(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Grand CommitteeMy Lords, I, too, will welcome the Minister’s reply. I regard him, as I have done for many years, as a friend; I am delighted, therefore, that he is here answering our questions. May I make a statement? First, it is so important to put anything that makes life more difficult for criminals on the statute book because no one should benefit from criminality, irrespective of where they may come from.
The truth is that criminals always seem to be ahead of the game and Governments always seem to be catching up. No matter how far you go, criminals’ skills and craft to carry on their criminal activity seem without bounds. Therefore, we have to do all we can to ensure that their programme is impeded.
The noble Baroness, Lady Ritchie, said that the code is not as yet drawn up, but I noticed that paragraph 5.7 of the Explanatory Memorandum says, “The codes require”. If they are not drawn up, how can they require? It says:
“The codes require an officer who is contemplating using the powers to consider the impact on the community in their use, balanced against the public interest and the benefit the use of the powers would add to the case”.
My noble friend Lord Morrow, mentioned that point. This is what concerns me because, as my noble friend pointed out, we had this scourge in the past: if it somehow impacted on a particular community, you did not act. People were therefore not only surprised by the authorities’ inactivity but annoyed because it seemed that they could act if it was a different community but, in a certain community, they did not. I want the Minister to assure me that, when it comes to this statutory instrument, no officer will be compelled
“to consider the impact on the community in their use, balanced against the public interest”,
because criminals do not care who they impact on. Therefore, we have to ensure that their programme is impeded and that the proceeds of their crime are taken.
Paragraph 6.1 of the EM says:
“POCA provides powers to recover the proceeds of crime”.
Can the Minister clarify where the proceeds of crime go when they are seized? Who benefits from the proceeds that are seized? Knowing exactly where the proceeds go is important.
The last thing I want to draw attention to is paragraph 7.2, which says:
“On the codes generally, law enforcement agencies’ responses requested clarification of certain definitions in the legislation and additional guidance on the practical operation of the powers to seize cryptoassets and related items”.
I would like the Minister to clarify whether these clarifications on the definitions were requested by the people who responded. Has proper clarification of certain definitions in the legislation and guidance been given?
Finally, it is right to say that the resource implication is so important, because we know that we do not have sufficient officers to carry out policing on the ground in Northern Ireland. We are well below the target that was said to be necessary to police Northern Ireland. I do not want resources to be taken from that and put into this; rather, money needs to be given to ensure that we have the proper agency to tackle those who carry on with criminal activity.
My Lords, I want briefly to bring noble Lords back to the whole issue of resources. I welcome this statutory instrument but I worry about resources. You will continue to hear the chief constable of Northern Ireland talk about the lack of resources. With these new powers, there certainly need to be additional resources.
As a former Minister in Northern Ireland, the Minister will be aware that these criminal gangs sometimes work fairly freely, not only in Northern Ireland but across the border. These criminal gangs will have all the resources they need to do what they are doing. Unfortunately, the different agencies that have to deal with them do not have the resources to do what they need to do. That is more of a worry than anything else. I keep coming back to the chief constable: most times when he is interviewed, he says, “No, I don’t have the resources within policing to do what needs to be done”.