Policing and Crime Bill

My Lords, I thank everyone who has spoken in the debate. I am glad to see the noble Baroness, Lady Gibson, back in her place and I hope that she is feeling better. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, about the total muddle that the policy seems to have been in for much of the time. I agree with him also that there have been far too many arguments over the evidence for it to be at all clear from which quarter the Government have finally drawn their conclusions. That is very unsatisfactory. However, in this amendment, above all others, it is very clear. The Minister has given a list of the initiatives that have commenced, but those are evidence of why the legislation that has been on the statute book for so long can finally be removed. It means that the Government are now in a better position to go back to the principle of using social services in the way that they should be used—provided that they are properly resourced, as the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, mentioned—and not resort to the criminal justice system. The Minister prayed in aid the fact that very few young people have had convictions or cautions. However, if there were so few cases, the intervention services could have made a strong effort with those few children and prevented them being landed with a criminal record. We have here an ideological divide but I shall not take more time to spell it out. I wish to test the opinion of the House. Division on Amendment 26 Contents 68; Not-Contents 80. Amendment 26 disagreed. Moved by