Protection of Freedoms Bill

Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve Excerpts

Thursday 15th December 2011 Grand Committee

Finally, I turn to my noble friend’s Amendment 131A, for which I have considerably more sympathy if it is intended as an alternative to the approach proposed in Amendments 131 and 132. I can certainly accept the spirit of that amendment. As I have said, there should be a readily available and up-to-date list of powers of entry. Again, however, we do not think that it should appear in statute. I have some doubts as to whether we need to write a duty to publish such a list in the Bill but I am more than happy to discuss that with my noble friend during the next few weeks before we get to Report. We want to be transparent and to make something available but we do not think that the Act or the Bill is the right place to do it. As I have said, I have a degree of sympathy for Amendment 131A. I am prepared to look at that and to discuss it with my noble friend.

[Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve]

My Lords, I have great admiration for what the noble Lord, Lord Selsdon, has done. The number of powers of entry is truly amazing and overwhelming, but I think that we are skirting a much bigger issue, which is the question of the implementation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights that covers the right to privacy. It is either beautifully observed or perhaps, I fear, widely neglected. I hope that we can take a more systematic view of when and under what circumstances powers of entry are justified. Listing them makes it very plain just how urgent the problem is, but I think that the remedies will have to be on a slightly different scale.

[Lord Henley]

My Lords, when I referred to the gateway that we talked about, I sought to say that what we are committed to do in the Home Office is to check any new powers as they come in from other departments to make sure that they can be justified before they are introduced. It is easy to introduce something without much further thought, but we are trying to create a form of approach that will allow for a greater degree of caution and care to be used before such powers are introduced.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Henley]

One of the joys of devolution is that it allows different parts of the United Kingdom to do different things. One might or might not approve of the different things they do, and they might create tensions in certain border areas. It will entirely depend on what powers each of the three devolved countries have as to what they do. Obviously we will continue to discuss matters with colleagues, as we do on all matters that go across borders. However, in the end it has to be a matter for them. It might be that differences will appear in due course, but once you have let the genie out of the bottle, that is what happens.

[Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve]

Since there will be conversations, it might be important to think about the way in which this code of conduct can be understood by citizens whose premises are to be entered, or not entered, in that this is very much addressing the official who seeks to enter, and what he or she may or may not do. It is very important to have something very simple that the citizen can actually grasp and say, “No, you have no warrant. I do not agree. This is not an emergency, so not now”.

[Lord Henley]

I well understand what the noble Baroness is saying. As we all know, statute is not written in a language that most of us find that easy to understand—although I have no doubt the noble and learned Lord finds it easy to understand. Codes of conduct are obviously written in a manner that we hope will be understandable by all those who have to either make use of them or who will be affected by them. I am sure that as codes of conduct are drawn up, the strictures the noble Baroness has mentioned will be taken into account.