I beg to move amendment No. 726, in

schedule 15, page 224, line 8, after 'held', insert 'part-time or full-time'.

The schedule addresses the membership of the Parole Board. The amendment is a minor one; it sets out who should be members of the board. It would be wise to widen the provisions of paragraph 2(2)(a) to include a person who holds or has held judicial office part-time or full-time. I say that because some distinguished silks have never wanted to take full-time judicial office. They might enjoy their lives as silks so much that they do not want to do so. When they retire they are just as distinguished as many who hold full-time judicial office. They might have sat part-time over many years and be just as experienced as many full-time judges. It might be worth considering part-time judicial office holders as well as full-time ones when choosing Parole Board members. This is a harmless amendment. I am not in much doubt that it will find favour with the Government.

The amendment is so harmless that the Bill already provides for the proposal. The schedule provides for both full-time and part-time members of the judiciary to be appointed as members of the Parole Board. Indeed, on occasion, recorders have been appointed, although at present the board's members are either High Court or circuit judges. The situation that the hon. Gentleman wants to facilitate has existed in the past and the Bill's wording will permit it in the future.

I am most grateful. This has been a worthwhile debate, not least—I am desperately thinking of a reason why it has been worth while—because people outside the building read the reports of our proceedings. Those who might have found the provision unclear—foolishly, because it is so obvious—would not be unclear now. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Schedule 15 agreed to.