Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more


  • Comment
Lord chancellor Irvine has issued a warning to cabinet colleagues that measures proposed by home secretary David Bl...
Lord chancellor Irvine has issued a warning to cabinet colleagues that measures proposed by home secretary David Blunkett to force the parents of wayward children to take compulsory classes could fall foul of European human rights legislation, reported The Sunday Telegraph (p4).

In a letter to the prime minister and cabinet colleagues, Lord Irvine said he supported in principle the proposals for parenting orders but that they risked being attacked as an 'extreme example of the nanny state'. Under the new measures, the home secretary would require parents of peristent truants or children engaged in anti-social behaviour to attend residential parenting courses.

Tony Blair has backed the measures as part of a broad campaign to crack down on yobbish behaviour in the street.

However, the lord chancellor, who represents Britain's judges in parliament, has told the cabinet: 'I think we need to recognise that the change is, in fact, quite radical. There are plainly human rights implications here under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Family Life). Though the prevention of offending and protection of others might justify the proposals, some will regard a court order imposing a residence requirement on a person who has not necessarily been convicted of any offence as draconian or an extreme example of the nanny state'.

Lord Irvine has locked horns with Mr Blunkett in the past, defending judges against criticisms of the home secretary, who has become increasingly frustrated with the judiciary for allegedly overriding the intentions of Parliament and frustrating the government's law and order strategy. In his letter, Lord Irvine also raised the question of who would care for children while parents undertook training.
  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.