Sentencing Council: Guidelines Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Justice

Sentencing Council: Guidelines

Baroness Miller of Hendon Excerpts
Wednesday 20th November 2013

(10 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Asked by
Baroness Miller of Hendon Portrait Baroness Miller of Hendon
- Hansard - -



To ask Her Majesty’s Government what sentencing guidelines are issued by the Sentencing Council to advise judges on the choice of the imposition of either consecutive or concurrent sentences on persons guilty of multiple offences.

Lord McNally Portrait The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord McNally) (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Sentencing Council issued the Offences Taken into Consideration and Totality guidelines in June 2012. They state that a concurrent sentence would be appropriate where,

“offences arise out of the same incident or facts”,

and where,

“there is a series of offences of the same … kind”.

A consecutive sentence would be appropriate where,

“offences arise out of unrelated facts”,

or where the offence,

“qualifies for a statutory minimum sentence and concurrent sentences would improperly undermine that minimum”.

Baroness Miller of Hendon Portrait Baroness Miller of Hendon (Con)
- Hansard - -

I thank the Minister for his reply, but does he not agree that perception is everything? The Sentencing Council admits that:

“Concurrent sentences are sometimes thought to mean that an offender is getting away with some offences”.

Why, indeed, should an offender convicted of, say, causing death by dangerous driving, driving while disqualified and driving while uninsured not serve separate consecutive sentences for each offence, so that justice can be seen to be done? Is the Minister aware that justice is not served when the system seems to operate like a supermarket: “Commit one crime and get another one free”?

Lord McNally Portrait Lord McNally
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I appreciate that sometimes the way in which sentences are reported can cause that reaction—but the courts are required to impose a sentence that reflects all the offending behaviour in every case, for both single and multiple offences. With concurrent sentences, the guidelines make it clear that the courts should normally aggravate the primary sentence to reflect the additional offences. These guidelines are about ensuring that the courts apply those principles consistently.