Clause 92 - Supplementary and consequential provision
Crime (International Co-operation) Bill [Lords]
3:30 pm
Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)
All four amendments relate to the issue of parliamentary scrutiny and the future of the legislation.
Amendment No. 114 would leave out clause 92(3). We think that subsection (3) is far too wide a power—a Henry VIII power. It was said in another place—I think by one of the noble Friends of the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland—that in Scotland such a power should be named after the title of a famous Scottish play. I do not know whether theatrical bad luck applies to parliamentarians, but I shall not make the mistake of one noble Lord by naming the play. I am sure that those of us who have had links with the theatre will know what I mean.
The provisions under clause 92(3) are far too wide, give far too much unfettered discretion and we want them deleted. Our argument will be familiar not only to the Minister but to all Committee members. The
Minister knows that we are never keen on Henry VIII-type powers.
Amendment No. 115 would cut out part of subsection (6) to make it less wide, and introduce a far narrower provision for the reasons that I have already stated. Amendment No. 84 would insert in subsection (5) new wording, which will provide for greater parliamentary scrutiny.
Amendment No. 85 introduces a sunset subsection to the clause. On 17 March, there was a long debate in another place at columns GC58 and 59 on the advantages of sunset clauses, but there would be no benefit to be had from my repeating that debate at length. Conservative Members are of the view that it does no harm to introduce sunset provisions in new legislation. It gives an opportunity to reflect on how well the legislation is working, and to identify any problems. I place much faith in the advantages of sunset clauses because I am a parliamentarian who believes that we have too many laws in this country, and, all too often, laws are left on the statute book; nobody ever goes back and asks, ''Did we get it right?'' It is only when there are catastrophes, such as the Government's recent tax credits scheme and other things that they have got wrong and had to own up to in the past six years, that we have a review. It would be good to have a sunset clause in most legislation, and if I am ever successful in getting a high place in the private Members' ballot in the House of Commons—