Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord West of Spithead (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 20 October 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Policing and Crime Bill.


Policing and Crime Bill

My Lords, the amendment relates to the ability of third parties to be heard at an application, variation or discharge of a detention order or an appeal. This is a detention order made by a magistrates’ court following the seizure and initial administrative detention of property under the new powers that we are seeking to introduce in relation to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. In the other place, the then Home Office Minister Vernon Coaker made it clear that we need to take account of third-party interests in detained property. We have looked again at this issue in consultation with the Ministry of Justice and I assure the House that our commitment to the interests of third parties can be met without the need for provision in the Bill. We can meet the commitment by amendments to the criminal procedure rules. The rules already provide for giving notice to third parties in other proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, so that those third parties can take part if they wish. The Criminal Procedure Rules Committee will be asked to amend the criminal procedure rules to give such third-party rights under these new powers, and we are confident that the committee will do so willingly. That will enable a third party to turn up in court and argue his case. With regard to the second and third limbs of the amendments, which look at third-party interests in applications to vary or discharge a detention order, there is already specific provision in the Bill on these matters. I refer in particular to new Section 47N(2)(b) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, as set out in Clause 53. Equally, new Section 47O provides a right of appeal to any person affected by an order against a decision of a magistrates’ court on an application to vary or discharge an order. I know that this was a probing amendment, and I hope that that explanation will allow the noble Baroness to withdraw her amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
713 c599 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Disclosure of information Criminal records Codes of practice Accountability Crime prevention Crime Bail Demonstrations Assets Costs Confiscation orders Crown dependencies Aircraft Airports Customs officers British Transport Police Department for Transport Crown Court Finance Fees and charges Licensing Extradition Human rights Immigration Genetics Drugs Isle of Man Home Office Independent Police Complaints Commission Ministerial powers Parking Personal records Northern Ireland Police Powers Public appointments Proceeds of crime Property Railway stations Magistrates' courts Proof of identity Police authorities Scotland Vetting Stop and search Republic of Ireland Training Security Trespass Right of search Video recordings Rendition Sex establishments Airspace Common travel area European arrest warrants
Legislation
Policing and Crime Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk