---

Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill

moved Amendment No. 7:"Page 17, line 32, at end insert—" ““(1A)   But— (a)   a person who fails without reasonable excuse to comply with a requirement imposed under section 32(2) or 33(2) by a constable in England and Wales or Northern Ireland otherwise than in relation to a reserved matter (within the meaning of the Scotland Act 1998) shall not be treated as having committed the offence in Scotland (but has committed the offence in England and Wales or Northern Ireland), and (b)   a person who fails without reasonable excuse to comply with a requirement which is imposed under section 32(3) for the purpose of complying with a requirement to which paragraph (a) applies— (i)   shall not be treated as having committed the offence in Scotland, but (ii)   shall be treated as having committed the offence in England and Wales or Northern Ireland.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, this amendment seeks to ensure that Clause 34 does not breach the Sewel convention. As noble Lords will be aware, Clause 34 makes it an offence to fail to comply with a police request for passenger, crew, service or freight information under Clauses 32 or 33. Carriers will commit an offence unless they can prove that they had a reasonable excuse for not supplying the information. Passengers and crew members will also be guilty of an offence if they fail to provide information to the carrier without reasonable excuse. To comply with the Sewel convention, the police in Scotland can only require passenger, crew, service or freight information for police purposes that are or relate to reserved matters within the meaning of the Scotland Act 1998. The police in England, Wales and Northern Ireland can require passenger, crew, service or freight information for any police purposes. The reason for this difference—I am conscious that the noble Baroness, Lady Carnegy of Lour, and the noble Earl, Lord Mar and Kellie, are present in the Chamber—is that police powers are in general a matter devolved to the Scottish Parliament A concern has recently arisen that Clause 34 is insufficiently clear as to whether a passenger or crew member who refuses to provide information to a carrier in Scotland in response to a request from a police constable in England, Wales or Northern Ireland for police purposes, would have committed an offence under English or Scots law. If the request had been made for police purposes, which would, in Scotland, not be police purposes in relation to reserved matters, and the failure to comply was an offence committed under Scots law, this would mean that a UK statute would be creating an offence in Scottish law in relation to matters that are not reserved—namely, general police purposes—thereby breaching the Sewel convention. This amendment seeks to put the matter beyond doubt. With that rather technical explanation, which is necessary for Hansard purposes, I beg to move.