Normally I would give way, and if we had a full day of debate, I would have expected to give way to Members on both sides of the Chamber—[Interruption.] It is not my fault. Let me first finish explaining the general case. I will then try to give way as generously as I can. It would be quite possible to take so many interventions that they filled the remaining time, but I have no intention of doing so.
I remind the House that in June the Prime Minister announced that the Government intended to replace IPP sentences. He and I had agreed on that. We had originally proposed in our Green Paper greatly to restrict the number by raising the threshold above which IPP sentences were given. The sentencing parts of the Bill were received extremely well in public consultation because those who responded were largely those involved in the criminal justice system, but we received many representations saying that IPP sentences should abolished completely, which is why we have moved on.
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Clarke of Nottingham
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 1 November 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
534 c786 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:51:14 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_780665
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_780665
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_780665