Humfrey Malins (Shadow Minister, (Assisted By Shadow Law Officers); Woking, Conservative)

While we are on the subject of football banning orders and football-related disorder—

Kevin Brennan (Assistant Whip (funded by HM Treasury); Cardiff West, Labour)

Why are you looking at me like that?

Humfrey Malins (Shadow Minister, (Assisted By Shadow Law Officers); Woking, Conservative)

I had no intention of looking at the hon. Gentleman in that way.

With the 2006 football World cup less than a year away, it is important that football banning orders operate as effectively as possible. Some concerns have been expressed to me about public safety; it is said by some that there is next to no national strategy on football banning orders. Research suggests that it is unlikely that many orders are complied with or that   breaches are detected. For many forces, it is not a priority, so little or no training is provided for front counter staff.

Unlike immigration officers or Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, which has special branches that monitor immigrants, contraband goods and terrorism respectively, football intelligence officers have no right to check passports at points of entry and exit. They have the right to request to see passports, regardless of whether individuals are wanted on warrant or for an arrestable offence, or subject to a football banning order. I understand that many of those subject to such orders are acutely aware of that and decline. The result is that they can travel with virtual impunity.

It is noteworthy that the police have the right to use the automatic number plate recognition system on points of entry and exit; they can check vehicles but not the passengers. Is there a reason for that distinction? Would the Minister consider amending the Football (Disorder) Act 2000 to grant police officers the power to demand to see passports at points of entry and exit, as well as granting them the automatic right to access manifest passenger lists to check whether they contain persons who are subject to football banning orders? I am sure that she will agree that it is imperative that the orders operate effectively with the World cup not far away, and I hope that she will be able to deal with the observations that I have passed on, though not necessarily now. In due course, I shall be extremely grateful to have a letter on the point.

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

I am a little surprised at what the hon. Gentleman has said. I understand that he is putting forward a view that has been expressed to him, but in my experience football banning orders have been extremely effective. They certainly were during Euro 2004, when I went out to Portugal to see how the law would be implemented. Everybody who was involved thought that it was a good, imaginative power, used successfully. There was also an effective ports policing operation. Again, I saw that for myself at Manchester airport. I watched the police tackle—“tackle” is probably not the right word—stop people.

The police do have powers to check passports on the departure side of ports. I shall consider what the hon. Gentleman has said, but I believe that the forces take the matter seriously. It is one of our most successful pieces of legislation. Clause 37 and schedule 1 bring in a range of refinements and improvements. We have learned from experience and want to make the law even more effective, particularly, as the hon. Gentleman says, with the 2006 football World cup in Germany coming up. We want to ensure that the proposals are really effective and achieve our aims.

We have a new proposal to extend the control period during which people are not allowed to travel to matches and to empower the police to intercept an individual and to commence banning orders proceedings within 24 hours where there is evidence that that person has previously caused violence. The measures can be used in a targeted and intelligence-led way, so that they really are applied to people who are likely to cause problems.

Schedule 2 introduces bail conditions for situations in which, at the moment, there are lengthy adjournments because there is no power to impose bail conditions. That power is needed in order to make the law effective. There is a right of appeal for cases in which a court fails or declines to make a banning order. Again, that tests why the court has not made an order. It also provides for chief officers to make applications wherever they are. Trouble makers often cause problems in the area where the team is playing rather than in their own area, so that power is important. Making them notify us about changes in circumstances and extending the minimum period from three to five years are also important, as is ensuring that they are banned from the next two-year cycle of European championship and World cup matches.

The provisions in clause 37 and schedule 1 are about strengthening and refining the operation of football banning orders. I believe that the legislation will be successful; it empowers the police to tackle the problem of serious and persistent risk behaviour at football matches. The reputation of British football has been enhanced. A few years ago, we had dreadful international reputation for football hooliganism. I do not say that that has been completely eradicated, but it is much improved.