---

Serious Crime Bill [HL]

We have excluded the bookmaker but whom do we include? Do we include the spouse, the partner, the business partner, the employer, or the employees? Would those people have to show a significant adverse effect of the order? That would be necessary before an application to vary or to discharge would be entertained. It means that an applicant walks into a court and a judge says, ““You are not a business partner, a spouse or a partner so I shall not even entertain your application for variation or discharge””. It is a threshold test; it is very odd. Normally a judge would entertain an application and hear it on its merits, but here he is not even allowed to entertain it if the person concerned comes into this vague category of someone who is not significantly adversely affected by the order. Let us put the bookmaker to one side and find out who this is aimed at. Who are the third parties? People in this country do not go around talking about third parties, saying, ““I am a third party””; they say, ““I am a wife””, ““I am a husband””, ““I am a partner”” or ““I do a job””. In putting forward these sorts of clauses, are those the people whom the noble Baroness has in mind? What does ““significant”” mean? Does it mean that they have to show that they are losing all their income or half of it, or if they are a spouse that their whole means of support has gone and that they would not qualify for certain benefits? What is it all about?