INFORMATION ABOUT PROSECUTION (Hansard, 31 October 2000)

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, we are already tackling the issue. I fully understand the intention behind the amendment, but the Government are already there. The amendment would not add significantly to the steps currently in train to ensure better communication of significant decisions to all victims of crime, regardless of the type of offence. Those steps are being taken by the police and the Crown Prosecution Service.
Any victim who asks will, as at present, be kept fully informed of the prosecution of such an offence. Under the victim's charter, that is currently the responsibility of the police rather than the prosecuting authority. However, following the review of the Crown Prosecution Service by Lord Justice Glidewell, and a recommendation made in the Macpherson report into the murder of Stephen Lawrence, the Crown Prosecution Service is now running pilot projects to establish more effective ways of communicating its own decisions to victims; that is, decisions on whether charges are to be preferred or dropped, or 'whatever the step in the process may be. It is intended that a new system for all victims of crime will be put in place by April 2001.
As I said at the outset, I fully understand that the noble Baroness's intention is to improve the current system. However, the Government believe that the measures which are already in hand and which have been in train for some time achieve that purpose, not only for this particular tragic group of victims but for all victims of crime. For those reasons, I do not feel able to accept the amendment and I trust that it can be withdrawn.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that answer. Perhaps I may put two questions to him. First, can he confirm specifically that the intention behind my amendment is covered? Can he say specifically that in relation to the offences listed in Schedules 1 and 2 to the Sex Offenders Act 1997 the prosecutor will have a duty to inform victims of the progress of the prosecution? Is the noble Lord responding with an unequivocal "yes" to that?
Secondly, he referred to the fact that a new system for all victims of crime would be in place by 2001. Has that already been legislated for or does it require legislation?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, as I indicated in my earlier comments, the proposal is based on pilot schemes. As I made plain, it is intended that this approach will cover all types of offence and that a new system for all victims of crime will be in place by April 2001. The victim's charter is guidance only; it is not legislation. However, as is often the case, legislation is not always required in order for schemes to take effect; they can be carried out by administrative fiat. That is our preferred approach in this case. The service on offer to victims of crime will be universal. Of course, we need to ensure that it is effective and that it works well. It will be run through the Crown Prosecution Service and the police.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, perhaps it is the lateness of the hour or perhaps it is me, but I did not understand the answer to my question. I believe that the noble Lord said that the duty to inform victims is not an obligation under the law and that it is no more than as set out in the charter. The right of victims of crime, and particularly of offences listed under Schedules 1 and 2, to be informed of the progress of the prosecution is not specifically covered. The noble Lord did not appear to say yes to that, and I should be pleased if he could give me an answer.
Secondly, on the one hand, the noble Lord said that pilot schemes would be put in place next year; on the other, he said quite clearly that a system covering all victims of crime would be in place by 2001. Which is it? Is a pilot scheme being trialled in order to put a system in place, or has the scheme been finalised, is ready to be implemented and will be in place for all victims by 2001?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, at the peril of repeating myself, I said that the system would be in place for all victims by April 2001. The answer to the noble Baroness's first question is: yes, it is indeed the case that pilots are now being run by the CPS, but a full system for all victims of crime will be in place by April 2001. I do not believe that I can express my answer more plainly, simply, basically or straightforwardly than that, but that is exactly what we are intending to do.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, the noble Lord missed cut the key point. Is that an obligation under the law or is it simply an obligation under the charter?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, it is not law; it is an act of policy. It is already in place and being implemented. We do not require law in order that it should be carried out. We are doing it as a matter of policy.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, this was a concern of the victims themselves who do not believe that it is being done. I shall return to this at Third Reading and make it a matter of law. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.