Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Soley (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 14 July 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill.


Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness. I think I am more sympathetic to the Government’s word ““appropriate”” than to the suggested use of the word ““necessary””. In the context of the Bill, both these words are actually subjective in terms of what is being looked at. I assume that the Government prefers ““appropriate”” because I would have thought that it would be easier to argue either for or against in court than ““necessary”” would be, because that word is rather different. Is that not the thinking behind the Government’s proposal? I understand the arguments, but the central issue seems to be that of appeal. It would be easier for a court to reach a decision on what is ““appropriate”” than on what is ““necessary””. However, please tell me if I am wrong.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c874 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Clubs Alcoholic drinks Anti-social behaviour Civil proceedings City of Westminster Fees and charges Greater London Drugs Exemptions Licensed premises Drunkenness Police Property transfer Parliament Square Protest Misuse Opening hours Private prosecutions Young people Reform Trespass Royal parks War crimes Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs Police and crime commissioners Night-time economy
Legislation
Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk