Clause 27 - Exercise of powers by others
Crime (International Co-operation) Bill [Lords]
3:00 pm
Mr James Paice (South East Cambridgeshire, Conservative)
Not only with this Bill, but with other Bills over which the Minister and I have sparred, he has always shown considerable common sense, even in
the face of contradictory briefs, and I am grateful to him for that on this occasion. Common sense is not a phenomenon that often crosses the portals of the Treasury, but I am appreciative that he realises the import of the fact that the Treasury is not a person: it is a building or institution, so the concept of it giving powers is odd.
I am grateful to the Minister for his comments. I chided him when he was responding to amendment No. 41, because it seemed as though practically everything he said was about justifying giving the powers to Customs and Excise officials, and no one is contesting that. Indeed, on Tuesday, amendments from both the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives sought to insert ''Customs and Excise'' into the Bill, so it can hardly be considered controversial for it to have the powers.
My much narrower point was that when Customs and Excise is operating these powers, it should do so under the guidance of the Secretary of State for the purposes of consistency. The last paragraph of the Minister's brief addressed that point, and I am grateful for his comments and reassurance. However, I still take the view that it would have been better to insert the phrase in the Bill, but fair enough.
On subsection (2) and the delegation of powers to others by order, it obviously sticks in my throat a little to accept that the Secretary of State should effectively have power to prescribe any organisation by order. Of course I accept what the Minister says—that a review is taking place, that there is no immediate hidden agenda, and that it is not as though as soon as the Bill receives Royal Assent the Government will come up with an order giving the powers to a range of other organisations. However, I still think that it is a shame that the Secretary of State should require the power to seek an order, and we will need to reflect on whether any such order should not at least be made by affirmative procedure, and whether the details of any power of significance should be considered by the House of Commons.
However, I am half-persuaded by the Minister's argument that we should not remove the subsection altogether. Particularly in light of the Minister's words about amendment No. 40, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 27 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 28 ordered to stand part of the Bill.