Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Anelay of St Johns (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 20 June 2006. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Police and Justice Bill.


Police and Justice Bill

I am grateful to all noble Lords who took part in this short debate. It was intended to be a gentle, probing amendment to open the discussions. As ever, I can rely on my noble friend Lord Waddington to put us on the right track very early on. I am grateful for the way in which the noble Baroness responded; she has given my noble friend Lord Waddington the opportunity to consider further and perhaps return to this at a future Committee sitting. I point out to my noble friend that he might wish at some stage to look at an amendment after Clause 20, Amendment No. 115. It is an admirable amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, to which I have added my name. It was proposed by the organisation for guide dogs and requires a new clause on the collection of data. It states:"““The Secretary of State shall collect and interpret data on reporting of offences which manifest prejudice based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity or other group characteristic.””" That is an important matter to which we will need to return in a constructive manner. I also accept with alacrity the Minister’s offer to provide us with the note setting out the relative activities and roles that are played by the organisations; that would be helpful. As the noble Baroness, Lady Harris of Richmond, said earlier, colleagues in another place were promised a detailed regulatory impact assessment on this part of the Bill. I direct the Minister’s attention to that, because we still have not had it. I hope that the Government might think further and provide that by the time we get to Report. We have only a very limited RIA at the moment. I take on board what the noble Baroness said about there being two overall different approaches between the organisations. One, the agency, will be looking at improving standards, and the other will be looking more at monitoring. I agree with my noble friend, the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, and the noble Baroness, Lady Harris, that there is a recipe for confusion. None of us wants that, let alone the new agency. It is something that we will need to consider further as the agency picks up its new role and, we hope, operates successfully. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
683 c653 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Accountability Crimes against the person Costs Association of Chief Police Officers Equality Finance Homosexuality Police Powers Public appointments Racially aggravated offences Mergers Police authorities Standards Violence National Policing Improvement Agency Association of Police Authorities Police Standards Unit Hate crime
Legislation
Police and Justice Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk