May I seek the leave of the House to respond to our debate, Mr. Deputy Speaker?
We have had a useful debate. The right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard) is correct that I have said that we have had this debate ad infinitum. However, I am happy to do so because, like other right hon. and hon. Members, the issues are of great importance so it is right to discuss them. I was struck by what my right hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham) said about justice, and I concur with him. This is a matter of justice, not reciprocity, although as far as possible we have achieved reciprocity on reasonable suspicion and probable cause. He asked whether the difference between reasonable suspicion and probable cause was so great that it created an injustice. The answer is no. At the risk of repeating myself, we have achieved rough parity. My noble Friend Baroness Scotland, my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Caroline Flint), now a Health Minister, and I never said that those things are identical—rough parity is what we have achieved.
May I say a word about forum provision, which has figured largely in our debate? The key issue is ensuring that offences are dealt with in the place where they can be prosecuted most effectively. The proposed procedures envisage early consultation in any case in which it appears to a prosecutor in one country that there is a serious possibility that a prosecutor in the other country may have an interest in prosecution. We are alive to concerns about the matter, but we reject the Lords amendment. However, I reassure right hon. and hon. Members that we will take a further look at the issue.
The proposed arrangements provide for a three-step approach to decisions on jurisdiction—first, the early exchange of information between relevant jurisdictions; secondly, prosecutors consulting on those cases and the most appropriate jurisdiction; and thirdly, provision for consultation and involvement. We will consider the issues that have been raised.
In the interests of justice, in the interests of victims of crime and in the interests of making the world a safer place, I urge hon. Members to support the Government and reject the Lords amendments.
Question put, That this House disagrees with the Lords in the said amendment:—
The House divided: Ayes 320, Noes 263.
Police and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Joan Ryan
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 24 October 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Police and Justice Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
450 c1429-30 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 14:05:23 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354413
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354413
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354413