I beg to move amendment No. 606, in

clause 131, page 75, line 24, after first 'offence', insert

'and the circumstances of the offender'.

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments:

No. 607, in

clause 131, page 75, line 33, after first 'offence', insert

'and the circumstances of the offender'.

No. 616, in

clause 140, page 78, line 20, after 'offence', insert 'and the offender'.

My view of the clause is that when a community sentence is passed, the court will have to take into account the seriousness of the offence, but it should in every case specifically take the offender's circumstances into account. In practice, I suppose that one of the most popular community orders is a community punishment order, formerly known as a community service order, by which a court imposes on a defendant a requirement to perform, typically, 140 hours of unpaid work for the benefit of the community.

In reaching its decision the court has regard, of course, to the seriousness of the offence. However, a discussion often follows about whether the order is appropriate to the particular circumstances of the defendant. For example, some defendants are in work and some are not. Some work shifts; others do not. Some have obligations at certain times of the week—such as Friday prayers for a Muslim, or sporting activities on a Sunday for some people. Careful consideration of the circumstances of the offender is essential before a community service order is made.

The Minister may tell me that that consideration is fully catered for in subsection (2)(a), but I want to stress my view that there is no harm in setting out in statute that the offender's circumstances should be taken into account before a community service or similar order is passed, so that the offender will be able to cope with the order and comply with it properly, despite his or her domestic circumstances. I can see no harm in adding the words

''and the circumstances of the offender''

and if the Minister also thinks that there is no harm in adding them, I hope that he will accept the amendment.

The hon. Gentleman, who raises an important point, anticipated my response correctly. There is certainly no harm in making the point in the statute, which is why the Bill does precisely that in subsection (2)(a), under which

''the particular requirement or requirements forming part of the community order must be such as, in the opinion of the court, is, or taken together are, the most suitable for the offender''.

That provides the opportunity to deal with precisely those matters that the hon. Gentleman raised. He mentioned religious beliefs, and clause 197, headed ''Requirement to avoid conflict with religious beliefs, etc'', specifically covers that point.

As to subsection (2)(b), it is important that restrictions on liberty imposed by the order should bear a relationship to the seriousness of the offence, which would include the effect on the victim. For example, an exclusion requirement, under which the defendant would have to stay away from the victim, should be governed by an assessment of the nature of the offence and its impact on the victim—but not really by the offender's personal circumstances.

The Minister has been very helpful. This short debate has reinforced the point that the circumstances of the offender are a relevant factor. I am grateful to the Minister for his comments and I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 131 ordered to stand part of the Bill.