Police and Justice Bill

I added my name in support of Amendment No. 193. The noble Baroness, Lady Henig, has neatly returned us, at the end of day four in Committee, to the concerns underlying all the debates that we had on that first day in Committee when we looked at the number of matters that had been shifted from primary to secondary legislation. She has underscored the concerns that we retain, not only that matters should be dealt with by negative resolution, but that they should be dealt with by secondary legislation at all. Of course, I appreciate that Governments want flexibility, but there are some occasions on which one loses the security and effectiveness of an organisation if one removes matters from primary legislation. We have concerns about the maintenance of the tripartite relationship and the way in which it has been built up because of some of the provisions in the Bill. That is a signal to the fact that when we reach Report, we shall want to focus on some more closely defined issues. We had—or at least I had—a scattergun approach on the first day in Committee. I know that I shall spend the summer looking at the Bill far more narrowly. There may be only two or three issues that I shall wish to return to, but in some strength, on the matter of what should be in primary and secondary legislation and what is the appropriate method of scrutiny of that secondary legislation. So this is an appropriate way in which to end our debates. I know that there is a technical government amendment to follow, but otherwise the noble Baroness has achieved a neat and elliptical move.