Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

We can deal with this matter rather more briefly. The new clause repeats a point that we made before lunch—that none of the provisions in the chapter should come into force until it is apparent that the other countries have introduced reciprocal provisions, and those provisions are in force. I do not want to take up too much of the Committee's time, but we thought that it would be helpful to have that in the Bill. That is

what we look forward to, and I shall listen with interest to what the Minister has to say.

Ms Caroline Flint (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (reducing organised and international crime, anti drugs co-ordination and international and European issues), Home Office; Don Valley, Labour)

As the hon. Gentleman says, the subject is similar to one that we discussed earlier today. The new clause would ensure that the provisions of chapter 4 did not come into effect until all participating countries had implemented similar provisions. That is similar ground to that covered in discussion on amendment No. 88A, which sought to restrict the application of clause 32 to EU member states that had incorporated similar provisions into national law.

We think that the new clause is unnecessary. Participating countries, for the purpose of chapter 4, will be member states of the European Union, and it is inevitable that they will implement the protocol at different times. Indeed, the protocol is framed in such a way as to ensure that the failure of just one or two states to adopt the protocol does not prevent the agreement from coming into force between the other parties. The protocol provides that it will enter into force once eight member states have ratified.

We would not wish to restrict the application of our legislative provisions until the last member state ratifies. That would not be of any benefit to us, and would prevent our authorities from seeking assistance from countries that could assist. However, I stress that that does not mean that we will be responding to requests for customer information and account monitoring from those member states that have not adopted the protocol. In order to make a request on the basis of articles 1, 2 or 3 of the protocol, member states must have notified the Council of the EU under the terms of article 13.

Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)

I want some helpful clarification, if the Minister can give it. If she cannot, I will accept her undertaking to write to me and the other members of the Committee on the matter. She talked about restrictions on agreements coming into force when eight member countries had ratified. Does ''ratification'' mean just that, or does it mean implementation, so that the laws in those eight member states would come into force and operate?

Ms Caroline Flint (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (reducing organised and international crime, anti drugs co-ordination and international and European issues), Home Office; Don Valley, Labour)

To finish the point I was making, before I come to the hon. Gentleman's point, there is no question of states that have not adopted the protocol being able to make requests on the strength of it.

I will seek guidance on the hon. Gentleman's question, and will write to him in due course. I am trying to be helpful in saying that the protocol has to be ratified by different EU member states, but they may not all do so at the same time. We would not want a situation in which we wanted to investigate a certain matter and required disclosure of information, but could not do that with a member state that had already ratified the protocol. That is my understanding of the situation. For clarification, ''ratification'' means that the country has to be ready and able to assist. I hope that that is helpful.

Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)

It is indeed. The Minister received guidance quickly and put it on the record. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.