Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Harris of Richmond (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 22 June 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Policing and Crime Bill.


Policing and Crime Bill

I added my name to the amendments because I completely agree with them. I have been interested to hear what the noble Baroness, Lady Henig, had to say. My question was why the senior appointments panel needs to be a statutory body. Once again, the Secretary of State will be granted new powers to make arrangements or orders about the make-up, functions and proceedings of this new body. It is the primary responsibility of police authorities to appoint their chief officers, after which the Secretary of State approves, or otherwise, that appointment. Therefore, I am extremely concerned that the balance of responsibility for ensuring that police authorities get the right chief of police for their area could be skewed away from them and towards the Secretary of State. The noble Baroness, Lady Henig, clearly pointed that out. If that is not political interference with local decision-making, I do not know what is. This panel must have a genuine tripartite balance in its membership. As it stands, the wording is so wide that it could allow a future Home Secretary to appoint more government representatives and so upset that very delicate balance. Government representatives should not outnumber police community appointees, so I ask the Minister to look again at this and ensure that the wording is tightened. I have spent many years on policing matters. I have gone through many interviews with chief officers—from chief constables through to deputies and assistants—and so have a wide-ranging knowledge of how they are selected to come before a police authority and what then happens when they do. As the noble Baroness, Lady Henig, said, the Secretary of State could say, "No, I do not particularly want that person to go before a selection panel of police authorities". That simply is not good news. A transparent process is what is needed in the Bill. There are no criteria by which decisions are made about when and which officers can apply for posts. SAP must develop mechanisms to address these concerns. I hope that the Minister will be able to assuage some of my concerns in this area.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
711 c1371-2 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Children Accountability Crime prevention Discipline Crime Audit Anti-social behaviour Cooperation Association of Chief Police Officers Equality Finance Freedom of information ICT Greater London Equipment Ethnic groups HM Inspectorate of Constabulary Industrial democracy Local government Police Powers Public appointments Payments Procurement Police authorities Minority groups Metropolitan Police Metropolitan Police Authority Scotland Standards Surveillance Young people Trade unions Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Association of Police Authorities Police Senior Appointments Panel
Legislation
Policing and Crime Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk