Clause 45 - Code of practice: Chief Constable
Railways and Transport Safety Bill
3:45 pm
Mrs Anne McIntosh (Vale of York, Conservative)
I am grateful for the clarification. It is disarming that the Under-Secretary is so charming and can so easily find the right piece of paper at the right moment. I shall perhaps in future quote him on what he said about being there to help.
I wonder whether the Under-Secretary can satisfy me as to whether the clause simply transfers a code of practice that existed under the SRA to the BTP committee, or whether it goes further. I fear that it may go further in some regards. As one might expect, I warmly welcome the fact that the Secretary of State will have to lay any code or revision made under the clause before Parliament. I sometimes suffer from short-term memory loss, and this may be one of those occasions, but I have not, in the short time that I have had the privilege to serve in the House, ever noticed a code of practice being laid before Parliament. I wondered what the procedure would be. Would it be introduced by statutory instrument, and if so, would a negative or affirmative resolution procedure be used? It would be of great interest to Opposition Members to have the opportunity to consider any such code. It is extremely important that chief constables, whether of our local police forces or—more relevantly, under the Bill—of the British Transport police, know the code or rules within which they are operating.
Given that we debated the matter this morning, and given the statement made by the Home Secretary this afternoon, it is particularly pertinent that the laying of such a code of practice before Parliament would especially apply when anything in the publication might be considered to be against the interests of national security. I wonder whether the Under-Secretary can be a little more specific. He will obviously have detected that the level of security for a form of transport infrastructure that you do not wish me to refer to by name, Mr. Hurst—the Under-Secretary will, I think, have grasped which type—was
a source of great concern to us. Conservatives, led by the shadow Home Secretary, were disappointed that the Government did not voluntarily field a Minister, preferably the Home Secretary, to come and inform us of that.
Being of a nervous disposition, I think that it always puts one's mind at rest if one knows before embarking on a flight—or, obviously, train journey for the purposes of this Bill, Mr. Hurst—whether there is a threat to national security. I wonder whether the Under-Secretary will put our mind at rest. The Secretary of State may be minded to make an oral or written statement on the matter, instead of making it the subject of a statutory instrument. I do not know whether members of the Committee have had experience of the way in which a code of practice works, but it is alarming to think that it could prejudice the prevention or detection of crime, or the prosecution of offenders. I am not sure how such a situation could arise, but I would feel somewhat alarmed if that were the case.
It would be highly preferable that a person's safety was not put in jeopardy. Will the measures envisaged in the clause relate to individuals going about their business on trains or in a railway station, or to the safety of a serving police officer? The Minister has been so helpful this afternoon and it would enable us to have a better understanding of the clause if he could provide such information. I welcome the fact that the Secretary of State will, as set out in clause 45, lay before Parliament the revision of such a code of practice. I should like to know what procedure will be used, for the benefit of my right hon. and hon. Friends, some of whom have been around for longer than I have in this place. We await the Under-Secretary's response with bated breath.