Criminal Justice Act 2003, so there will be an opportunity to look at suspended sentence issues again in relation to the custodial threshold. Our view is that it will not lead to further increases in the prison population. I acknowledge that magistrates would prefer to receive further training on the intended use of suspended sentence orders. The Sentencing Guidelines Council has already set out in its guidelines that an offence must reach the custodial threshold before a substantial sentence can be imposed.