← Back to House of Commons Debates
Sentencing Bill - Second Reading (General Discussion of the Bill)
06 December 2023
Lead MP
Alex Chalk
Debate Type
Bill Debate
Tags
Justice & Courts
Other Contributors: 39
At a Glance
Alex Chalk raised concerns about sentencing bill - second reading (general discussion of the bill) in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
The Sentencing Bill aims to protect public by ensuring dangerous offenders serve longer sentences and imposing whole-life orders for certain crimes. The bill addresses mandatory release halfway points, enabling courts to impose two-thirds custody terms for serious violent and sexual offenders sentenced to seven years or more. It also targets rapists and serious sexual offenders with no possibility of Parole Board review before completing their sentence. Additionally, the bill seeks to reduce reoffending by introducing a presumption against short sentences, promoting community-based rehabilitation.
Alberto Costa
Con
South Leicestershire
Costa interjected early on, confirming that the proposals would ensure those who commit grave crimes such as Colin Pitchfork’s will likely serve life sentences.
James Wild
Con
North West Norfolk
Wild inquired if the power to require offenders to attend sentencing hearings would be extended to cover other serious crimes, such as sexual assault on children under 13.
Richard Burgon
Lab
Leeds East
Welcomed the presumption against short sentences aimed at cutting reoffending and crime but raised concerns about increased pressure on probation services for rehabilitation outside prison.
Davies questioned whether a sunset clause should be introduced to assess the impact of new measures and inquired if knife crime would not be covered under proposed legislation.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Discussed literacy rates among prisoners, highlighting the importance of addressing underlying issues to rehabilitate offenders effectively.
John Hayes
Con
South Holland and The Deepings
Clarified that 6% of sentences are for possession of knives and a further 9% for common assault, emphasising the seriousness of these crimes.
Asked for examples of exceptional circumstances under which courts would not suspend short sentences.
Neil O'Brien
Con
Harborough, Oadby and Wigston
He questioned whether the statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice were comparing like with like. He argued that the analysis should take into account the effect on crime of the prison sentence itself, not just the community sentences.
Rosie Winterton
15:06:00
Ordered the House to stay for interventions and gave context about Neil O'Brien's intervention. Did not contribute arguments directly related to the amendment.
Kit Malthouse
Con
North West Hampshire
Supported the move but expressed concerns about diminishing the retribution element of sentencing. Suggested looking at ways to make alternative disposals tougher, such as extending curfew periods and sobriety tag durations.
James Daly
no constituency given
Asked for clarity regarding the exceptional circumstances test. He was concerned that drug-addicted shoplifters would receive a clean slate with no risk of custodial terms, which he believed could lead to continued offending.
Shabana Mahmood
Lab
Birmingham Ladywood
Ms. Mahmood criticises the Government for not addressing the prison capacity crisis and instead focusing on reducing prison numbers. She points out that fewer than half of the 20,000 promised prison places will be delivered by 2030, despite warnings from various bodies about overcapacity. She also highlights the failure to deliver on promises for new prison places made since 2016 and the botched privatisation of the probation service under this Government. Additionally, she raises concerns regarding the lack of adequate funding and resources for the probation service to handle the additional workload imposed by the Bill's measures.
Bob Neill
Con
Bristol South
Neill supports the Bill's provisions on suspended sentences of less than 12 months. He cites evidence showing lower reoffending rates for suspended sentences compared to short prison terms and argues that community ties are better preserved, reducing recidivism risks.
Neil O'Brien
Con
Harborough
O'Brien disagrees with Neill's interpretation of reoffending statistics. He clarifies that for those given short prison sentences, the reoffending rate is 75.6%, compared to 71.5% for suspended sentences, but argues that during incarceration, the reoffending rate is zero. O'Brien suggests including the effect of the prison sentence in calculations shows a significant reduction in overall reoffending rates.
Carmarthen East and Dinefwr
Supports a new crime of desecration or concealment of a murdered body to reflect extra suffering for bereaved families. Argues that such acts are becoming more prevalent and should be discouraged by law. Cites an example from his constituency where tissue matter was found with DNA matching the victim’s, leading to a guilty verdict after a year-long search.
Priti Patel
Con
Witham
Ms Patel expresses concern about certain provisions in clause 6 regarding suspended sentences for those convicted of serious crimes. She argues that victims see their offenders avoiding custody and reoffending, which is unjust and fails to protect public safety. She cites statistics showing high percentages of sexual offenders not receiving immediate custodial sentences (e.g., 43% in one year). Patel calls for stronger sentences and better integration of rehabilitation efforts across government departments.
John Hayes
Con
South Holland and The Deepings
The speaker argues against suspending sentences for crimes attracting less than a year, believing it does not align with public sentiment for harsher punishments. He raises concerns about the effectiveness of tagging as punishment compared to incarceration.
Jerome Mayhew
Con
Broadland and Fakenham
The speaker interjected, suggesting that with technological advancements, there are multiple ways to deprive people of their liberty. He argues for methods that not only serve as punishment but also reduce future reoffending.
Bob Neill
Con
Bromley and Chislehurst
The speaker interjected, clarifying his previous statement about the balancing exercise sentencers undertake. He emphasises considering both the nature of the offence and circumstances of the offender.
Neil O'Brien
Con
Harborough, Oadby and Wigston
Mr. O'Brien strongly welcomes aspects of the Bill such as whole-life orders but is concerned about the presumption against sentences of a year or less. He argues that this measure does not make the public safer, citing flawed statistical analysis by the Ministry of Justice. Mr. O'Brien also notes that short prison sentences are necessary for serious crimes and that other factors like delays in courts and foreign national offenders contribute more to upward pressure on prison places.
Lia Nici
Lab
Great Grimsby
Expresses concerns about repeat offenders exploiting home detention, leading to coerced criminal activity and evasion of community service. Advocates for longer-term and more substantial community service sentences, as well as visible community engagement from offenders.
John Hayes
Con
South Holland and The Deepings
Intervened to support the idea of stigma for criminals among their contemporaries, suggesting it is necessary to stop reoffending.
Richard Drax
Con
South Dorset
Highlights concerns about pressure on probation services and suggests national service as an alternative for young offenders. Advocates for leadership, discipline, and structure to prevent reoffending among troubled youth.
Rob Butler
Con
Henley
Supports the Bill's shift to a presumption of suspending custodial sentences up to 12 months, arguing it still provides punishment and allows for rehabilitation. Emphasises that suspended sentences can be activated if conditions are breached or new offences committed. Welcomes extension of home detention curfew eligibility and suggests better use of GPS tags for certain offenders.
James Daly
Con
Stockport
Critiques the current and proposed wording of clause regarding suspended sentences. Argues that magistrates will still impose custodial sentences due to offender characteristics. Suggests criminal justice focuses on individual circumstances rather than uniform sentencing policies.
Jerome Mayhew
Con
Broadland and Fakenham
Welcomes clause 1 for delivering tough sentences for serious crimes. Supports clause 6 due to evidence suggesting short custodial sentences increase reoffending rates compared to other disposals.
Andy Carter
Lab
Wirral West
Mr. Carter supports the Bill, arguing that it strengthens principles by ensuring serious offenders receive tougher sentences and reduces reoffending rates for lower-risk criminals. He emphasises the importance of breaking the cycle of reoffending through a combination of criminal justice measures and social policies from other government departments such as Work and Pensions and Education. He notes that magistrates already consider suspended sentences or community orders before imposing immediate custody, but it is crucial to retain discretion for cases where neither option is suitable.
Kevin Brennan
Lab
Cardiff West
He criticises the government’s failure to deliver promised prison places and highlights concerns over suspended sentences, probation service capacity, and lack of clarity in releasing offenders early on compassionate grounds. He raises examples such as violent offenders receiving lenient sentences under current proposals.
Robert Neill
Con
Bromley and Chislehurst
He is against politicising sentencing but agrees to scrutinise the bill, focusing on early release of offenders involved in domestic abuse and sexual offences. He raises concerns about prison rehabilitation becoming impossible due to deterioration.
Priti Patel
Con
Witham
She made a thoughtful contribution, agreeing with some points raised by the opposition and expressing interest in exploring further issues such as which offenders are listed for early release.
John Hayes
Con
South Holland and The Deepings
He described the Bill as 'lamentable' and expressed concerns about rehabilitation. He cited poetry to emphasise his view that prisoners should be in prison for punishment, not rehabilitation.
Michael Ellis
Con
Northampton North
He questioned the language of the bill as being 'a bit Edwardian'. He mentioned 20,000 new prison places but challenged this number.
Neil O'Brien
Con
Harborough
He criticised the government's methodology for justifying suspended sentences and highlighted issues with remand in prison due to court backlogs.
Lia Nici
Lab
Great Grimsby
She called for visible community service and expressed concern over taxpayers' money being wasted on poorly operationalised schemes.
Richard Drax
Con
South Dorset
He raised concerns about the pressure on the probation service due to early release provisions. He advocated for the return of national service and borstals, noting their anecdotal effectiveness.
Rob Butler
Con
Aylesbury
He made an extremely thoughtful contribution based on his experience as a magistrate and Justice Minister. He emphasised the importance of sentencing being an art, not a science.
James Daly
Lab
Bury North
He expressed sympathy with some points raised by the opposition regarding short sentences and focused on early years intervention as a way to break the offending cycle.
Gareth Bacon
Con
Orpington
The Minister acknowledges that this is a strong and thoughtful debate. He supports the Bill as it builds on their record of cutting crime, protects the public, and prevents further criminal activity by those who have committed low-level offences.
Roger Gale
Con
Herne Bay and Sandwich
The Member calls for order in the Chamber to allow the Minister to conclude his winding-up speech, highlighting the need for Members who have not participated or heard the debate to listen.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.