The right hon. Gentleman, the Chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, makes an important point when he draws that distinction. I say to him that, under the current regime, the Crown Prosecution Service will consider the prosecution of a properly authorised CHIS as perverse. So in essence, the Bill will offer no practical difference in the application of the power, because obviously the conduct will have to be properly authorised, as it does now. If something has not been properly authorised, then clearly the authorisation will not have effect. Where CHIS conduct is outside that authorisation, there will be no impact on the ability to prosecute. Public authorities tightly limit the scope of CHIS criminal conduct, so this will not provide a licence to commit crime outside those stringent limits. In reality, the practical difference between providing a defence and making conduct lawful is limited. Indeed, we say that the provisions actually reflect broader provisions within the current legislative regime, governing all other aspects as well. There is a distinction, which the right hon. Gentleman makes, but in practice, we do not see that there is the fundamentals difference that perhaps some might wish to paint into it.
Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
James Brokenshire
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 5 October 2020.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
681 c656 Session
2019-21Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-28 15:59:26 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-10-05/20100547000001
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-10-05/20100547000001
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-10-05/20100547000001