| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Bradshaw: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. We have every sympathy with the small person who suffers damage. We have little sympathy with the large-scale insurance claims that result and fall to be met by police authorities, which are presumably receiving claims in proxy for the Government for something for which they are often not responsible. Having said that, and hoping that the Government come forward with proposals shortly, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 278:
- Page 142, line 1, leave out sub-paragraph (6) and insert—
The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving the amendment, I speak also to Amendment No. 283. The purpose of the amendments is to ensure that accredited persons, in addition to designated persons, have regard to any relevant provisions of codes of practice issued under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 in the exercise or performance of the powers and duties conferred or imposed on them by that designation or accreditation.
Amendment No. 278 works by creating a new subsection (9A) of Section 67 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 to do that. Amendment No. 283 is a consequential amendment to Amendment No. 278 regarding Section 67(10) of that Act. Amendment No. 283 simply has the effect of repealing the word "or"—it is a consequential amendment. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Harris of Richmond moved Amendment No. 279:
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving the amendment, I speak also to Amendment No. 281. We have returned to the amendments because we were disappointed that the Government did not feel able to respond more positively and at least offer to give the matter some thought. The amendment is not intended to give police authorities extensive powers to demand reports from all and sundry, nor to force people to co-operate. The intention behind the amendment is very different to that which has been placed on it by the Government. That may be due to deficiencies in the drafting, but we are more than happy to discuss with the Minister how we may secure an amendment that would be acceptable to the Government.
The aim of the amendment is in line with the wider aims of the Government's reform programme. It is designed to enable police authorities to be proactive about improving their oversight and management of the force by calling on professional assistance and advice—whether from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary or auditors—and working with those bodies to drive up police performance. Police authorities want to raise their game, just as the reform programme seeks to raise the game of the rest of the police service.
We are nearly there. I turn to Amendment No. 281. The Minister may be sick to death of hearing about police authorities and may feel that they have caused him a lot of work during the passage of this Bill. However, he told us in Committee that he was an
The purpose of the amendment is to untie the hands of police authorities so that they can employ the right staff and resources to ensure that local people get efficient and effective police services. Police authorities are extremely frugal bodies. The Minister need have no concern that the amendment will detract in any way from money spent on operational policing. The debates that we have had on pensions are evidence of the commitment of police authorities to that.
In Committee, we said that this was a minor amendment aimed at helping police authorities to do their job better. The Minister suggested that the Association of Police Authorities have discussions with his department, and some preliminary discussions have taken place. I hope that if we are unable to resolve the issue today the Minister will agree that further discussions should take place before Third Reading.
The Minister has said many times in our debates that he wants to support police authorities and forces. I hope that that is exactly what he will do by making these small changes. I beg to move.
Lord Rooker: My Lords, I have learnt to love the police authorities, but, sometimes, you have to be cruel to be kind. I cannot accept the amendment proposed by the noble Baroness. Amendment No. 279 refers to the crime and disorder reduction partnerships. The noble Baroness knows that we tabled amendments, which were agreed, that will make the police authorities responsible for ensuring crime and disorder strategies under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. There is no statutory reference to crime and disorder reduction partnerships, but the new role as responsible bodies should ensure that the partnerships have access to information.
Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary is responsible to the Secretary of State. It is important not to blur that distinction. It is not, for example, responsible to chief constables or commissioners of police. As noble Lords have said, that does not hinder the flow of information to forces. That point was well made by my noble friend Lord Bassam of Brighton in Committee.
Amendment No. 281 is, I think, exactly the same. My noble friend Lord Bassam of Brighton said that we understood the argument behind the amendment. It is important that police authorities are appropriately resourced to perform their functions of setting a budget and appointing senior officers and in relation to the local policing plan and best value. However, as we have explained, the provision that requires civil staff to be under the direction of the chief officer of police is necessary to ensure the efficient and effective policing of an area.
The necessary corollary of that is that the chief officer should be involved in decisions that may lessen the staff resources at his disposal. If there is a disagreement, it is
I have no doubt that we have not heard the end of the matter, and I suspect that it will be pursued in the other place. As for this place, I hope that the noble Baroness will not press the amendment.
Baroness Harris of Richmond: My Lords, I am disappointed again that the Minister does not feel that he can accept two small amendments.
One amendment relates to the general functions of police authorities and support for what they do. When the police authority that I chaired for a number of years wanted to employ an extra clerk or sub-clerk, we went through hoops with the police force, especially—to my regret—with the Police Federation, who said that the police authority took money out of its pocket to look after itself. We had long arguments. It is disappointing when an amendment is meant to say to police authorities that we understand that they need support in what they are trying to do. After all, the Government gave them statutory duties.
I urge the Government to consider the matter again. Even if they cannot accept both amendments, they should consider accepting one of them. Police authorities should be sensible and frugal. It is important that they have sufficient proper professional people to help them do their jobs effectively. I hope that the Minister will consider that matter and, regrettably, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
( ) In subsection (7B) of section 67 of that Act (limited effect of modification of code of practice), in paragraph (c) for "order" there shall be substituted "code".
( ) After subsection (9) of that section there shall be inserted—
"(9A) Persons on whom powers are conferred by—
(a) any designation under section 34 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (c. 00) (designated employees of a police authority or Service Authority), or
(b) any accreditation under section 36 of that Act (accreditation under community safety accreditation schemes),
shall have regard to any relevant provision of a code of practice to which this section applies in the exercise or performance of the powers and duties conferred or imposed on them by that designation or accreditation."
( ) In subsection (10) of that section (failure to comply with codes not to render a person liable to civil or criminal proceedings), after paragraph (b) there shall be inserted ", or
(c) of a person designated or accredited under section 34 or 36 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (c. 00) to have regard to any relevant provision of such a code in the exercise or performance of the powers and duties conferred or imposed on him by that designation or accreditation,"."
Page 143, line 8, at end insert—
"In section 6 of the 1996 Act (general functions of police authorities), after subsection (5) there shall be inserted—
"( ) A police authority for any police area shall have power to call for information or reports from Her Majesty's Inspectors of Constabulary, the Audit Commission or any crime and disorder reduction partnership within the authority's area.""
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page