First, I did not say and I have never said that there is not a need for secure provision for young people; it is the type of secure provision that we are talking about here. I thank everyone who has taken part in this important debate. I shall not forget the kind words that have been said around this Chamber. I thank noble Lords for that. I shall also not forget—I hope that the Minister hears this very clearly—the words from the lips of the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, who said just how very vulnerable these 17 year-olds are. The statistics I have used—on self harming, suicide and so on— prove that.
I recognise that the Government’s intentions are good, but I would like to remind the Minister that secure training centres—child prisons where the children are as young as 12—are a child of this Government. When he talks about, for example, how inappropriate it is to put 17 year-olds in secure children’s homes, which are actually designed for them, he is perhaps forgetting not only the vulnerabilities but the implications of putting 17 year-olds with much older and, as it were, much more experienced prisoners in the prison estate. YOIs are very much a part of the prison estate.
The noble Lord said that he could not see why 17 year-olds should not go to YOIs as they would present a risk to younger children in secure children’s homes. Of course there are secure children’s homes that cater for children with welfare issues. There are others which do not and there is endless scope, if we take up the challenge, of developing the work in secure children’s homes. I would love to take the Minister to one or two that I know very well, particularly in Scotland. It is a different world there, where children do not need to have their bones broken when they are restrained. That simply does not happen.
For the moment, I have said enough. I feel very strongly about this, as the Minister understands. I have listened hard to what he said and it is almost inevitable that we shall return to this matter on Report. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 116 not moved.]
Schedule 21 agreed to.
Clause 103 agreed to.
Schedule 22 agreed to.
Clause 104 agreed to.
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Linklater of Butterstone
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 27 February 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
699 c717-8 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2025-01-04 08:57:59 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_449958
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_449958
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_449958