Police and Justice Bill

As I am English, I hope I might do a little better at some later stage, but not quite tonight. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Harris, for her support and the Minister for her careful response and explanation of why she does not like what I have proposed. None of that was too surprising, but it is helpful because it sets out some of the issues that we will need to resolve at the next stage. She was right to say that this is a stalking horse. I am well aware of some of the deficiencies in the drafting, which I will seek to address before the next stage in October. On Amendment No. 60, on cost effectiveness, the noble Baroness said that I had not identified an independent body that the Home Secretary should commission. Earlier, the Government said they were dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t. Here am I trying to be like John Reid, all cuddly and nice, and to offer the Home Secretary the flexibility—a word that the Government love so much—to appoint a body, provided that it is independent. The last part of my amendment says that it should not be involved in,"““Government, police forces or police authorities””." I give that flexibility but the Government say that it is not enough. I have not pointed out the exact body that should be nominated under the Bill. I give the Minister a commitment. If she will accept the earlier amendments to specify the Police Federation, the Police Superintendents’ Association and ACPO as statutory consultees in the Bill, then I will try to find a body to specify in this amendment and bring it back for that delectation.