I thought that I had dealt with these two amendments earlier, but I clearly had not. Let me say, at the risk of repeating myself, that we agree with the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, about the advantages of keeping these five matters in subsection (11) in their current order, not least because they are understood, having been used for a number of years. That does not, of course, mean that the council should not have regard to other matters, including those raised by the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, and by the noble Baroness, Lady Linklater. We recognise the importance of assessing the cost-effectiveness of sentencing disposals. I repeat that we are not talking about the cost of sentences in individual cases.
The problem with Amendment 191ZC, which relates to Clause 115, is that it would remove subsection (2)(c), which encourages the council to promote public awareness of the operation and effect of guidelines. I do not think that the noble Baroness would want us to do that.
Coroners and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bach
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 15 July 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c1202 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:00:22 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_578116
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_578116
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_578116