HC Deb 17 December 1936 vol 318 cc2782-4

Lords Amendment: In page 8, line 4, at the end, insert: 'Public place' means any highway, public park or garden, any sea beach, and any public bridge, road, lane, footway, square, court, alley or passage, whether a thoroughfare or not; and includes any open space to which, for the time being, the public have or are permitted to have access, whether on payment or otherwise; 'Public procession' means a procession in a public place.

11.8 p.m

Sir J. SIMON

I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

A definition of "public place" was asked for, and this definition is borrowed from the Statute Book. It was given in the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933.

Mr. TURTON

May I ask what happens in the case of a river? Supposing that there were a public procession down the Thames, and uniforms were worn, would it not be desirable that that should be included

Sir J. SIMON

I should have thought that the Thames in such circumstances might be regarded as a highway.

Lords Amendment: In page 8, line 22, leave out: appointed to act as deputy for" and insert "authorised in accordance with directions given by a Secretary of State to exercise those powers on behalf of.

11.9 p.m.

Sir J. SIMON

I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

The Amendment is merely a drafting Amendment.

Mr. KELLY

It seems to be something more than a mere drafting Amendment.

Sir J. SIMON

May I just explain that it is drafting in the sense that it does not alter the meaning of the Bill at all? It appears, however, that in borough police forces there does not exist any person who can be called a deputy to the chief constable, and therefore it is necessary to use a form of words which will cover the person intended. That is the only reason for these words. Without them we should not have anyone whom we could appoint, in the case of a borough, as deputy.

Mr. KELLY

That may be, but it is news to me that, on the death of the chief constable or someone who may be in charge, there is no deputy left to take charge. That is somewhat of a surprise. What is happening is that not the local authority but the Home Secretary will come in to authorise some person to exercise that power on behalf of the Chief Officer of Police. Does this mean that the Home Secretary is going to take charge of the police force in a borough or a county in the event of the Chief Constable being removed for one purpose or another? Some of us are very doubtful about the Bill. I hope it does not mean that the Home Secretary is going to play a bigger part and be placed in control and be enabled to give this authorisation or engage in this prohibition.

11.12 p.m.

Sir J. SIMON

I can entirely reassure the hon. Member. There is a statutory requirement as regards a county police force. There is a provision in the existing law in the case of a county that a superintendent of police shall be appointed by the Chief Constable to act as his deputy in case of need. There is no such provision in the case of a borough police force and, since we have drawn the Bill as one that provided in certain cases for a deputy acting for a Chief Constable, we unintentionally made a provision which had no meaning and it is necessary to put something in in the case of a borough. The Home Secretary is not going to pick the gentleman nor interfere with local administration at all but he will give directions as to the nomination of a deputy.