§ 4.50 p.m.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (VISCOUNT BLAKENHAM)My Lords, with your Lordships' permission, I wish to make a statement on penal policy which my right honourable friend the Prime Minister has just made in another place. It will be convenient, I think, if I use his exact words. They are: "In 1959 the Government published a White Paper, Penal Practice in a Changing Society, which discussed the greatly increased volume of post-war crime and the measures taken to deal with it, and forecast developments in the penal system and building programme over the next few years. It emphasised the need to intensify research into crime and its causes, and into the effectiveness of methods of treatment. It acknowledged that existing penal practice had developed piecemeal and empirically over a 605 long period in response to experience and the pressure of current problems; and it looked forward to a time when, with growing knowledge, it would be possible to conduct a fundamental review of penal methods and of the philosophy on which they are based.
"The Government is to-day publishing a White Paper, The War Against Crime in England and Wales which is a survey of the progress made in this field since 1959. Copies of the White Paper will be in the Vote Office at 4 o'clock. In the light of that progress, the Government has decided that the time has now come for the fundamental review foreshadowed in 1959, and that its importance is such that it should be carried out by a Royal Commission. I have therefore recommended to The Queen, and Her Majesty has been pleased to approve, the setting up of a Royal Commission with the following terms of reference:
'in the light of modern knowledge of crime and its causes and of modern penal practice here and abroad, to re-examine the concepts and purposes which should underlie the punishment and treatment of offenders in England and Wales; to report how far they are realised by the penalties and methods of treatment available to the courts, and whether any changes in these, or in the arrangements and responsibility for selecting the sentences to be imposed on particular offenders, are desirable: to review the work of the services and institutions dealing with offenders and the responsibility for their administration: and to make recommendations'."I will announce later the names of the Chairman and members."It is the Government's intention to ask the Royal Commission to give first priority, in its survey, to offenders under 21 and their treatment."
§ THE EARL, OF LONGFORDMy Lords, I am sure we are all much obliged to the noble Viscount for his statement. The House will be aware, after many debates in this place, that noble Lords on this side of the House will always extend a welcome to far-reaching proposals of penal research; but I am bound to say that we find the timing of this particular Royal Commission highly mystifying. The Government have had many years during which to propose a Commission of this sort, and that it should come in the last months of a dying Government is, 606 frankly, amazing to those of us who sit on this side of the House, and no doubt to many others. I think I need only say now that the matters with which the Royal Commission are concerned are highly urgent, and the House will realise that a future Labour Government could not possibly be retarded in the steps it might take by the fact that this Royal Commission had been set up.
LORD REAMy Lords, may I, from these Benches, add our welcome to this very interesting statement which, we agree with the noble Earl, is rather overdue? It is indeed rather mystifying that it has come at this point, but as we on these Benches do not really count very solidly on being on the Government Benches after the next General Election, we can welcome it from whatever Government it comes, and thank the noble Viscount for his statement.
§ THE EARL OF LISTOWELMy Lords, may I ask my noble relative—
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMMy Lords, before I answer my noble brother, may I answer the first of the noble Lords who, I think, have broadly welcomed this? The noble Earl, Lord Longford, said that he thought the announcement was overdue. I think, to be fair, the 1959 White Paper explained that the time was not right for an inquiry. Since then, considerable progress has been made with the prison building programme and with criminological research; and, in the Government's view, the time is right. So far as this being a late appointment—and I believe this covers the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Rea—I do not think this is a matter on which there is any political controversy and I would point out that the Labour Government, I believe, appointed a Royal Commission within less than a year of the General Election in 1950—the Royal Commission on Capital Punishment.
§ THE EARL OF LISTOWELMy Lords, may I now ask my noble relative one question? It is the first question I have asked him, and I am sure he will not mind. I happen to be associated with the organisation which does most of the after-care work in this country, and I should like to know whether after-care is included in the 607 terms of reference of the Royal Commission. It has not been stated explicitly in what has been said. Also, if they are to consider after-care, does it mean that the proposals the Government now have for the reorganisation of after-care will be posponed until after the Royal Commission has reported? I think the voluntary societies would like to know where they stand, and it is most important to them that they should know.
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMMy Lords, in answer to my noble brother, I think I can this time give him the pleasure of a very satisfactory answer on both the points he has raised. Certainly the terms of reference are quite broad enough for the Royal Commission to take in the work of the after-care associations, if they so decide. On the second point, there would certainly be no question of there being a postponement of carrying out any decision the Government may make on the evidence that is now available to them.
§ THE EARL OF LISTOWELMy Lords, I am very much obliged.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, following on the question that the noble Viscount has just answered, can he give the same assurance with regard to the inquiry into the system of preventive detention? He will be aware that a Committee was appointed in January, 1961, and reported in January, 1963, and we are still awaiting the Government's decision with regard to the recommendation of that Committee to abolish the system of preventive detention. Can the noble Viscount give an assurance that this will not be held up in any way by this appointment of the Royal Commission?
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMMy Lords, as my noble friend, I think only two days ago, indicated in answer to the noble Lord, it is hoped the Government will be able to make a statement on this matter fairly soon. Certainly the appointment of the Royal Commission will not inhibit any decision the Government may make in this matter.