Although my name is not attached to this amendment, we support it. The Minister accepted the argument put forward on similar lines in Committee in another place, saying: "““Of course, we will expect officers exercising such powers to be properly trained. We expect that with any powers that the police are given. They have extensive training, and we will expect them to be properly trained in those powers””.—[Official Report, Standing Committee D, 21 March 2006; col. 134-35.]"
The point at issue is that, given that extensive training is expected, there is no reason why that should not be included in the Bill, as the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, said. The crucial area is the powers that the custody officer has—some of us have visited police cells. The custody officer makes an important judgment balancing what the constable says with the rights of the individual. It is a very difficult decision in many circumstances, and he does not necessarily follow everything police officers say. In this instance it is important that that element is specified in the Bill.
Police and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Dholakia
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 4 July 2006.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Police and Justice Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c187 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 23:20:42 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_334487
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_334487
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_334487