Police Reform Bill [Lords]

[back to previous text]

Mr. Hawkins: As the hon. Member for Lewes says, the matter was raised in another place. Given that such duties were included under the 1996 Act, it would be helpful to have the words in the amendment in the Bill, or at least something along those lines. The hon. Gentleman has reasonably said that there might be other ways of dealing with the matter, and he and I will be equally interested to hear what the Under-Secretary has to say on whether there is any good reason why we the Bill should not have something equivalent to what was in the 1996 Act.

Mr. Ainsworth: I cannot believe that the hon. Member for Lewes is seriously trying to persuade me to go along with his argument, otherwise he would have said that it was a probing amendment and his intentions would have been clear. That joke was not worth making, was it?

The amendment would place an obligation on the police authorities and inspectors of constabulary to keep themselves informed about the working of the clause. In relation to the operation of the complaints system, police authorities, inspectors of constabulary and, indeed, chief officers are already placed under such an obligation by clause 14(1) and (2). I understand that the concern is to enable police authorities to get information about complaints-related matters. That would help police authorities with their wider functions, one of which is the function to maintain an efficient and effective police force under section 6 of the Police Act 1996.

However, the wider duties imposed on police authorities already necessarily imply incidental powers to see relevant documents and materials. It is for police authorities and chief officers to agree arrangements for the provision of such information to police authorities under the powers. It is important that police authorities hold their chief officers to account for the direction and control of the force, and information on complaints might be an important tool in doing that.

However, I see no reason to single out information about complaints, and I am not persuaded that there is a gap in the police authority's ability to call for information that must be plugged. We have not been presented with evidence of the problem raised by the

Column Number: 174

hon. Gentleman, and an amendment that referred to a police authority's duties on the maintenance of an efficient and effective police force would limit the obligation on police authorities. Police authorities have other duties—those on best value, for example. The amendment would impose no obligation on a police authority to keep itself informed about the workings of clause 13 when carrying out such other duties. That is why clause 14 refers simply to a police authority maintaining a police force.

The amendment is unnecessary and would not add anything to the Bill. Although I agree with what I perceive to be its spirit, I hope that the hon. Gentleman can see that the point is already provided for and that the amendment could narrow the remit. I ask him to withdraw the amendment.

Norman Baker: The Under-Secretary is illogical. First he says that police authorities have incidental powers and the amendment is therefore not required. Then he says that because the amendment refers to only the maintenance of an efficient and effective police force, police authorities cannot deal with best value. He cannot have it both ways—either they have the general powers or not. The amendment is an attempt to ensure that the requirement on police authorities is not weakened from the standard in the Police Act 1996, which is my fear. The Under-Secretary failed to deal with that point, but it is almost 5 o'clock and no doubt their Lordships will wish to reflect on the matter at a later stage. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 13, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 14 and 15 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 16

Provision of information to the Commission

Mr. Paice: I beg to move amendment No. 123, in page 16, line 8, at end insert—

    '( ) every employer with whom arrangements have been made under section 36.'.

The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to take the following amendments: No. 124, in page 16, line 13, after 'officer', insert

    'and of every employer with whom arrangements have been made under section 36'.

No. 125, in page 16, line 28, after 'officer', insert

    'or employer with whom arrangements have been made under section 36'.

Mr. Paice: Even though the Government have resisted our determination to include accredited community safety schemes in the commission's remit, it is important for the employers in such schemes to have a responsibility to provide information to the commission if required to do so. The people involved may be party to an incident that is the subject of a complaint. They may be accompanying a police officer against whom a complaint is made or involved in another aspect of an incident. They should be required to provide information to the commission. That puts the argument in a nutshell. I hope that even if the

Column Number: 175

Under-Secretary does not reply, he will consider that point.

Mr. Ainsworth: The amendments would place—

It being Five o'clock, The Chairman proceeded, pursuant to Sessional Order D [28 June 2001] and the Order of the Committee [23 May 2002], to put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.

Amendment negatived.

The Chairman then proceeded to put forthwith the Questions necessary to dispose of the business to be concluded at that time.

Clauses 16 to 20 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 21


Amendment made: No. 168, in page 21, line 47, at end insert—

Column Number: 176

    '(kk) for applying the provisions of this Part with such modifications as the Secretary of State thinks fit in cases where a complaint or conduct matter relates to the conduct of a person—

    (i) whose identity is unascertained at the time at which a complaint is made or a conduct matter is recorded;

    (ii) whose identity is not ascertained during, or subsequent to, the investigation of a complaint or recordable conduct matter;'.—[Mr. Ainsworth.]

Clause 21, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 22 to 27 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Further consideration adjourned.—[Mr. Heppell.]

Adjourned accordingly at one minute past Five o'clock till Tuesday 18 June at half-past Four o'clock.

The following Members attended the Committee:
Widdecombe, Miss Ann (Chairman)
Ainsworth, Mr. Bob
Baker, Norman
Brooke, Annette
Challen, Mr.
Follett, Barbara
Gillan, Mrs.
Hawkins, Mr.
Heppell, Mr.
Irranca-Davies, Huw
Johnson, Mr. Boris
Jones, Mr. Kevan
Lucas, Ian
Mercer, Patrick
Munn, Ms
Osborne, Mr. George
Paice, Mr.
Prentice, Bridget
Stoate, Dr.

Previous Contents

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries ordering index

©Parliamentary copyright 2002
Prepared 13 June 2002