Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his intervention. I entirely agree that the additional costs of the TPIMs regime are of concern, given the much lower cost of the control order regime, and I invite the Minister to explain how that correlates with the draft emergency legislation. Presumably, the additional resources might not be required in those circumstances. We need greater clarity about the costs that might arise in that situation. When I asked the Minister, in relation to amendment 20, about the one year that it takes to train up a surveillance officer, he said, ““We're not just looking at human resources””, but it is clear that Mr Osborne—this is why I read out his responses—was not just talking about human resources either. He was talking about hardware, software and money resources too, and it was his considered opinion, put on the record of the House, that all those resources would take more than one year to come online. I have to say that the Minister's explanation—that not only are we looking at surveillance officers, but somehow this process can be managed with technology as well as anything else—does not give us the reassurance that we need that all the resources will be available, a point that I put to the Minister in Committee as well. I am not a very technical person—I often describe myself as a ““tech-know-nothing””. However, after we have worked out what hardware is required, it will then need to be designed, procured and made, a process that I imagine would also take some time and could not happen overnight. Again, we do not have any clarity that those assets will be ready by the time the Bill comes into force either. We are in a position where Parliament is being asked to pass a Bill when there are real concerns about whether the increased risk that it poses can be met by the Government and the police. Our amendments do not seek to frustrate the purpose of the Bill, but to reassure the House and, perhaps more importantly, the public that we will be ready for the new regime when it comes online. They therefore offer a practical way to try to deal with some of the issues that have been raised in Committee and which will be of great concern to the public. I never thought that I would say this, but I can pray in aid Lord Howard, the former Home Secretary, in support of my case for amendment 20. He, too, gave evidence to the Committee, saying:"““If the police evidence is that it will take them a year to prepare, that evidence has to be respected. Obviously, it is important that arrangements remain in place until the moment arrives when the new regime can be effectively introduced.””––[Official Report, Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Public Bill Committee, 21 June 2011; c. 27, Q84.]" That is exactly the purpose of amendment 20.