Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill
Public Bill Committee, 20 January 2011.
Joe Benton (Labour, Bootle)
Good morning everyone. The Committee is about to hear oral evidence from the Local Government Association, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, the Wine and Spirit Trade Association and the British Beer and Pub Association. Will the witnesses introduce themselves?
Joe Benton (Labour, Bootle)
The Committee has decided that it wants evidence on several topics this morning. We shall therefore devote the first section of approximately 40 minutes to drug and alcohol abuse. It is important to keep that in mind so that we can make a clear separation.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
To clarify matters, Mr Benton. We are covering drugs and alcohol this morning, so I suggest that we discuss alcohol up to 10 o’clock, and drugs afterwards.
Joe Benton (Labour, Bootle)
I am now opening up matters to the Committee.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Good morning. I wish to start by asking generally about the licensing provisions in the Bill, about the perception that the Licensing Act 2003 was weighted towards the trade, and whether the provisions in the Bill will redress the balance. Will communities have more of a say about licensing in their areas? Will panel members make some overall comments on those matters?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Councillor, the levy may not pay for a police officer for a night, but will it not act as a disincentive for places of entertainment and places where alcohol is being sold, and can be used to increase their security to pay for door staff, for example, to prevent access to those already in drink when they seek to enter the premises, and perhaps, in other ways, to improve a business’s actions towards those who might be disorderly?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
We have to balance out the need of individual licensees to do business and to stay in business. For example, public houses have closed at the rate of 50 a week in recent years, and we should balance out such aspects. The figure that the Bill currently refers to will have at least some effect on those businesses and will cause them to give careful consideration to what is going on.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
They come in a package, so that matter does not stand alone.
Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
As a Liverpool councillor, you will be aware of what city centres were like back in the ’80s and ’90s, and of how they have been transformed over recent years, especially in the northern cities of Liverpool, Leeds and Manchester. What role did developing a night-time economy play in that city centre regeneration, and was it worth it?
Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
Is it possible to hear any perspectives from the other witnesses on the role of city centre regeneration and the night-time economy?
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
I did not want this session to be dominated by the Local Government Association, although it has interesting views about different parts of the Bill. I want to return to the original question and ask particularly Mr Beadles but also Dr Rawlings about their views on the Bill and the night-time levy.
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
Did the Act promote café culture?
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
Did you ever think it would?
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
I have been asked to stand up because I have no microphone. You would agree that it is down to the discretion of the local authority, so I believe that Ministers are introducing legislation that will enable district councils, to which you have particularly referred, to look at their local areas, rather than the Government deciding from a top-down approach. It is down to the local authorities. Perhaps we could hear the view of the LGA from Councillor Kemp.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
The 2003 Act introduced alcohol disorder zones, which were based on geography; this provision is based on time, so there is a different focus, which is based on hours. I shall ask the panel, but I think I am right to say that alcohol disorder zones did not work, because, as far as I am aware, not a single authority imposed them. Is that not a tragic failure—one of several—of the 2003 Act?
I understand that the Council of Her Majesty’s Circuit Judges, which represents some 600 circuit judges who pass sentence on individuals, was also very critical of the alleged café culture proposals of the 2003 Act. This is a fresh approach, is it not? The geographical approach is not the focus of the Bill; it is based on hours of operation.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Exactly.
Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)
The media play highly on under-age sales and drinking. Do you think increasing fines and shutting premises for longer periods will help? Will that address the problem, or will it not address the problem? This is something that Governments of all colours have failed to tackle and failed to solve over many years.
Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)
We will move on to that.
Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)
I think the industry has made strides. The problem, as you have said, is with people selling it out the back of vans, or, in many cases, with parents buying alcohol and giving it to their children. I do not know, but that is very difficult to square off.
Mary Macleod (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
Zero demand—
Joe Benton (Labour, Bootle)
Order. Members should indicate if they want to intervene. I am trying to be as fair as possible in getting everybody in.
Jeremy Wright (Conservative, Kenilworth and Southam)
I want to jump back to the late-night levy, and Dr Rawlings’ legitimate concern about pubs that are not in town centres, particularly in rural areas, which are going to be affected by a generalised levy. I understand the concern, but the Act makes it clear that the period of time to which the levy will apply cannot start before midnight.
Based on your experience, how common is it for the sort of rural pubs you are talking about to be open on a regular basis from midnight onwards, compared with the pubs in town centres where the problems generally occur?
Jeremy Wright (Conservative, Kenilworth and Southam)
The alternative way of doing things is that there should be a specific area of town designated as where a levy or tax might apply. Is there not a negative effect on that area of the town, if such a designation is given to it, and does that not also affect the members and businesses you are responsible for?
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Arundel and South Downs)
In response to that, what are the alternative proposals to the late-night levy and the funding it will provide to go back into policing costs, for instance? Why should the polluter not pay? Local communities have to fund enormous sums of money for their police officers to be deployed on Friday and Saturday nights, abstracting officers from other duties. It is very burdensome on police forces and, arguably, unfair to all other residents who are not doing the drinking and enjoying of those premises. Why should the polluter not pay?
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Arundel and South Downs)
You are making money from it. I am asking you what alternative proposals you have to assist in funding the necessary public service that deals with this harm, which is being created by the fact that there is late-night drinking.
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Arundel and South Downs)
So is every business. Your business is the one that is doing the harm.
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Arundel and South Downs)
So, you are opposing the levy, but you have no proposals yourself or any means by which funding could go back into the local community to make some contribution to the policing costs. You have no proposals.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Do you think that, because the people who run bars and pubs—the high profile presence on the high street—are associated with alcohol, it tends to distort people’s approach to alcohol policy and that it does not give the overall picture of what is causing the problem?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Not everybody will enjoy themselves—certainly not Councillor Kemp, as he has already pointed out. The late-night drinking problem—people who are tanked up late at night—is not only caused by the pubs in the town centre, is it?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Would you say that the late-night levy is a blunt instrument, which does not actually hit the target, because it hits people who are selling alcohol late at night but they are not the sole source of the problem?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
One of the most visible problems we have with alcohol and young people in my constituency, for instance, is with the peer group around the age of 18—some are under 18 and some above. Because we are so efficient at keeping people under the age of 18 out of pubs, the under-18s go to a local convenience store and they get drunk in the community. That problem is not addressed by a late-night levy.
Mary Macleod (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
On that point, because several of you have mentioned 18-year-olds and youngsters drinking before they even go out to pubs, do you not feel that we have to have harsh deterrents on traders who actually sell to under-age people?
Mary Macleod (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
It is obviously still happening.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Can I come in on that?
Joe Benton (Labour, Bootle)
Order. Sorry, I am trying to give an opportunity to everyone. Dr Huppert is next.
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
The Bill proposes changes to temporary event notices, making them more flexible in some areas and constraining them in others. With apologies to Professor Iverson, I am interested to hear what the other three on the panel think about the changes.
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
How could one define an event? Presumably Tesco could have a special first Thursday of the month event.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
May I take this back to the generality of the Bill? One key thing that the Committee has been talking about is police commissioners. I wonder if Councillor Kemp, particularly, might like to comment. Do you have any concerns about the role of the police commissioner with the local licensing committee of a local authority? Do you see any problems there? Is there anything you would be concerned about?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Anything in particular on police commissioners and their role with the licensing committee?
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Dr Rawlings has already indicated that if we went for a whole council-based area and did it on the basis of time, you would define those areas that would be most affected, such as the rural areas and those more problematic areas. Do the witnesses also recognise that on the issue of responsibility—some important points have already been made about business improvement districts, community alcohol partnerships, purple flag, Best Bar None—enabling discounts and other provisions to be made in there to allow flexibility might assist local councils in promoting prosocial behaviour?
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
But there is nothing in the Bill that mandates local councils to do that. If they have an area that is being well run they do not have to put one of these in place.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Councillor Kemp, you advocate a more localised approach to defining areas, although that was the problem of the alcohol disorder zones.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Alcohol disorder zones were part of a legislative framework, and I know that Mr Coaker lived and breathed this over the years as well in trying to get such a structure to work. I am surprised that you said you would not have a problem with an area being designated a problem area. That was not the view of local councils at that time. It is interesting if you are taking a different view now.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Just to be clear, councillor, you believe that it is possible to get a map and draw an area that would be capable of withstanding legal challenge and judicial review?
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
That is interesting. It was not the experience of alcohol disorder zones.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Could I press you on that point? Presumably you would then ignore the issue of pre and post-loading in terms of other outlets outside your specific zone opening later as well, even though they may be contributing to the problem.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Even though you advocate the localist agenda—we can discuss to what level that is—you do not welcome a proposal that gives local councils greater flexibility?
Joe Benton (Labour, Bootle)
I want to move on to drugs very shortly. Nigel Mills will have to ask the last question on this subject.
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
I think the Minister was heading down the road that I wanted to go down. If we are going to allow councils to choose an area, how exactly do we define what they are allowed to choose? You have referred to “neighbourhood.” Do you think that designating a whole neighbourhood, rather than a whole council area, could work? Would that be effective in this regard?
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
One of the issues that I have with licensing is the vicinity test. We want to give all those who are affected by a premises the chance to comment or seek a review without opening the door to too many national campaign-type things, which are not really focused on the local issue. We are making progress with that, but, in my seat, I have a nightclub in the green belt and the walk-home route goes through a different county and district. What proposal would work best to allow the people who live along that walk-home route to seek a review, without spreading it for 20 miles? Does anyone have any ideas as to what the best option would be?
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
Effectively, if it received a request or a comment, the authority could use its discretion to say, “No. That’s not at all relevant to this.” That would almost allow representations from anybody, no matter where they lived.
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
Effectively, you would be happy with the planning system coming into licensing, so that anyone can make representations and the council can choose what weight to give them.
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
With a planning application, once you have approved it and it has been built, you do not tend to review it easily.
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
With licensing, however, there is a provision for ongoing attempts to review, which slightly changes the balance. Do you think that there is scope for a different test? For initial applications, you allow a wide consultation, but you try and scope it down for reviews.
Joe Benton (Labour, Bootle)
I am going to have to stop you there, because we are moving on to drugs.
Mary Macleod (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
Professor Iverson, thank you for being so patient with us, but I want to discuss the temporary class drugs order. Dr Rawlings has already said that drugs were much more of an issue than alcohol, and drug-related crime is certainly a major issue for me in west London. Given how fast science is moving—you are certainly the expert to tell us about this—are there things that we need to do to get classification right and, in terms of the process, get it happening as soon as possible? Do you feel that the temporary class drugs order is required?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Professor, I also note that the Bill proposes to make some constitutional changes to the advisory body. Given some recent controversies between the Government and the advisory council, do you have any concerns that that might be used as a means to avoid scientific advice and criticism of Government policy?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
So you would not recommend specifically named areas of expertise in a review? You want flexibility?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Thank you. I would like to ask a quick question about the temporary bans. You said that that would be a two-way street, and that the council would recommend temporary bans on some substances that are identified while an investigation is undertaken. Would you recommend that the Secretary of State be required to consult the advisory council before a temporary ban is introduced?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Professor, is it therefore accurate to say that the provisions will strengthen the scientific input in comparison with the current system? That is based on the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, which is a little outdated regarding the composition of the advisory council, for the reasons you have already said. Is that correct?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
That has serious consequences, as we know. Delaying action when a new substance has been located, and the concomitant media attention, can lead to stockpiling, and an increase in the availability of the drug until it can be dealt with.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
So you are happy that this improves the position.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
The new compounds will keep emerging, but this will enable you and your council to be more flexible in dealing with them quickly when they are discovered.
Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
On the issue of the long-term trends in drug and alcohol abuse among young people, what assessment has the professor made of the impact on civic society, social capital, and community engagements? We looking at measures to combat drugs and alcohol at the point of offence, but are we missing a trick? Could legislation take into account all the stages, and what is turning young people towards drugs? What impact would a 35% cut in local government funding have on the infrastructure that is in place to support leisure and extra-curricular activities, and the activities that could divert young people away from negative engagements into more positive engagements?
Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
It is a cost.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Have you thought about cutting your admin costs?
Joe Benton (Labour, Bootle)
Order. Do not go down that line. Can we confine ourselves to the issues under discussion?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
Can I come back to drugs and the Bill? The ACMD is required to keep under review drugs that have harmful effect sufficient to constitute a social problem—that is in the wording of the Act. How do you interpret the section about a social problem? What does it mean in the original Act? It is not just harmful effects: they have to constitute a social problem.
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
How do you interpret it?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
Do you think that it is important that the Act highlights the fact that there has to be a social problem?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
And it has real meaning for you?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
I want to go back to the membership of the council. Most members of the general public find it a bit strange that we are going to pass some legislation to remove the requirement for specific categories of people on the council. I understand what you have said today and the explanation. Would it not be easier just to say that there was not this requirement to have all the different categories filled in order for you to meet? Would that not be a simpler way to get round the problem?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
I think there is a lot of merit in the temporary banning provision. I am less sure about the composition of the ACMD.
Professor Iverson, I was interested in your comment that the Misuse of Drugs Act is now 40 years old. This provision is clearly trying to address a particular problem that has arisen and, to be fair, I think it will be an improvement. Given what we have been talking about—the role of local authorities, the link with alcohol, the fact that the Act is 40 years old, the fact that something else will no doubt arise, the need for public education and all the other issues, such as the change of composition of the ACMD—do you think there is a need for a broader look at the whole area of drugs legislation? This proposal may be a welcome improvement, but it is a sticking plaster for one particular aspect of the problem. There is a broader issue about what the legislative framework should now be for drugs in our society.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
I do not think anybody would go near that again.
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
These proposed temporary class drug orders effectively last for a year. Is that a sensible time frame? Do you think you can get through the process you need to get through in that time to decide whether it becomes an illegal drug? Do you think that initial period will need to be longer?
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Professor Iverson, do you accept that the criminal law can be an important way of directing patterns of behaviour? We are looking at the temporary class drug order. The experience of mephedrone suggested that because it was legal, people equated that in some way with safety. There are issues as to how people might view a drug. Do you think having the legal element there acts as a stimulus to how people behave?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
They are not blurred by the courts though, are they? The sentences are very different.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
What I was saying was that the difference between class A and class B sentences are very different.
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
The protocol—
Joe Benton (Labour, Bootle)
Order. I am sorry, we are at the end of the session. On behalf of the Committee, I thank the witnesses for their attendance this morning. Thank you for the enlightenment that you have provided—it is appreciated.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
Thank you for coming along to help us with our deliberations. For the purposes of the record, will you briefly introduce yourselves? We shall start off with Shami.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
Thank you. Vernon Coaker has the first question.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
May I start with a general question to both of you, not necessarily related to policing protests outside Parliament, which we shall come to? What is your view of part 1 of the Bill and the police commissioner proposals?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
So it is politicisation that concerns you.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Assistant commissioner, is there anything that you want to add in respect of commissioners?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
An entity like the police authorities that are currently in existence are almost anonymous to the general public at large. Will not the focus on strategic direction via the police and crime commissioners simply be an up-front approach that the general public will be able to connect and associate with, and replace a largely anonymous entity such as police authorities? Is not the danger that of confusing operational issues with the strategic direction of the police, the point that you made?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
What system for holding the police to account would you like to see? Would it be the current system of police authorities? It is clearly not what is proposed in the Bill. What would you like to see in an ideal world?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
There have been suggestions, have there not, of political partisanship in the current system? I do not want to necessarily quote examples, but in the current system there have been such suggestions not far from the Palace of Westminster, have there not?
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Arundel and South Downs)
I am amused that Liberty of all organisations should be expressing reservations about democratically elected politicians. If not democratically elected politicians to hold the police to account, then who? Is it not the case that police and crime commissioners will have broadly the same powers as police authorities? And what about the case of London? Is it Liberty’s position that the mayoral oversight of the police in London should be reversed? Should we hand that oversight to some independent body of non-elected wise men, perhaps? It would be terribly inconvenient, of course, that they might represent the public’s view.
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Arundel and South Downs)
The Met are accountable to the Mayor of London, so the existing system has an elected politician with oversight of the Met—the very force that you are talking about in relation to the investigation of expenses. Are you saying that you would reverse that and that that is problematic?
Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
The last chief constable.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
Chris, Matthew and Clive want to come in.
Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
In the interests of progress, I must withdraw my question.
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
In his evidence to Committee, Rob Garnham quoted the Association of Police Authorities’ independent research, which was conducted by Ipsos MORI. That research found that the public liked the idea of an individual who could be held to account. How do you feel about that?
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
But in this day and age, with the amount of scrutiny of MPs, police officers, you, and all of us—particularly by the media—if there were any hint of politicisation, it would surely emerge.
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
Effectively, you say. So the reality is not operational power.
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
To you.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
The one example where a single individual is at the top of a democratically-elected body is that of the Mayor, through the Metropolitan Police Authority. With that experience in mind, where have the problems arisen? The Mayor has been severely admonished by the Standards Board for England for overstepping the mark, and we have had statements from various police officers when people have said that they have gone the other way and got involved in politics. From the experience in London so far, where are the flaws that the Bill should address?
Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
There is Kit Malthouse.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Does the Bill need to be more prescriptive about roles, how far the elected body can go, and how far the chief officer can go?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
You were nodding, Lynne.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
Vernon, do you want come back on this?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
I was going to move on, Chair, if I may.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
Do Bridget or Mary want to come in on this particular aspect?
Bridget Phillipson (Labour, Houghton and Sunderland South)
Just two points. Obviously it is your view that the proposal is a very fundamental change to how we do policing. We have also had it suggested to us that the Government should pilot this, before they roll it out across the whole country. What would your thoughts be on that? Should they proceed ahead regardless? My other question is on regional variation. For example, my force is Northumbria, which is a huge force area going from the Scottish border down to Durham. They would have one police commissioner, as would Durham, which is a much smaller force. At the moment, we have a police authority which recognises the breadth of geography. Instead, you would have one person covering my area, who may have been elected in Berwick. I am not sure how that would improve accountability, when it comes to local people and their often very local concerns about the nature of policing.
Bridget Phillipson (Labour, Houghton and Sunderland South)
Do you have any views on pilots?
Mary Macleod (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
My question is to the assistant commissioner. We have the example in London of the Mayor and the Mayor’s office with responsibility for policing and, as far as I know—I commend the police for what they do—in London, crime has come down and more knives are off the street and a great job has been done. Do you feel, with this Bill and with the police and crime commissioner role across the country, that you will still have the operational independence in London to do your job effectively?
Mary Macleod (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
Do you currently feel that you have that operational independence?
Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
They should have learnt the lessons of the miners’ strike.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
To reassure the assistant commissioner, one of the amendments that we have tabled today would make a police and crime commissioner and the chief constable consider the strategic policing requirement in order to try to address the point that you have made, about it just being around a local issue.
On a broader point, on the repeal of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 provisions and the changes that the Bill outlines, the Home Secretary said that that would restore the right to peaceful protest around Parliament. There is quite a degree of change there. How do you both feel generally about the changes that the Bill proposes? We will come on to some of the specifics later, but generally, do you feel that the change in the Bill strikes a better balance between protests, civil liberties and the powers that you, assistant commissioner, are given to do your job? I would like to hear some general thoughts on the changes proposed in the Bill from both of you.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Surely you do not think it is appropriate for people to be allowed to camp for years in a public square, without abiding by the same rules, laws and norms of society that everybody else has to. Of course, the right to protest is fundamental, but effectively to live for years in a location is an affront, is it not?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Is it not the other way round? If it were in a park, or square in a town somewhere else, I strongly suggest that that encampment would not have been allowed to continue for 10 years. Is it not being given special attention because it is here?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Perhaps we should ask the assistant commissioner that.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
You must allow the witness to answer the question.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
I am sorry; I am going back to court.
Mary Macleod (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
If I could come back to you on that, I am very supportive of peaceful protests, but as an individual, do I not have freedom and rights too? Right now, as a Londoner, I am prevented from enjoying Parliament square because of the views of the people protesting on there. Is there not a balance to be struck?
Mary Macleod (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
Well, I do not like the view, but that is beside the point, it is irrelevant. I cannot walk across the square; I cannot eat my lunch in the middle. When there were all the tents there and the mess they made with it, there was no way I could enjoy that part of the square as part of London.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
I just wanted to perhaps take a step back and look at where we are and where we have got to. What are the panel’s views on the existing regime and on the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005? It might be helpful to understand the current context, and perhaps I can then explore the purposes or nature of the changes. It is always helpful to understand, because Shami has said that it may have had a chilling effect on process under the existing regime. I think it would be helpful to hear both from the police operationally and from Ms Chakrabarti what the themes around SOCPA are at the moment.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
To be clear, and I think this is in part Ms Chakrabarti’s point about the special natures and distinctions that are drawn, as a consequence of the changes, the Public Order Act and the general regime that operates around the country, subject to the specific provisions in the Bill, would then reapply.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
May I challenge that point and the concept behind it? The issue that some people have raised, and I will raise it in the generic sense, is that having a permanent encampment may actually frustrate protests. Parliament square is the centre of the nation and the centre of protest, in that way, and if you allowed permanent encampment and therefore, permanent protest by one group on the square, that would frustrate and prevent others from protesting. I am interested in whether you would accept that there may need to be a way of regulating—hence the reason for looking at permanent encampment, rather than protest—and seeking to address the potential problem, instead of saying, in some ways, “We don’t want protest here.” We should say, “We accept that there should be protest, but when it transgresses into permanent encampment it frustrates other protests.”
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
However, you can see that that could help facilitate such a situation. Even if you do not necessarily agree with the specific approach, you accept the general principle that there could be a conflict between protests.
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
Perhaps I could move on to the details of what is proposed in the Bill and the directions power. I would be grateful to hear your thoughts are on the proposals.
It is proposed that directions can be given on a range of things, which we have already mentioned. They can be given orally, either by police officers, or by a range of other people—they may be council employees, or they may not be—who are authorised to do so. Presumably, they would not necessarily be uniformed or particularly trained—there is nothing in the measure to say that they would be. These oral directions then last for 90 days, with no record of that, unless they are changed. If they are breached, there is a power for confiscation with reasonable force—again, either by police officers or by non-officers who may not be involved. How comfortable are you with the various steps in this process, in particular, with non-police officers having power to use reasonable force and with giving the direction on the 90-day period orally?
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
But we have door supervisors who have that power and training, and regulation through the Security Industry Authority. Do you have a problem with them as well?
Chris Ruane (Labour, Vale of Clwyd)
Absolutely.
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
Perhaps it is your behaviour.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
On the issue of non-uniformed officers, I have heard from the police in the past that they are concerned about people being warranted with certain powers when they are not in uniform. I am interested in clarity about people knowing their rights and with whom they are dealing. For instance, I think The Highway Code still says, “a uniformed officer” or “a traffic warden on point duty”—it is a long time since I did my advanced driving test. Would you care to comment on that?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
I mentioned that. We have seen recent controversy about individual police officers not being able to be identified, yet the Bill suggests a move towards people not in uniform being given powers.
Michael Crockart (Liberal Democrat, Edinburgh West)
I want to echo the point that you have just made. Having policed public order situations in a previous occupation, I know that it is difficult enough as a police officer to get a lawful order given by a uniform to be accepted and acted upon, especially in stressful situations. You tend to find that different types of people will accept it, and others will say, “Who do you think you are?” and, “Don’t you know who I am?” We are potentially exacerbating that situation by asking those same people to accept that same type of, albeit lawful, order from a non-uniformed person, and we could make the situation worse.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
I want to go back a step and perhaps bring in the assistant commissioner. The focus on the rights of people who want to protest frustrates a lot of people. What about the human rights of people who want to be passers-by and to have quiet enjoyment of that facility? What about people who want to enjoy the statues and monuments in an area such as Parliament square? What about the human rights of the residents of Westminster and the people who work here? Do you feel that the Metropolitan police are sufficiently focused on that aspect?
You have also said that your powers are insufficient to deal with the encampment. I understand that, in other parts of the country, when faced with tents of this sort, the Vagrancy Act 1935 has been applied. Do you have anything to say about that and why that has not been applied in this case? The Vagrancy Act applies to several issues, including the erecting of tents.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
But you are not specifically aware of the Vagrancy Act.
Mary Macleod (Conservative, Brentford and Isleworth)
When the mass of tents were removed was there any damage to the square?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
It has been interesting to hear from both of you about your views on the Bill and where we should go. I am not trying to put words in your mouth and so correct me if I am wrong, but you both seem to be saying that in many respects you can see merit in the repeal of the existing legislation but that in repealing it we need to be careful that we get the balance right. There is a lack of clarity in the Bill at present. There is real concern about the powers, particularly those of the officer, the discretion given to an officer and the extension of power to civilian employees. There is also a concern about what Parliament actually wants to happen in and around Parliament. Because that is not clear, we are not totally sure what it is we are legislating to solve.
In a sense, as the Bill goes through, the Government, with the Opposition holding them to account, need to take a step back and try to understand what we are trying to achieve over and above the statement that we have not quite got the balance right between protest and civil liberties. We would all agree that some of the things that have happened under SOCPA have not been good, but in trying to do something about that we must not create a whole set of new problems. The Public Order Act 1986 gives a basis for taking this forward but that on its own will not be sufficient to give you clarity as a serving police officer or to address Liberty’s concerns about the balance of that process. As a simple supplementary question to the assistant commissioner, if this were passed, how would you get rid of what is there now, and on a practical policing level, what would you have to do to ensure that it did not return? I know that might sound a really simplistic question.
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
Why should they be there all the time? Why should we suffer that?
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
My hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth has already said that we cannot use Parliament Square. I tried to do that before I was elected. I went over to the peace camp when it existed, and they made it very clear that I should not be there.
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
I do not accept that police are bouncers when they are enforcing the law.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
Will people address their remarks through the Chair because otherwise we will be setting a bad example? People may be looking in from outside. I will ask Bridget to bring some order.
Bridget Phillipson (Labour, Houghton and Sunderland South)
You say that Parliament square is a separate case if people want to protest there because of its national significance. Should we make legislation to deal with separate cases?
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
Does the long-term occupation of the square provide any security concerns for you? I know that you go round and wax seal all the drains for miles around when there is a big event. How do you cope when somebody has been there for weeks and months and when you struggle to work out what they have got hidden under their blankets?
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
So there is no concern over the royal wedding and what impact the square might have on your policing on that day?
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
Julian, do you want to ask about clause 151?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
I want briefly to ask about clause 145, which is about authorisation for the operation of amplified noise equipment. There is a section here which means that it can be allowed, and I hope that that might be used generously. Applications have to be made at least 21 days in advance, but can be withdrawn or varied at any time with no requirement for reasons. Are you concerned about this as a proportionate response and how would you like to see it work?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
I shall turn to clause 151, which is a single clause on a separate issue to do with arrest warrants and universal jurisdiction. Shami, you have argued that the clause would:
“unjustifiably undermine exercise of the right of private prosecution”.
Could you perhaps start off by commenting on why you see that as a problem. Is there any problem with the current system that needs to be fixed? If so, how could it be fixed instead.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Do you not think that the state should be involved in initiating serious prosecutions? These qualifying offences include hijacking, piracy, the taking of hostages and the like, aviation and maritime security. My first question is should the state not primarily initiate such serious prosecutions? Secondly, I am interested to hear you talk about and almost dismiss the fact that this is fear rather than reality, because in many arguments do you not make the counterpoint that you are just as concerned about the fear that members of the public might have, for example, of the state’s overacting or having overarching powers? Are you not singing two different tunes, if I can put it that way?
To paraphrase what you have said, you have referred to the courts not being silly and that they will behave themselves and do the right thing. But is not the whole point of this that at the moment there are almost no provisions for the courts to get involved before the damage is done? The harm we are trying to address is the application for arrest. There is considerable harm in the fear of arrest, even if it is only for a few weeks. If I were to say to you, “There is a danger that, if you come to my part of town, you will be arrested,” even if that is a relatively unlikely eventuality, it would affect your travelling to my part of town, would it not?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Well, at the earlier stage they are not.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
At the moment, almost no evidence is required at the earliest stage for an arrest warrant to be issued—prima facie evidence, somebody alleging something. Effectively, that is enough, and has been enough, for an arrest warrant to be issued, which in many cases has caused diplomatic incidents. I am concerned about the respect for this country overseas and the respect for our rule of law, about which you have already spoken. Does it not bring our legal system into disrepute that the current system can be used for posturing and grandstanding by politically motivated organisations that are trying to score a cheap point? It is all very well that the courts can get more involved after the committal stage—cases can then be thrown out, and they often have been—but the damage has been done and some weeks have elapsed.
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
As I understand from the briefing note, which cites a written answer from the Lord Chancellor, there were 10 applications for arrest warrants in the last 10 years, of which only two were granted. First, does that suggest that there is already a proper filtering process? May I also ask about the issue of fear? Given that the Government, with the DPP’s involvement, could not presumably give anybody an assurance that they would not be arrested—unless they were leaning very heavily on the DPP—is there not anyway the fear that somebody could be arrested, with or without the DPP’s involvement?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
If the DPP was on notice or had a veto, how could you ensure timeliness? How quickly might we want the DPP to respond, and what would be realistic for the DPP to do?
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
If there are no more questions? Yes, Lynne, you would like to make a contribution.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
Thank you both very much indeed for informing this Committee’s proceedings so effectively.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
We will now move straight on to Keir Starmer. You do not need any introduction as the Director of Public Prosecutions. Thank you very much indeed for coming.
Matthew Offord (Conservative, Hendon)
I apologise, Mr Starmer, for hurrying you—I understand from one of the previous witnesses that you are a very busy man, so I do not want to waste your time. I want to ask about clause 151. What is the standard of evidence that you will seek in order to give your consent to a warrant under that particular piece of the legislation?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
Thank you for coming, Mr Starmer. It is much appreciated and will be helpful to the Committee. May I step back for a second? I mentioned earlier—you were in the room—that in the last 10 years there have apparently been 10 applications for arrest warrants, two of which were granted. Is there a problem with the current system that needs to be fixed, and exactly what is that problem?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
In the last year or 10 years?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
You talked about very fast responses. Realistically, how quickly could you respond? If somebody said, “A plane’s landing in a few hours,” would it be realistic to expect you to carry out even a threshold test within that time?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
What sort of time window would be deliverable?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
What, if any, are the current flaws with the need to provide prima facie evidence to a magistrate?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Fair enough.
I am a lay person—I am fortunate enough not to be a lawyer—so, will you explain the key differences between the level of prima facie evidence that would be required by a magistrate, and what would be required by you?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
But is that a significant difference? Is that something that the magistrate does not have to consider?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Is there any way to introduce a guarantee that someone cannot flee while you are going through that process?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
There is not such a guarantee for other criminal offences on the statute book, either, is there? Before an arrest warrant is issued, there is nothing to stop an individual from fleeing if they are charged with shoplifting or grievous bodily harm.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
I now return to the prima facie test. At the moment, if Joe says, “Pete punched me”, that is prima facie evidence—just the fact that Joe has said that he has been punched by somebody else. That would be enough for an arrest warrant to be issued against a VIP.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
At the moment, the magistrate would not have to look at any evidence, and the bold allegation, on the face of it, in and of itself, can be accepted and an arrest warrant will follow. This is an increased provision—we are referring to it as an increased provision to have a realistic prospect of conviction, but it actually just brings it on to an even keel with all the other laws in England does it not? Does the Crown Prosecution Service not have to be satisfied that there is a realistic prospect of conviction and that it is in the public interest to prosecute for every other offence?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
Not for an arrest.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
But the CPS prosecutes only if it believes that there is a reasonable chance of securing a conviction, and that means that the CPS does not engage in malicious, vexatious or opportunistic prosecutions. It is much more robust than the threshold of evidence needed to begin a private prosecution, as it currently stands. Is that right?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
There is a list of qualifying offences, including piracy and so on. As far as you are concerned, does that cover it all? Could a clever lawyer discover another offence and perhaps get round the safeguards that are in the Bill by finding something else?
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
You will have to forgive me, because not being a lawyer I may be misunderstanding some stuff. I would normally expect that the level of evidence you would need for an arrest would be less than to go ahead with a prosecution. To my layman’s eye you appear to be applying the same test to allowing the arrest warrant as you would be looking at to go ahead with a prosecution. The Bill says that the warrant only needs to be issued with your consent. It is not forcing you to go to any particular degree of proof before you give that consent. Is there not some risk that you are putting too much emphasis on what you are trying to do—more than you actually need to?
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
Say we were in the super-fast situation that you outlined and I have eight ring binders full of evidence, but we need to get the arrest warrant issued in two hours. You appear to be suggesting that you need to go through all eight ring binders and give it deep consideration. Do you not have the scope to look at the key bits and say, “Actually, this looks like a pretty reasonable one, I’ll consent to the warrant to buy myself some time to read the full file”?
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
That was not quite what I suggested.
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
I have two further areas of questioning. First, you talked about judging the public interest. When judging the public interest for the purposes of consenting, or not, to an arrest warrant, who would you take representations from? Would you, for example, take representations from the Government as to what they felt they would prefer you to do?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
What about other organisations, such as Amnesty International? Would it also be able to contact you with its thoughts?
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
But that is partly because the people did not stay in the country.
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
There is a suggestion from Shami Chakrabarti, which I think you heard, that an alternative would be to put the DPP on notice. What do you think of that suggestion?
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
In answer to Dr Huppert’s question, you were talking about consulting with the Attorney-General. That becomes a bit academic, because presumably, shortly after the arrest warrant, the Attorney-General has to consent to the process going any further anyway. It strikes me as being quite unusual that, were he to disagree with you, you would go ahead, because he could just say, “No” the next day—there would not be much point. Are we not creating an independent process here, which in reality is a bit of sham?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Can I just establish whether there are already several criminal offences on the statute books for which the DPP’s consent is required?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Some are historical.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
But the process that you have described is far from unique. This is a process that has been tried and tested over decades.
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
How many are there that require both your and the Attorney-General’s explicit consent?
Nigel Mills (Conservative, Amber Valley)
We are in a much shorter time frame here. Effectively you are both giving consent on what is likely to be the same information.
Julian Huppert (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge)
Can I just clarify your response to Mr Ellis? Are there other cases where your or the Attorney-General’s consent is required to arrest or prosecute? Are there any other cases where consent is required to arrest, which is really what we are talking about here?
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Arundel and South Downs)
Can I follow up on the questions about the Attorney-General’s involvement here, in so far as where consultation may take place? The concern that has been expressed and, I think, was alluded to by Shami Chakrabarti, relates to some kind of political dimension being added to the decision as a consequence of your involvement, by which I suppose she meant the ability of the Attorney-General to influence that decision. The concern, as we all know, is about a wider political consideration that may be made by the Government as to whether it is appropriate that a VIP should be arraigned—let’s use that word—in that manner. How much regard would you take of such an intervention by the Attorney-General?
Nick Herbert (Conservative, Arundel and South Downs)
So do you believe that forming a consideration about a wider aspect of how Ministers viewed such an arrest and the impact that that might have on our national interest would be a proper thing for the Attorney-General to do? I am asking the question because I genuinely want to know. Is that the kind of proper representation that might be made?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Just to follow on from that, so that I can understand it, the Attorney-General can consult other Ministers to determine whether it is in the national interest for the warrant to be issued. What other public interest would you take into consideration to counter that, when you come to your balanced judgment?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
What if the Attorney-General came back and said, “It’s a bit embarrassing, old boy. We don’t really want to cause a fuss”?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Just to clarify again, and sorry to push the point: if you had enough evidence and you were past the threshold of the likelihood of pursuing a successful case, could the Attorney-General still convince you not to pursue that case?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
The answer is yes then.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
With all due respect to you, if it is an international leader who is popping in to go to Harrods, we probably could not arrest him anyway.
Christopher Chope (Conservative, Christchurch)
Thank you very much indeed. You have answered the questions with exemplary clarity and precision. We are indebted to you for doing that. That brings us to the conclusion of our proceedings this afternoon.