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

Follow that. I have been trying to avoid saying something like ““Wayne Rooney”” all day, but never mind. My major problem with this remains my concern about the Government moving so much into secondary legislation and away from primary legislation. I thought that Amendment No. 40, tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Henig, was particularly adept at ensuring that there was another way of clearly setting out what the Government rightly want to set out—that is, the functions of the police authority—but doing so in primary legislation, without having to go down the secondary route. Her amendment has the advantage of enabling other functions to be added later through secondary legislation. Here we have a clear statement of what I believe the functions of a good police authority should be. I hear what the Minister says about some possibility of movement on some other issues and the Government’s readiness to talk between now and Report. We will be doing a lot of talking, but we are going to need a lot of action, too. At this stage, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendments Nos. 40 to 46 not moved.]


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
683 c705-6 
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