Police and Justice Bill

This is rather a sneaky Bill and, potentially, a pernicious one. If not substantially amended in Committee, it will reduce the freedom of the individual, increase the power of the state, remove the autonomy and capability of bodies on whom we rely to hold the police to account, allow direct Government intervention in police business without any objective basis on which to do so, increase the surveillance society; extend summary justice; possibly damage community relations and run the risk of increasing human rights abuses in prisons. Even the seemingly welcome development of involving the local community in policing has the potential to create dangers and difficulties, so there is much to be done in Committee. To begin on a more amenable note, however, we support a number of the Bill’s provisions. The incorporation of the Central Police Training and Development Authority and the Police Information Technology Organisation into a national policing improvement agency is a logical and sensible step forward. It almost goes without saying that we support the Government in their attempt to tackle better the problems caused by computer hacking. Given their penchant for creating surveillance databases, whether on national identity or on DNA, the security of those databases is paramount. Whatever the dangers they pose to civil liberties, they must be secure. Of course we support the Bill’s proposal to tackle the illegal possession of indecent photographs of children and, indeed, the harmonisation and the extension of powers for community support officers. The proposal that the Independent Police Complaints Commission should take on the role of ensuring that complaints and misconduct in the immigration and asylum system are properly investigated is another welcome measure. Only last week, I visited the IPCC, which will now investigate complaints against immigration and nationality personnel and will exercise specified enforcement functions. That new area of expertise is a perfect translation of its function to investigate police complaints. Such work is extremely sensitive and the proposal will not only create a better system but, equally vitally, it will improve public opinion of the system. Before I move on to the meat of Liberal Democrat concerns about the Bill, I shall touch on the section on extradition. I shall not go into detail as most of the proposals are technical. However, it is not lost on us that the Government’s track record on matters connected with extradition is hardly exemplary, given that they have so singularly and spectacularly failed to deal with the unfair, unequal and embarrassing nature of our extradition arrangements with the United States. We give the US what they want—all they have to do is demonstrate to us that the person in question is the person they want—whereas when we want someone, we have show evidence against that person.