Mr.
Dhanda: In speaking to amendment No. 121, I shall address
amendments Nos. 120, 122, 123, 133 and 134 as well. Amendments Nos. 121
and 122 deal with the process for automatic barring and would make it
subject to consideration by the IBB. The role of the IBB is not to
exercise any discretion in deciding whether to bar a person who has
been referred by the Secretary of State. If the Secretary of State is
satisfied that the prescribed criteria apply, he must refer the
individual to the IBB, which must include the person on the list. There
is no useful purpose to be served by asking the IBB to consider whether
someone who has been convicted of one of the offencesfor
example, rape of a childshould be barred. We are clear that
barring should automatically follow the
conviction.
Sarah
Teather: Has any consideration been given to what would
happen if there were an administrative
error at some point in the process of referral? Obviously, there is no
appeal process, so what would happen if somebody were included by
mistake on the barred
list?
Mr.
Dhanda: Information will go to the IBB via the courts and
Criminal Records Bureau process and will indicate that somebody had
already been convicted. The hon. Lady proposes an interesting set of
circumstances that I cannot envisage arising. I am happy to write to
her, but it would be highly irregular were that situation to
occur. Amendments Nos.
120 and 123 propose a code of practice for the IBB in taking its
barring decisions. They appear to be intended to ensure that broadly
the decision-making processes of the IBB are specified in a code of
practice, and that the code is subject to consultation. Criteria would
be prescribed for automatic inclusion in the
list. The criteria
that may be prescribed are set out in paragraph 19 of schedule 2 and
include cautions and convictions for certain offences, inclusion on an
overseas list or being subject to an overseas order or direction.
Following consultation, the offences will be included in regulations
subject to the affirmative resolution procedure, as I believe was made
clear in another place. Automatic barring without the right to make
representations will result from the most serious sexual offences
against children and vulnerable adults, such as rape, sexual assault of
a child under 13 in the case of the childrens barred list, or
inducement, threat or deception to procure sexual activity with a
person with a mental disorder in the case of the adults barred
list. It being One
oclock, The Chairman adjourned
the Committee without Question put, pursuant to the Standing
Order. Adjourned
till this day at Four
oclock.
|