Tuesday Volume 519 23 November 2010 No. 77 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Tuesday 23 November 2010 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2010 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through the Office of Public Sector Information website at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail:
[email protected] 147 23 NOVEMBER 2010 148 scrapped entirely. It is critical of the way they work, and House of Commons it is clear that they are not working as intended, but the Government are hoping to take a balanced view. We Tuesday 23 November 2010 must obviously protect the public against dangerous people and the risk of serious offences being committed on release. On the other hand, about 10% of the entire The House met at half-past Two o’clock prison population will be serving IPP sentences by 2015 at the present rate of progress, and we cannot keep piling up an ever-mounting number of people who are PRAYERS likely never to be released. Mr Jack Straw (Blackburn) (Lab): Does the Secretary [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] of State accept that it is inherent in both life sentences and the concept of IPP sentences, which are widely supported throughout the Chamber, that many prisoners Oral Answers to Questions will be tariff-expired because the idea is that they are not released until it is judged that it is safe to do so? Does he also accept that although it is true that the precise construction of the clauses was inappropriate JUSTICE and led to some very short tariffs, since the changes that I introduced in 2008, the number of new IPP sentenced The Secretary of State was asked— prisoners has dropped by 50% from about 1,500 to under 1,000 a year? Would it not be far better for public Imprisonment for Public Protection safety to let that work through instead of prematurely releasing such prisoners? 1.