HC Deb 15 June 1998 vol 314 cc10-1
7. Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)

What plans he has to increase the maximum sentence for indecency with children. [44249]

The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. Alun Michael)

The maximum penalty for gross indecency with a child aged under 14—which is different from indecent assault—was increased by this Government from two years to 10 years' imprisonment as recently as 1 October last year when we brought into force section 52 of the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997. We have no evidence to suggest that a further increase in the maximum penalty is needed. However, we do need to make sure that the system of offences and penalties is coherent and effective. I can tell the House today that we will review the law relating to sexual offences generally and we will look at this specific issue as part of that review.

Mr. Bercow

Would the Minister explain to the House why the Government opposed the Conservative amendment to the Crime and Disorder Bill to increase from 10 years to life the maximum sentence for indecency with children, when this would have left the freedom with the courts to pass an appropriate sentence and would have allowed the more serious offenders to be released only when they no longer posed any threat to any children? Is this not a case of the Government being soft on criminals and tough on the child victims of those criminals?

Mr. Michael

No, Madam Speaker—it is a case of a Back-Bench Member being tough on the English language and soft on his thinking. Only last year, the Conservative party thought that 10 years was a perfectly adequate sentence. With the irresponsibility of Opposition, it wants to make everything subject to a life sentence. The reason we turned that down—as I explained in Committee, as the hon. Gentleman will see if he takes the trouble to read Hansard—was because it was our intention to have a coherent review of the offences and the penalties to make sure that sexual crimes, particularly against children, were dealt with effectively, properly and coherently. We will do that.

Ms Sally Keeble (Northampton, North)

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments and the changes that have been made to penalties for sex offenders. Is he aware that some of my constituents will welcome very much the changes—for example, the family of Jason Swift, who was killed by a member of the Cooke gang? What thought has my hon. Friend given to introducing indeterminate sentences to make it possible for sex offenders to be kept in prison for as long as they are a risk—a much more effective way of dealing with the problem than simply introducing blanket, long-term sentences which would not address the main problem?

Mr. Michael

My hon. Friend is right. The horrific example to which she referred makes it clear why we must take responsibility, not only for punishing people after the event, but for managing risk and for ensuring that risk does not turn into danger or an event involving a victim. We have already implemented the Sex Offenders Act 1997, and we have worked with the police and the probation service to make sure that the information required under it is used to protect children and vulnerable adults, rather than gathering dust on file or sitting in a computer.

The sex offender orders in the Crime and Disorder Bill will plug a further gap by enabling courts to take action where it is clear that someone poses a risk. We shall consider indeterminate sentences in the review that I have announced. My hon. Friend understands the sensitivities that have to be observed and the careful thought that has to be given to the matter. We shall give it that thought.

Forward to