Police and Justice Bill

moved Amendment No. 192: Page 37, line 18, leave out subsection (4). The noble Baroness said: I shall also speakto Amendment No. 193, standing in my name. Amendment No. 193 is the key amendment, Amendment No. 192 being consequential. It is very much a probing amendment. We debated at length on earlier Committee days the proposals to put many of the Bill’s provisions in secondary legislation and I do not wish to rehearse all those issues. However, as I said, key principles should be placed in primary legislation while only genuine matters of administrative detail should be in secondary legislation. I am not entirely convinced that we have yet achieved that balance, although I note and thank my noble friend for her offers to continue discussions with key stakeholders over the summer to try to resolve some of the more contentious issues. I would expect that ultimately, and in some cases rightly, many provisions will still be subject to secondary legislation. The question then arises about whether those provisions should be subject to negative or affirmative resolution procedures. My noble friend has already indicated that she is likely to accept the recommendations of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. The amendment would clarify what further issues she thinks should be subject to positive resolution—which are the important matters of principle that she would accept ought to be debated by Parliament and which are merely matters of administrative detail. Given that the criminal justice system is such an important guarantor of the freedoms of the people of this country, does she agree that it is important that fundamental changes to it should be fully scrutinised and debated by Parliament? I beg to move.