---

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Investigative Powers of Prosecutors in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: Code of Practice) Order 2008

Without any disrespect to the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, I am sure that none of us thinks that she is a poor substitution; she is a very fine substitute. I am aware of the concerns raised about Northern Ireland. There has been no evidence in fact that any change has taken place. ARA in Northern Ireland has performed with considerable distinction and efficacy and it is intended that there should be no significant change in that. Every effort is being made to ensure that the efficacy of the procedure and the approach that was adopted before is continued. I know of nothing to indicate that there has been a diminution, although I am very happy to clarify that point. On costs and the recovery of assets, I can reassure the noble Lord that there will be no lack of transparency. I, too, expect these figures to be disclosed in the normal way. I believe that the consultation period was the same length as usual, but because the Home Secretary’s order and code had been so extensively consulted upon, with issues raised and resolved, we were not surprised that there was no response to our consultation. We did not take it amiss because it is identical in terms to the Home Secretary’s order. It is right that we look at comprehensive safeguards and make sure the powers are exercised fairly and proportionately by, for example, making arrangements for a person interviewed under a disclosure order to have access to legal or financial advice and the support of an appropriate adult. That would deal with the sort of issues that were raised in relation to the Home Secretary’s previous code and were put right or amplified in the amended code. I hope that Members of the Committee will find that this is now in good order; I invite them to approve the order in the terms set. On Question, Motion agreed to.