Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)

This is slightly different because, in another place, there was no debate on this clause. It was passed on the nod for the sake of speed. The Committee will be pleased that I will once again be very brief. However, there is one question that I wish to put to the Minister. It is a serious question, which he may want to discuss with his officials. I am happy for the Minister to write to me, instead of responding today.

Clause 12 deals with variation or revocation. The provisions in general terms seem absolutely fine. However, at the moment, any person who is affected can apply to vary or revoke under clause 12(2)(d). That is fine, after the original order has been made. I am seeking reassurance that any person who might be affected will have the right to be heard during the consideration of the original application. Let us suppose that an application is being made, and people who might be affected come to hear about it. That is not beyond all likelihood. If the person who might be affected by it is aware that an application is being heard, there is nothing specific that gives that person the right to be heard—locus standi, as lawyers

call it—during the original application. They have the right to come along afterwards and be heard on an application to vary or revoke, but that could lead to more court time and more court costs, after the event. I would like the Minister to consider with his officials whether it could be made clear—perhaps through a small Government amendment—that as well as having the right to apply to vary or revoke, a person who may be affected will have rights of audience and rights to be heard when the original application is considered. As I read it, that is not clear in the Bill.

Mr Bob Ainsworth (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Home Office; Coventry North East, Labour)

Let us suppose that the order is made on a person who is outside the UK. The hon. Gentleman put the point that that person might have a view about it.

Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)

I am not talking about the person who is the subject of the order, but people who are affected by the order—those whose assets might be affected. They are referred to in the Bill. Rather than the person who is the subject of the order, someone else who is affected by it can apply to vary or revoke it. However, the Bill does not cover someone who may be affected by the order, who lives within the jurisdiction and becomes aware of the order. That person does not apparently have the right to be heard in the English language.

Mr Bob Ainsworth (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Home Office; Coventry North East, Labour)

The hon. Gentleman knows that there will be many circumstances in which such a right will not be available to people. However, there may be circumstances when it is. I do not believe that such matters are covered under the Bill. I shall examine its provisions and write to him.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 12 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Further consideration adjourned.—[Mr. Heppell.]

Adjourned accordingly at twenty-four minutes to Six o'clock till Thursday 12 June at ten minutes past Nine o'clock.