My Lords, I want to pick up on the point that my noble friend Lady Kennedy of The Shaws has made and speak to Amendment 13, on the review of this extension of tagging. My honourable friend Dan Jarvis made the point in the other place about possible unforeseen consequences of this extension. I was talking to a magistrate colleague of mine only last week, and she pointed out to me that the new GPS tags are physically much larger than the existing tags used today. That means that they are possibly easier to remove—but there is another possible consequence, in that they need charging much more often. The existing tags do not need recharging because the battery lasts for the length of the period that the person is tagged. Potentially, that raises a whole series of issues with offenders—people out on bail or offenders in the case that we are now discussing—who are not properly recharging their GPS-driven tags. My understanding is that they would have to do it by an induction loop; it would not be a physical connection. That could raise a lot of unforeseen consequences, which is why I reiterate my support for Amendment 13, so that it can be looked at when the provision comes into force.
Criminal Justice and Courts Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 14 July 2014.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Criminal Justice and Courts Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
755 c401 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2014-08-08 14:04:38 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-14/14071433000004
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-14/14071433000004
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-14/14071433000004