Clause 21 - Special committee of the Board
Police (Northern Ireland) Bill [Lords]
3:15 pm
Mr David Trimble (Upper Bann, UUP)
Amendments Nos. 91 and 92 relate to the establishment of the special committee of the board, which is part of the arrangements that we have talked about on many other occasions. The clause was added at the last minute in another place. I have listened to the hon. Member for Newry and Armagh talking about the perils of the Report stage and the nasty things that can happen to people during it. I must say that my colleagues in another place would agree with him, because things happened to them on that occasion.
Amendment No. 91 would remove the word ''shall'' and replace it with ''may''. That would create a situation in which the Policing Board was not under a legal obligation to create such a committee and could choose whether to do so. That would give the Policing Board the option. It also enables my colleagues on the Policing Board to let the Committee and the Minister know that they take great exception to that obligation. The Policing Board was not consulted about the changes; I think that the Minister would accept that. The Policing Board would prefer not to be consulted on certain matters on which there are likely to be political differences. However, the Policing Board was not consulted on this issue that deals with its internal workings. Will the Minister tell me who was consulted? My party's representatives on the board were not consulted and, as far as I am aware, no member of my party was consulted. When the Government tabled the amendments in another place, they offered information and briefings on the matter to one of my colleagues who was, at that stage, indisposed and not in a position to take advantage of it. However, that was a briefing, not a consultation.
I wish to place on record the fact that we take grave exception to the Government bringing forward an important series of changes to the operation of the Policing Board without consulting the board. The board, as the Minister knows, has been remarkably successful in its operations and the Government have unilaterally introduced changes without consultation. I will wait to hear what the hon. Member for East Londonderry says, but I suspect that his party's representatives were not consulted either. The Government are very foolish to proceed in such a high-handed, unilateral way with a board that is working successfully.
There is considerable anger about the issue among my party's representatives on the Policing Board. They
will be delighted if the present provision, which places them under a legal obligation to form such a committee, is amended to give them discretion. They are presently not minded to form a committee if the option is available to them. That is a serious matter in itself, but leaving aside the more general issue of the failure to consult, one may doubt whether it is a good idea to create such a committee at all. The establishment of a committee would create different classes of members within board. The committee would handle sensitive information, giving rise to difficulty. I have already argued on other amendments that such problems would not arise if the provisions relating to the disclosure of information were drawn more sensibly and more tightly. The provision is ill advised and consequential on other ill-advised changes that have been made.
The Bill, as presently drafted, provides an avenue whereby matters that relate to national security will be communicated, or might be communicated, to the committee of the board. It would not be inappropriate to have a safeguard with regard to the persons who are on the board to ensure that they are fit and proper to receive the information. That explains amendment No. 100, which would give rise to some interesting situations, were it to be carried into effect and were positive vetting to be required with regard to the occupations of members of the Policing Board.
Although some hon. Members, such as myself, might find it slightly amusing, there is a serious point concerning the failure of communication, the failure to consult and the failure to bother to find out what were our views on the matter. I want the Minister to say who was consulted, whose idea it was, where it came from and what dirty little deal lies behind it.