| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Rooker: I am happy to confirm that. I do not want to be critical, but it is sometimes the case that one has an idea and it ends up as a 10-page schedule, which was not quite what one intended. We shall look at the matter again. In order to look at the suggestion of the noble Lord, Lord Renton, we shall have to look at the construction of paragraphs (a) to (f) of subsection (4).
Viscount Bridgeman: My Lords, in the later stages of the Bill we will be interested to know exactly what the guidance comprises. The Minister was concerned that there should be uniform treatment between police forces. It is important that the guidance is fittingly
comprehensive and specific in that way. With those remarks, we shall study the Minister's reply carefully. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 166A not moved.]
Lord Bradshaw moved Amendment No. 166B:
- Page 19, line 46, at end insert—
The noble Lord said: This is another case in which we think that it might be worth stating that consultation should take place under the tripartite arrangement. I beg to move.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: We dealt with this matter in an earlier debate on Amendment No. 165A, so it is really for the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment.
Lord Bradshaw: I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 166C not moved.]
Viscount Bridgeman moved Amendment No. 167:
The noble Viscount said: The amendment would make the one-word substitution of "shall" for "may". The clause deals with matters that are fundamental to the operation of any effective complaints system. Such measures need to be in place, and if they are not to be included in the Bill, there should be an obligation on the Home Secretary to bring forward the necessary regulations. It is not good enough to leave such important matters to the decision of the Secretary of State. I beg to move.
Lord Rooker: The Secretary of State will be able to make a wide range of regulations for procedures to be followed in the new police complaints system. This list simply gives an indication of some provisions that are most likely to be made by such regulations. The Secretary of State will not necessarily make regulations for all of them and he may make some that are not listed in the clause. It is appropriate for him to have discretion over such procedural issues.
Of course, when the Home Secretary makes regulations he will set out the cases in which, and the extent to which, they will apply; otherwise they would probably be unworkable. It is unnecessary to spell that out explicitly for just one matter listed in Clause 22(2) for which regulations may be made, as does Amendment No. 168. I hope that the noble Viscount
Viscount Bridgeman: I understand the Minister's reply and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 168 not moved.]
Viscount Bridgeman moved Amendment No. 169:
The noble Viscount said: In moving the amendment, I wish to speak also to Amendments Nos. 170, 171 and 172. The Minister's earlier reply regarding the National Criminal Intelligence Service covered Amendment No. 170. Amendment No. 171 is a probing amendment. We want to know why a comparable complaints system for Scotland and Northern Ireland should be left to the Secretary of State's decision. It is surely needed as much in those countries as in England and Wales. If the Home Secretary has the power to introduce such a system—it is clear from the clause that he has—he should do so or explain why he is imposing a system on England and Wales that he does not think good enough for the Scots and Irish. I beg to move.
Lord Rooker: Clause 23 deals with the National Criminal Intelligence Service and the National Crime Squad. The amendments, whether probing or not, do not appear to result from any difference in policy. They appear to be designed to achieve the same result as Clause 23 by a different means and seem to relate only to the NCIS aspects of Clause 23. There is something technically defective about them and I am seeking advice and further particulars from my learned friends.
It is important that the National Criminal Intelligence Service and the National Crime Squad are brought fully within the complaints commission regime. There is no question about that. The amendments do not result from any particular change.
As regards Scotland and Northern Ireland, I am at a complete loss for an answer. However, in Scotland devolved matters are for the Scottish Parliament to consider, and Northern Ireland has its own system, which is why it is not covered by the Bill.
Viscount Bridgeman: Perhaps we can take the matter up with the Minister in correspondence outside proceedings on the Bill. In the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendments Nos. 170 to 172 not moved.]
Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 173:
The noble Lord said: This is purely a drafting amendment.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 23, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 24 [Forces maintained otherwise than by police authorities]:
[Amendments Nos. 174 and 175 not moved.]
Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 176:
The noble Lord said: Clause 24 enables the National Criminal Intelligence Service, the National Crime Squad and other forces to be brought under the proceedings corresponding or similar to those provided under Part 2 relating to complaints and misconduct. However, there are issues to do with the conduct of disciplinary proceedings that fall outside Part 2.
There is a provision in Clause 32 which relates to the conduct of disciplinary hearings that gives the complaints commission a right to participate in disciplinary proceedings following an investigation into a complaint or other conduct matter. That provision will enable the commission to present, or instruct counsel in presenting, the case against the person facing charges or to participate or intervene in some other way.
The amendment will enable that provision to be included in procedures for any other non-Home Office force—for example, the British Transport Police—that falls under the provisions of the clause if it is appropriate and desirable. Equivalent provision is made for NCS and NCIS in the new clauses to be inserted. We will come to those amendments on day four of the Committee stage. I beg to move.
Lord Renton: At this late hour, I should perhaps be hesitant about saying what I have to say. The Government cannot be prevented from moving and carrying the amendment. However, the amendment does have implications. It means that the commission will not merely be a commission for receiving and considering complaints; it will be able to use its own initiative to investigate matters that have not been referred to it. I do not say that that is wrong, but I think the Minister should bear in mind that that is an important consideration which will make the work of the commission even more of a whole-time job than otherwise it would be.
Lord Rooker: The noble Lord, Lord Renton, is absolutely right. In the debate on Second Reading we dealt with the whole Bill. Many issues were raised, some of which were not contained in the Bill. References were made to the provisions of Part 2
There is no question that there has been a good degree of consensus in the Committee about the proposal for a new complaints commission. However, no one has made a speech formally setting out the power of and the work to be undertaken by this authority. At times I have tried to use my extensive notes to put points on to the record in order to make it absolutely clear that the commission will not be the Police Complaints Authority. That was clearly indicated earlier, given the powers conferred under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
The commission will be a powerful organisation, independent, in charge, able to initiate its own activities and able to conduct investigations in a way that the Police Complaints Authority has never been able to do.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 24, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 25 [Conduct of the Commission's staff]:
"( ) Before making any such regulations, the Secretary of State shall consult—
(a) persons whom he considers to represent the interests of police authorities in England and Wales; and
(b) persons whom he considers to represent the interests of chief officers of police of forces maintained by those authorities."
10 p.m.
Page 20, line 3, leave out "may" and insert "shall"
Page 21, line 31, leave out "For" and insert "At the end of"
Page 22, line 11, at end insert "there shall be substituted—"
Page 23, line 11, at end insert—
"( ) An agreement or order under this section in relation to any body of constables may contain provision for enabling the Commission to bring and conduct, or otherwise participate or intervene in, any proceedings which are identified by the agreement or order as disciplinary proceedings in relation to members of that body of constables."
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page