Nick Herbert (Shadow Minister (Police Reform), Home Affairs; Arundel & South Downs, Conservative)

I support the amendments.

Further to my comments about the extension of bail conditions, I add my concerns about where the measure leads us, given that there will be no time limit on or automatic review of the provisions, unless the relevant suspect appeals. I foresee that when dealing with suspects, it might become an option for the police to impose punitive conditions on bail in the hope that that will dismiss the suspect concerned and that the suspect will simply abide by the conditions. That would effectively shut out their need to go to court at all, and might mean that the courts never have an opportunity to consider the matter.

The proposals in the Bill represent a fundamental shift in the balance between the powers that we have traditionally expected the police to deploy and the proper role of the courts. In that context, it is extraordinary that there is no measure to time-limit the provisions and that the Minister would reject one. When my rather too lengthy intervention on the Minister came to an end, I was about to ask whether she was sure that the provision in the Bill was compatible with the Human Rights Act. I suppose that   the operation of consent is important, and perhaps that is the answer to my point, but the open-ended imposition of punitive restrictions, with no formal review process, nevertheless seems to contradict the normal processes and principles of natural justice.

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green for tabling her amendments. Even if she decides not to press them, I hope that she, like my colleagues and I, will be willing to return to the issue at a later stage. Some of the principles that we have discussed will apply to the measures on conditional cautions, under which the same extension of summary justice is proposed. That gives rise to the same profound issue of whether it is proper to allow such an exercise of power without sufficient scrutiny or sufficient checks and balances.

Lynne Featherstone (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Hornsey & Wood Green, Liberal Democrat)

I have listened to the Minister’s comments, but I am not reassured. There are issues about the open-ended and overweening nature of the change in the balance of power before charge, which might have some dangerous, unintended consequences. At this point, however, I am content to ask that we revisit the issue at a later stage. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Lynne Featherstone (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Hornsey & Wood Green, Liberal Democrat)

I beg to move amendment No. 11, in schedule 4, page 78, line 4, leave out paragraph 6 and insert—

‘6(1)In section 47(1A) after “but” there is inserted “, subject to subsection (1AA),”.

(2)After section 47(1A) there is inserted—

“(1AA)The normal powers to impose conditions of bail shall be available to him where a custody officer releases a person on bail under section 37(2) or 37(7)(b), subject to sections 47B to 47E below.

(1AB)In section (1AA), “the normal powers to impose conditions of bail” has the meaning given in section 3(6) of the Bail Act 1976”.

(3)After section 47A there is inserted—

“47BLimits on duration of bail conditions without charge (1)Subject to the following provisions of this section and to sections 47C, 47D and 47E below, any relevant conditions on bail shall not last for more than 24 hours after the relevant time. (2)“Relevant conditions” in this section and in sections 47C, 47D and 47E below are any conditions of bail imposed on a person under section 47(1AA) above. (3)For the purposes of this section and sections 47C, 47D and 47E below “the relevant time” has the meaning given in section 41, subsections (2) to (5), subject to the following modification: for “the period of detention of” in subsection (2) there is substituted “duration of bail conditions imposed on”. (4)Subject to subsection (5) below relevant conditions shall be rescinded 24 hours after the relevant time. (5)Subsection (4) above does not apply if the continuation of relevant conditions for more than 24 hours after the relevant time has been authorised or is otherwise permitted in accordance with sections 47C, 47D or 47E below. (6)A person whose bail conditions are rescinded under subsection (4) above shall not be re-arrested without a warrant for the offence for which he was previously arrested unless new evidence justifying a further arrest has come to light since his release; but this subsection does not prevent an arrest under section 46A above.   47CAuthorisation of continuation of bail conditions (1)Where a police officer of the rank of superintendent or above who is responsible for the police station at which the relevant conditions were imposed has reasonable grounds for believing that— (a)the relevant conditions imposed on the person are necessary— (i)to secure that he surrenders to custody, or

(1)Subject to the following provisions of this section and to sections 47C, 47D and 47E below, any relevant conditions on bail shall not last for more than 24 hours after the relevant time.

(2)“Relevant conditions” in this section and in sections 47C, 47D and 47E below are any conditions of bail imposed on a person under section 47(1AA) above.

(3)For the purposes of this section and sections 47C, 47D and 47E below “the relevant time” has the meaning given in section 41, subsections (2) to (5), subject to the following modification: for “the period of detention of” in subsection (2) there is substituted “duration of bail conditions imposed on”.

(4)Subject to subsection (5) below relevant conditions shall be rescinded 24 hours after the relevant time.

(5)Subsection (4) above does not apply if the continuation of relevant conditions for more than 24 hours after the relevant time has been authorised or is otherwise permitted in accordance with sections 47C, 47D or 47E below.

(6)A person whose bail conditions are rescinded under subsection (4) above shall not be re-arrested without a warrant for the offence for which he was previously arrested unless new evidence justifying a further arrest has come to light since his release; but this subsection does not prevent an arrest under section 46A above.

(1)Where a police officer of the rank of superintendent or above who is responsible for the police station at which the relevant conditions were imposed has reasonable grounds for believing that—

(a)the relevant conditions imposed on the person are necessary—

(ii)to secure that he does not commit an offence while on bail, or

(iii)to secure that he does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice whether in relation to himself or any other person, or

(iii)(iv)for his own protection or, if he is a child or young person, for his own welfare or in his own interests;

(b)an offence for which he was arrested is an indictable offence; and

(c)the investigation is being conducted diligently and expeditiously, he may authorise the continuation of the relevant conditions for a period expiring at or before 36 hours after the relevant time.

(2)Where an officer such as is mentioned in subsection (1) above has authorised the continuation of relevant conditions for a period expiring less than 36 hours after the relevant time, such an officer may authorise the contiuation of relevant conditions for a further period expiring not more than 36 hours after that time if the conditions specified in subsection (1) above are still satisfied when he gives the authorisation.

(3)No authorisation under subsection (1) above shall be given in respect of any person more than 24 hours after the relevant time.

(4)Where an officer authorises the contiuation of relevant conditions under subsection (1) above, it shall be his duty to inform that person of the grounds for the continuation of relevant conditions.

(5)Before determining whether to authorise the continuation of relevant conditions under subsection (1) or (2) above, an officer shall give—

(a)the person on whom the relevant conditions were imposed; or

(b)any solicitor representing him who is available at the time when it falls to the officer to determine whether to give the authorisation,

an opportunity to make representations to him about the continuation of the relevant conditions.

(6)Subject to subsection (7) below, the person subject to the relevant conditions or his solicitor may make representations under subsection (5) above either orally or in writing.

(7)The officer to whom it falls to determine whether to give the authoisation may refuse to hear oral representations from the person subject to the relevant conditions if he considers that he is unfit to make such representations by reason of his condition or behaviour.

(8)Where an officer has authorised the continuation of relevant conditions on a person who has not been charged under subsection (1) or (2) above, any relevant conditions shall be rescinded at the expiry of 36 hours after the relevant time, unless—

(a)he has been charged with an offence; or

(b)continuation of the relevant conditions is authorised or otherwise permitted in accordance with section 47D below.

47DWarrants of continuation of bail conditions (1)Where, on an application on oath made by a constable and supported by an information, a magistrates’ court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the continuation of relevant conditions imposed on the person to whom the application relates is justified, it may issue a warrant of continued conditions authorising the continuation of the relevant conditions on that person. (2)A court may not hear an application for a warrant of continued conditions unless the person to whom the application relates— (a)has been furnished with a copy of the information; and

(1)Where, on an application on oath made by a constable and supported by an information, a magistrates’ court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the continuation of relevant conditions imposed on the person to whom the application relates is justified, it may issue a warrant of continued conditions authorising the continuation of the relevant conditions on that person.

(2)A court may not hear an application for a warrant of continued conditions unless the person to whom the application relates—

(a)has been furnished with a copy of the information; and

(3)The person to whom the application relates shall be entitled to be legally represented at the hearing and, if he is not so represented but wishes to be so represented—

(a)the court shall adjourn the hearing to enable him to obtain representation; and

(b)the relevant conditions may continue during the adjournment.

(4)Continuation of relevant conditions is only justified for the purposes of this section or section 47E below if—

(a)the relevant conditions imposed on the person are necessary—

(i)to secure that he surrenders to custody, or

(ii)to secure that he does not commit an offence while on bail, or

(iii)to secure that he does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice whether in relation to himself or any other person, or(iv)for his own protection or, if he is a child or young person, for his own welfare or in his own interests;

(b)an offence for which he was arrested is an indictable offence; and

(c)the investigation is being conducted diligently and expeditiously.

(5)Subject to subsection (7) below, an application for a warrant of continued conditions may be made—

(a)at any time before the expiry of 36 hours after the relevant time; or

(b)in a case where—

(i)it is not practicable for the magistrates’ court to which the application will be made to sit at the expiry of 36 hours after the relevant time; but

(ii)the court will sit during the six hours following the end of that period, at any time before the expiry of the said six hours.

(6)In a case to which subsection (5)(b) above applies the relevant conditions imposed on the person to whom the application relates may continue until the application is heard.

(7)If—

(a)an application for a warrant of continued conditions is made after the expiry of 36 hours after the relevant time; and

(b)it appears to the magistrates’ court that it would have been reasonable for the police to make it before the expiry of that period,

the court shall dismiss the application.

(8)Where on an application such as is mentioned in subsection (1) above a magistrates’ court is not satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that continuation of the relevant conditions imposed on the person to whom the application relates is justified, it shall be its duty—

(a)to refuse the application; or

(b)to adjourn the hearing of it until a time not later than 36 hours after the relevant time.

(9)The relevant conditions may continue during the adjournment.

(10)A warrant of continued conditions shall—

(a)state the time at which it is issued;

(b)authorise the continuation of the relevant conditions on the person to whom it relates for the period stated in it.

(11)Subject to subsection (12) below, the period stated in a warrant of continued conditions shall be such period as the magistrates’ court thinks fit, having regard to the evidence before it.

(12)The period shall not be longer than 36 hours.

(13)Any information submitted in support of an application under this section shall state—

(a)the nature of the offence for which the person to whom the application relates has been arrested;

(b)the general nature of the evidence on which that person was arrested;

(c)what inquiries relating to the offence have been made by the police and what further inquiries are proposed by them;(d)the reasons for believing the continuation of the relevant conditions on that person to be necessary for the purposes of such further inquiries.

(14)Where an application under this section is refused, either the person to whom the application relates shall forthwith be charged or, subject to subsection (15) below, the relevant conditions shall be rescinded.

(15)Relevant conditions need not be rescinded under subsection (14) above—

(a)before the expiry of 24 hours after the relevant time; or

(b)before the expiry of any longer period for which continuation of the relevant conditions is or has been authorised under section 47C above.

(16)Where an application under this section is refused, no further application shall be made under this section in respect of the person to whom the refusal relates, unless supported by evidence which has come to light since the refusal.

(17)Where a warrant of continued conditions is issued, the relevant conditions on the person to whom it relates shall be rescinded on the expiry of the warrant unless he is charged.

(18)A person whose bail conditions are rescinded under subsection (17) above shall not be re-arrested without a warrant for the offence for which he was previously arrested unless new evidence justifying a further arrest has come to light since his release; but this subsection does not prevent an arrest under section 46A above.

47EExtension of warrants of continued conditions (1)On an application on oath made by a constable and supported by an information a magistrates’ court may extend a warrant of continued conditions issued under section 47D above if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the continuation of the relevant conditions on the person to whom the application relates is justified. (2)Subject to subsection (3) below, the period for which a warrant of continued conditions may be extended shall be such period as the court thinks fit, having regard to the evidence before it. (3)The period shall not— (a)be longer than 36 hours; or (b)end later than 96 hours after the relevant time.

(1)On an application on oath made by a constable and supported by an information a magistrates’ court may extend a warrant of continued conditions issued under section 47D above if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the continuation of the relevant conditions on the person to whom the application relates is justified.

(2)Subject to subsection (3) below, the period for which a warrant of continued conditions may be extended shall be such period as the court thinks fit, having regard to the evidence before it.

(3)The period shall not—

(a)be longer than 36 hours; or

(4)Where a warrant of continued conditions has been extended under subsection (1) above, or further extended under this subsection, for a period ending before 96 hours after the relevant time, on an application such as is mentioned in that subsection a magistrates’ court may further extend the warrant if it is satisfied as there mentioned; and subsections (2) and (3) above apply to such further extensions as they apply to extensions under subsection (1) above.

(5)A warrant of continued conditions shall, if extended or furhter extended under this section, be endorsed with a note of the period of the extension.

(6)Subsections (2), (3) and (13) of section 47D above shall apply to an application made under this section as they apply to an application made under that section.

(7)Where an application under this section is refused, either the person to whom the application relates shall forthwith be charged or, subject to subsection (8) below, the relevant conditions shall be rescinded.

(8)Relevant conditions need not be rescinded under subsection (7) above before the expiry of any period for which a warrant of continued conditions issued in relation to him has been extended or further extended on an earlier application made under this section.’.

Some of this debate will be a repeat of the previous one. Basically, the amendment is copied from sections 41 to 44 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, which relate to pre-charge detention. Once again, we   seek to ensure that the conditions that are set on pre-charge bail at a police station cannot be open-ended timewise and we seek to limit the duration of bail conditions without charge. Once again, Liberty was extremely strong and clear in its briefing about its concerns over the lack of safeguards, time limits and judicial oversight over the conditions for pre-charge bail.

As has been mentioned, certain things automatically follow when someone has been charged and the person has certain rights relating, for example, to contact with a lawyer or to learning about the case against them. The ability to impose conditions on a person before charge could lead to the police never getting round to the charge or never placing the case before the court. In effect, that would be a punishment or at least a restriction that was subject either to no legal necessities or only to necessities that were not sufficient to safeguard somebody’s civil liberties and human rights.

Unless time limits are provided for, pre-charge bail conditions could be used as alternatives to charging a person and bringing them before the courts for prosecution. Without judicial oversight, the police could use bail conditions as an endless preventive tool or as a punishment in themselves. In the amendment, therefore, we seek a reassurance from the Government that street bail cannot be used for lengthy periods while evidence is being gathered to determine whether to charge.

My colleagues and I are extremely uneasy about this part of the Bill, because we believe that it will have unintended consequences. I find it hard to see how the Minister can reassure us, even if there is guidance, that that is not the intention. Once again, we ask the Minister to support our amendment, although I am sure that she will find that difficult. If she is not willing to support it, I hope that she will be willing to table Government amendments to at least introduce a time limit to safeguard civil liberties and human rights.

Hazel Blears (Minister of State (Policing, Security and Community Safety), Home Office; Salford, Labour)

The hon. Lady is right to say that the amendment covers some of the ground that we have already discussed. The aim of granting bail is to enable the person to be released from custody. At times during this debate, we have lost sight of that.

Under section 37(2) or (7)(b) to PACE, bail is granted pending the outcome of further police inquiries prior to a decision to charge or refer to the Crown Prosecution Service for a decision on a charge. Paragraph 6 of schedule 4 to the Bill before us amends PACE to enable the normal conditions of bail, which currently can be attached to bail that is granted pending the decision of the CPS to charge or refer, to be attached to the other categories of bail. As I have said, that is aimed at raising the ability and confidence of the police to enable people to be released from custody for a period sufficient to enable the necessary further inquiries to be completed.

The hon. Lady put forward the idea that the police might use that as a punitive end in itself, or as a method for simply never bringing a charge. That would be an   inappropriate use of police powers and therefore would be subject to challenge should a case come to court, and certainly subject to appeal in the magistrates court. There are safeguards in the Bill that would allow people to apply to the custody sergeant to have those conditions re-examined and varied, so I feel that the hon. Lady has reached a conclusion that is not justified by the provisions in the Bill. She is speculating that the police, with some kind of vindictive attitude or nefarious motive, would seek to use those powers inappropriately and unlawfully. The powers are there to be used in a proportionate way, and the conditions have to be necessary. The picture that she painted is extreme and not one in which police officers would be involved. Clearly, there are general provisions to challenge police officers’ actions should they act unlawfully.

The hon. Lady’s amendment would impose on the system a new and extensive bureaucracy, and require police and magistrates to review conditions even when the person who is subject to those conditions has not sought to change or vary them, or asked for them to be reviewed. It is difficult to see how an effective review could be carried out without contacting that person on virtually every day of their conditional bail to see whether those conditions are still appropriate and proportionate. Again, that would involve extensive bureaucracy, and would take officers off the front line so that they could go and find those people to check their conditions. The amendment is poorly thought out.

The hon. Lady talks about a maximum period of 96 hours. That is arbitrary, and I see no evidence to suggest that four days is the period for which bail conditions can normally be sustained. If bail conditions are issued at the custody station, in the normal course of events, people can be on bail for a significant time. I see no evidence whatever to suggest that the conditions set out in paragraph 6 would be more onerous than those that would normally apply, or that four days is the maximum period for which they should be sustained.

The Bill contains safeguards. I said in the circular that has been issued that street bail is not expected to last for a period longer than six weeks. In most cases, a person will answer to their bail much sooner. We are looking at a fairly short period in which people will have conditions so that while they are on the streets, they are not reoffending or interfering with witnesses. That will ensure that the investigation into the offence can proceed properly and that further police inquiries can be carried out while that person is on conditional bail.

After four to six weeks that person will answer to the bail and the matter will be dealt with. I really feel that the hon. Lady is painting a picture and imputing to the police service motives that it would not accept. She is suggesting that it would misuse those powers in a punitive and unlawful way. She is wrong to set out that scenario, so I ask her to consider withdrawing the amendment. If not, I ask the Committee to oppose it.

Lynne Featherstone (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Hornsey & Wood Green, Liberal Democrat)

I was not impugning the police force; I am examining the extent to which those powers could be extended and the possibility of unintended consequences. That is my job, but this is a probing amendment, and on that basis I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.