Amendments made: 18, page 38, line 40, at end insert—

“(3A) Regulations under sub-paragraph (2) may make—

(a) different provision for different purposes or different areas;

(b) incidental, supplemental, consequential, saving or transitional provision.”

This ensures that regulations prescribing authorised persons and testing places for the purposes of the new drug testing measure in TPIM notices can make different provision for different purposes or areas (and ancillary provision).

Amendment 19, page 38, line 43, at end insert—

“(2) In section 17 of that Act (jurisdiction in relation to decisions under the Act), in subsection (3), after paragraph (ca) (inserted by section 41) insert—

‘(cb) a decision by an authorised person to give a direction by virtue of paragraph 10ZB(1)(b) of Schedule 1 (drug testing measure);’.” —(Robert Buckland.)

This provides that directions given by persons authorised to take samples for drug-testing purposes from subjects of TPIM notices, like decisions of the Secretary of State under the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011, are “TPIM decisions” and so cannot be questioned in legal proceedings other than in the high court (or, in Scotland, the Outer House of the Court of Session).