I am grateful to the Minister for his full reply. He told us that it is not a matter of punishment, but of encouraging the relevant parent to pay up. Taking away people’s right to travel abroad and to drive will inevitably be seen by them and the community at large as very much a punishment for their conduct. The difficulty with arguing that such measures are appropriate so long as there are sufficient safeguards—in the sense that decisions are taken by officials of an appropriately senior level, are taken only by reference to appropriate criteria, such as wilful misconduct, and only when they think it appropriate—is that exactly the same argument could be applied to any other sanction or order that Ministers think it appropriate to confer on an administrative body; for example, a curfew order or something of the sort. Why not allow administrative bodies to impose those orders? This Government are taking us down a very slippery slope in arguing that, for reasons essentially of convenience, it should be appropriate to confer on an administrative body the right to impose what will be regarded by citizens as very painful sanctions. I have heard nothing today—
Welfare Reform Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Pannick
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 2 July 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Welfare Reform Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c144-5GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:23:17 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_573626
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_573626
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_573626