| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Dholakia: I am grateful to the Minister. One of my concerns is that often he speaks on a particular amendment on the basis of advice that he has received. There are three Members on this side of the House with direct police authority experience, including myself. Anyone who has served on a police authority knows of the number of discussions, conflicts and internal difficulties that take place between it and the chief officers. I should have thought that the right way to try to resolve the matter would be to give a responsible police authority the ability to make the appointments they consider appropriate.
I wish only to say to the Minister that we shall certainly get in touch with the police authorities to see whether they can make direct representation to the Home Office in order to see whether there are other means by which this matter can be resolved. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 337A not moved.]
Lord Dholakia moved Amendment No. 338:
- Page 132, line 21, at end insert—
The noble Lord said: Amendment No. 338 is grouped with Amendment No. 339. These are minor amendments but ones which I hope that the Government will have little difficulty in accepting. They provide for the police authorities to determine for themselves the levels of expenses for travel and subsistence to be paid to their members.
In the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001, the Government fulfilled a long-standing commitment to police authorities to deregulate allowances paid to their members. The Home Secretary finally gave up control over the level of allowances and police authorities were given the scope—long available to local authorities—to decide their own allowances. However, because the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions had not then deregulated travel expenses for local councillors, the Home Secretary felt unable to take that further small step.
I understand that the DTLR is now deregulating expenses for local authority members. The Bill provides an opportunity to do likewise for police authority members. I hope that the Government recognise that police authorities are responsible bodies which can be trusted to behave reasonably.
Perhaps I may quickly mention how police authorities have responded to their new freedom to set up their own allowance levels. They have done so responsibly. The Association of Police Authorities set up an independent panel to produce guidance for all
I believe that this shows that police authorities could and should be entrusted by the Government to manage their affairs sensibly without needing to be told by the Home Secretary that they should pay, for example, £6.57 per day subsistence to their members. I hope that the Minister feels able to accept this small but further rationalisation of the current arrangements. I beg to move.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: The noble Lord will be happy when I say that I am about to raise the white flag on this matter. I fully acknowledge that there are differing approaches in legislation for police authorities and local authorities. If the noble Lord is content to withdraw his amendment, which does not actually do what it perhaps seeks to do, we will give fair consideration to the proposition and will undertake some reasonably swift consultation and perhaps bring forward an amendment at a later stage.
The noble Lord has a point here. We are quite happy to give it active consideration.
Lord Dholakia: Especially when the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, moves his head I am always delighted. I am always happy with small miracles from time to time from the Minister. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 339 not moved.]
Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 339A:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendment No. 340 not moved.]
Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 340A:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Schedule 8, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 79 [Short title, commencement and extent]:
[Amendment No. 340AA not moved.]
Lord Rooker moved Amendments Nos. 340B to 341A:
The noble Lord said: With the leave of the Committee I shall move Amendments Nos. 340B to 341A en bloc. I beg to move.
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 79, as amended, agreed to.
Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 341B:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendment No. 341C not moved.]
House resumed: Bill reported with amendments.
Reported from the Unopposed Bill Committee with amendments.
"In Schedule 2 of the 1996 Act for paragraph 25(1), there shall be substituted—
"(1) A police authority may make to its chairman and other members such payments by way of reimbursement of expenses as the authority may determine.""
Page 134, leave out lines 31 and 32 and insert—
"Section 42(6)(a)."
Page 134, line 38, column 2, at beginning insert—
"In section 1— (a) the words after paragraph (b) of subsection (1); and (b) subsection (2)."
Page 71, line 32, leave out "and" and insert "to"
Page 71, line 39, after "provision" insert "(other than one contained in Chapter 1 of Part 4)"
Page 71, line 39, at end insert—
"( ) Section (President of ACPO) also extends to Northern Ireland."
Line 5, after "officers;" insert "to amend the law relating to anti-social behaviour orders;"
12 Mar 2002 : Column 815House adjourned at twenty-eight minutes past ten o'clock.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page