I thank my right hon. Friend for that intervention. We will, of course, ensure—I give him this commitment—that in extending these powers, as we hope to do under new clause 9, we speak to the police and reinforce the need for proportionality in everything that we do. Indeed, as he will know, that was one of the reasons why we set up the stop-and-search action team, to try to address both disproportionality and to assist forces in making arrangements to record stops and to ensure that stop-and-search powers are properly implemented by the police.
The gist of the debate is that we all agree that stop-and-search powers need to be revisited at times. We need to ensure that our laws work effectively. However, I tell the hon. Member for Hornchurch that my key objection, which is supported by the hon. Member for Taunton and by my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, East, is our concern about lowering the rank of officer who can authorise stop and searches. We are not persuaded that that would be the right thing to do. Notwithstanding the comments of the hon. and learned Member for Torridge and West Devon (Mr. Cox), in most areas that I visit across the country, both urban and rural, the local area commander—the person responsible for the delivery of neighbourhood policing—is the local inspector. In the first instance, the local inspector is the most appropriate person to determine the initial authorisation.
The hon. and learned Member for Torridge and West Devon, who made a good speech, agreed with the action that the Government are taking and believed that it would clarify the law on extending stop-and-search powers to something that happens after a violent incident has taken place, so that we can detect crime, thus enhancing the existing powers that are intended to prevent crime. He asked us to keep the various stop-and- search measures under review at all times, and to keep under consideration the points made by the hon. Member for Hornchurch. I said in my introductory remarks that we will always keep the various powers that are available under review to ensure that the law is good, and that improvements are made where necessary.
The hon. and learned Member for Torridge and West Devon asked me whether there is any need for proximity in time. There is no such requirement in the new clause, but the new powers should be used as close to the time of the incident as is possible. The hon. Member for Broxbourne talked about the need to ensure balance in the law. He made an important point. In everything that we do with respect to stop and search, we recognise that we are talking about an extension of the power and an erosion of civil liberties. In the main, that is done to try to ensure that we prevent crime and protect our communities—something that we all wish to do. The Government new clause offers a further way of protecting the public, but it does so in a proportionate and considered way. I urge the House to support it.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.
Serious Crime Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Coaker
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 22 October 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Serious Crime Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
465 c84-5 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:02:36 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_418863
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_418863
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_418863