---

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, my noble friend is right in his summary of the law. The police have power to apply to a local authority to ban a procession, but they do not have such a power to apply to ban a rally, although they can apply to the local authority to impose conditions on a rally. The law is as it is because in the 1980s the Government took the view that while some rallies are more difficult to police, and therefore are more likely to bring trouble, problems do not arise to the same extent in relation to static rallies.

We take the view that one should intervene with civil liberties as little as possible. In relation to the events in August in Trafalgar Square to which my noble friend referred, a local by-law was used to ban it. The Metropolitan Police did not make an application, as they could have, to impose conditions on the rally; yes, there was a right-wing counter demonstration; there was some disorder; but it was not considered sufficient to justify even an application for conditions.

8 Oct 2002 : Column 137

Although, as I have said, we shall keep the situation under review, we consider that the correct approach is to balance the intrusion against civil liberties with what is necessary for public protection.

Lord Waddington: My Lords, I recognise the legitimate concerns of the noble Lord, Lord Janner, but does the Minister appreciate that many are concerned that our law on public order can already be used to prevent people exercising their right of free speech in a public place? They were amazed when, for example, a man voicing his views about homosexuality was prosecuted rather than those abusing him and throwing missiles at him.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I am not sure to what incident the noble Lord refers. As I made clear in my Answer, we regard the right way to approach such matters as being to intrude on civil liberties as little as possible. That is the approach that we currently take in relation to the powers of the police to apply to ban rallies. We do not believe that that is necessary or appropriate. I shall write to the noble Lord about the particular incident to which he has referred. I am sorry that I do not know the detail of it.

Lord Renton: My Lords, in further considering this matter, and with deep respect to my noble friend, will the Government bear in mind that the police already have more than enough to do, are undermanned in many parts of the country, and that their time should not be taken up in giving protection to small gangs of people who are behaving in an anti-racial way or stimulating disorder?

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, the obligation of the police is to ensure that public order is preserved. That is a very important role of the police. I am happy to tell noble Lords that there are more policemen in this country than ever before, indeed since records began in 1921.

Lord Dholakia: My Lords, I support what was said by the noble Lord, Lord Janner. Does the Minister accept that the recent demonstration by the fundamentalists and the right-wing extremists was obnoxious? Does he further accept that at present the police have powers simply to react to situations rather than to ban marches proactively? Therefore, would such a move require a change in the law?

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I entirely agree with the condemnation of bodies whose aim is to provoke racial hatred, but for the reasons that I gave at the outset, I do not believe that there is any evidence to suggest that it is necessary to give the police power to apply to a local authority for a ban in relation to a rally. I believe that we should move to that stage only if there is evidence that it is necessary to preserve public order. Although I have indicated that the matter is kept under constant review, at the current time I do not believe that there is a basis for saying that that is the right course.

Lord Clarke of Hampstead: My Lords, does my noble and learned friend have any plans to issue

8 Oct 2002 : Column 138

further guidance to police in localities such as east Lancashire where neo-fascist organisations are often provocative in saying what they will do? The police, with the local authorities, have a difficult time working out what powers they have. The previous question referred to the police being proactive rather than reactive. Are any guidance notes being reissued to help with the situation?

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I am well aware of the issue to which my noble friend refers; namely, the extent to which racist groups can provoke difficulties, particularly in the east Lancashire area. In that respect one of the most important points is that the local authority and the police stay closely in touch with each other and have a joint approach to dealing with the issue. I do not know the position on specific guidance so perhaps I can write to my noble friend on that point.

Criminal Records Bureau

2.57 p.m.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale asked Her Majesty's Government:

On what date and for what reason the Criminal Records Bureau decided to change the method of data processing of applications for enhanced disclosure from that originally specified.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, the original model for the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) was based on a call-centre, telephone-based and online application route, with capacity to deal with individual paper applications. That arrangement was expected to be convenient for applicants and would reduce errors. It was also in line with the Government's e-government objectives. However, during extensive consultation with registered bodies and employers from January to June 2001, there was strong pressure from them to introduce a full-scale paper-based application. Consequently, in May 2001, the CRB agreed to introduce more extensive capacity to deal with paper-based applications. That was negotiated with a contractor between May and October 2001.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale: My Lords, in thanking the Minister for that response, I ask him to explain why the Home Office and the Criminal Records Bureau accepted the ICT system from Capita designed to deal with most applications by phone before asking its known customers how they wanted them dealt with, which turned out to be by paper. After similar failures in IT contracts signed off by the Home Office, the Prison Service, the Passport Agency and the Immigration Service, to name but a few, should there not be an immediate review of procurement practice to ensure that systems are fit for the purpose before the start button is pressed and the results of such a review published?

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, in regard to the focus on a call-centre, telephone-based approach,

8 Oct 2002 : Column 139

both the contractor and the CRB thought that was appropriate, but before they went live there was detailed consultation with the clients of what was to become the CRB. That took place between January and June 2001, which was approximately nine months before the process went live. It was sensible to hold that consultation before it went live. It led to the discussions between the contractor and the CRB during the period that I indicated in my original Answer and the change that was then introduced in relation to the system of dealing with applications.

On the problems about ICT contracts generally, yes, my noble friend is absolutely right. In both public sector ICT contracts and private sector ICT contracts, there are frequently great difficulties in making them work at an early stage. In organisations such as the Government, but also in the private sector, we have a huge amount to learn about how they are best introduced. We have an Office of Government Commerce and a series of NAO reports looking at that kind of issue. We have a huge number of lessons to learn. But please do not be under the illusion that this relates only to the public sector. Anyone in this House who has been engaged in the introduction of major ICT contracts in the private sector may well have experience of similar problems.

The Lord Bishop of Portsmouth: My Lords, the importance of such disclosures is not questioned; it is the process. Are the Government aware of the chaos that has resulted in the appointment of teachers, clergy and all kinds of voluntary workers such as youth leaders and Sunday school teachers—and the anxiety that it causes, not just to the people concerned but to the communities around them? We need to have some action to make the process speedier.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I am fully aware of the particular problems referred to by the right reverend Prelate. The aim of introducing the CRB was that there should be reliable vetting of people who work with children and vulnerable people. I do not think that anyone in the House would disagree with that outcome. The process of introducing that has been problematic, particularly in relation to the ICT. It has been running since March, but it is not running properly at the moment. A great deal of effort is being put in to make it right, in particular, by bringing in three outside independent people to look at the system and to make sure that it is being done in the best possible way to reach the conclusion that I know the right reverend Prelate wants. Please bear with us in relation to that. Do not be unrealistic about how long these things take to get right. We all know the aim that we want. Please bear with us to get to the aim that we are after.

---