HC Deb 14 February 1983 vol 37 cc17-8
44. Mr. Campbell-Savours

asked the Attorney-General if the Lord Chancellor has any plans to meet the Magistrates Association to discuss sentencing policy for shoplifting offences.

The Solicitor-General (Sir Ian Percival)

As was indicated in the replies to my hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch and Lymington (Mr. Adley) on 9 June 1980 and 9 March 1981, meetings are not arranged with the Magistrates Association to discuss sentencing policy limited to a single type of offence.

Mr. Speaker

I should make it clear that in future I shall not call hon. Members unless they stand up. Does the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) intend to ask a supplementary question?

Mr. Campbell-Savours

Does the Solicitor-General accept that people under stress and the mentally ill should not be threatened with prosecution or brought before the courts for sentencing on shoplifting charges? If the right hon. and learned Gentleman has any sympathy with that principle, will he ensure that all police forces are required to appoint persons qualified to assess the degree of stress or, indeed, whether the person concerned is mentally ill?

The Solicitor-General

I am sure that most prosecuting authorities are well aware of those considerations. There is no question of any special threat being held over the heads of the mentally ill or anyone else. The threat is the same. The greatest safeguard in this respect is the availability of legal aid and advice so that those appointed to assist people may take account of these points in their defence and see that full weight is given to them, either before prosecution is undertaken by making representations to the authorities, or, if there is a conviction, in mitigation before the court passes sentence, which is the point to which the main question relates.

Mr. Arthur Davidson

As a fair proportion of those prosecuted for shoplifting are elderly first offenders, do the Attorney-General's new guidelines on prosecuting policy contain clear advice to prosecuting authorities on the advisability of cautioning rather than prosecuting? Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that the sense of shame and disgrace for the elderly first offender far outweighs any penalty that the court may impose?

The Solicitor-General

I entirely agree with the hon. and learned Gentleman on the last point. Anyone appearing at a police station or court for the first time, but perhaps especially an elderly person, may become thoroughly confused. We all want every assistance and indulgence to be given in such cases. Cautioning is indeed referred to in the document mentioned by the hon. and learned Gentleman. It is also referred to in another document, which will soon be available and which I believe will be of interest to the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours)—a report of the Home Office standing advisory committee on the prevention of crime. The difficulty is that cautioning can be administered only if the accused makes a clear admission of the offence. That limits its usefulness, but that does not alter the fact that whenever it is available and useful it must be considered very seriously.