Clause 57 - Recognition in United Kingdom of
Crime (International Co-operation) Bill [Lords]
5:15 pm
Mr David Jamieson (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport; Plymouth, Devonport, Labour)
I wonder how the hon. Gentleman sleeps at night with all the dreadful things that the Government are supposedly doing. The period of 21 days was not just plucked out of the air. That length of time has been used in previous legislation and is the normal period for an appeal in domestic cases—that is where it came from.
The hon. Gentleman also said that it takes the Government a long time to answer letters. I hope that he was not referring to my Department, which has a very good record in Whitehall and Westminster on responding to hon. Members in correspondence. Although my Department probably gets almost twice as much correspondence per Minister than any other Department, we have the equal best record on responding in good time. I say that for the assistance of the Committee, because there has been a slur against some Departments in relation to their responses to letters. I believe that the time of responding is actually rather better than it was prior to 1997. There may have been a period during which the hon. Gentleman himself was a Minister, although I am sure that he was excellent in responding.
The amendment would remove the power to make regulations prescribing a period longer than the 21 days specified in the Bill for a disqualification to take effect in which to lodge an appeal or to produce a license following disqualification. The power to make regulations will be used only if we conclude that a longer period should be prescribed in which the specified actions should occur. Such regulations would not make provision for different time lengths in different circumstances—the time lengths would be common to all cases. A decision to give effect to a foreign disqualification necessitates giving the offender notice that he is disqualified. Although the offender should have been aware of the proceedings, the notice given under the clause will be used to inform the driver of disqualification in the United Kingdom.
We consider that the period of 21 days before the disqualification takes effect is both reasonable and appropriate. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman has another figure in mind—he has not tabled an amendment to that effect—but I should be interested to know if he does. We are a listening Government and I should be very happy to hear any suggestion that he has to make. The provisions allow for the delivery of the notice and give time for the
driver either to surrender his or her license or to consider lodging an appeal. Reference is made to the period currently allowed in which to lodge an appeal against a domestic disqualification from a decision of a magistrates court.
The power to prescribe a period longer than 21 days is needed, because it would allow us to make adjustments in line with any changes to the appeal court and also, in the light of experience, in the operation of convention procedures. To some extent, we are sailing into uncharted waters in relation to co-operation between countries. If drivers consistently experience difficulties in complying with the requirements within the 21-day period currently specified, we need to be able to prescribe a longer period. The regulations would therefore not prescribe criteria for the automatic extension for the time limits laid down in the Bill.
I hope that that has assuaged the hon. Gentleman's concerns, because he seems to have got himself rather worried on the last two groups of amendments and convinced himself that the Government are up to some subterfuge. I can assure him that that is not the case.