§ 12. Mr. SpringTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received regarding the right to appeal against lenient sentences.
§ Mr. Kenneth ClarkeMost of the representations I receive on the right of appeal against lenient sentences, which was introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 1988, are to indicate views on the outcome of particular cases.
§ Mr. SpringDoes my right hon. and learned Friend recall that although the hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) ludicrously tries to talk up his party as the party of law and order, the hon. Gentleman and his party voted against the measure? How can the British people take seriously Labour's pretension to support law and order when—
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman is calling into question the Opposition's policies. He must ask the Government about their policies, especially in relation to his substantive question.
§ Mr. SpringWill my right hon. and learned Friend confirm the importance of ensuring that lenient sentences are referred and that we get the proper passing of sentences appropriate to the crime?
§ Mr. ClarkeI entirely endorse my hon. Friend's sentiments. He is right to recall that it was this Government who introduced the new power and enabled an appeal to be made against unnecessarily lenient sentences. It was used recently most notably when there was widespread public feeling about the sentence first imposed on a 15-year-old for an offence of rape in south Wales. My right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General used his powers under the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to go to the court and to get a proper sentence imposed. That power was introduced by this Government only a few years ago. My hon. Friend is right to recall that it was opposed by Opposition Members, including Opposition Front-Bench Members.
§ Mr. Mike O'BrienIs the Home Secretary aware that one of the main reasons why the courts have been concerned about lenient sentences is section 29 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991, which the Government brought into force last October? When the Home Secretary gave evidence to the Select Committee on Home Affairs, he said that he did not intend to review the provision until a year had passed. Is not it the case that if he now intends to review section 29 and if he now accepts that there is inadequacy in the legislation that his Government passed to deal with crime, it is only because strong pressure to be tough on crime has come from the Opposition? Again, he has shown complacency.
§ Mr. ClarkeMy hon. Friend the Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Spring) has just pointed out that the Labour party ferociously opposed the prosecution's right to appeal against sentences. My hon. Friend the Member for Gravesham (Mr. Arnold) pointed out that Labour opposed the power of the court in the 1991 Act to take parents before the courts and to make them liable for the 933 fines of their children. Section 29 of the 1991 Act was one of the measures to which the Opposition raised no opposition and which they supported. It is not working as Parliament intended. I have been saying for months that I intend to put the matter right as soon as I can. If the hon. Gentleman stays in the Chamber for about 20 minutes, he may get news which puts his mind at rest on the question.
§ Mr. SweeneyDoes my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it is Labour which has opposed every major piece of criminal justice legislation in the past 14 years?
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. Some hon. Members will never learn. If the hon. Gentleman can ask a supplementary question that is in order, I shall of course want to hear him. I have selected him to speak.
§ Mr. SweeneyDoes my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it is a bit rich for Labour—
§ Madam SpeakerOrder, I shall pass on. I selected the hon. Gentleman because he has a substantive question on the Order Paper and I thought that he might like to follow it up. I hope that he will understand if I now call Mr. Spellar.