HC Deb 07 February 1997 vol 289 cc1290-4
Mr. Maclean

I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 5, line 17, leave out "77" and insert "77(1)".

The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means (Dame Janet Fookes)

With this, it will be convenient to discuss Government amendment No. 5.

Mr. Maclean

The first part of amendment No. 5 is the most substantial element in this group, so I shall address that first. I hope to be commendably brief.

Amendment No. 5 makes it clear that any expenses incurred by a chief constable in carrying out any of his functions in relation to the class of property to which the new part VIIA of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 applies will be defrayed by the appropriate police authority. Section 77(2) of the 1982 Act relates to the expenses incurred by the chief constable in performing his functions under part VI of the Act in relation to lost or abandoned property. The section requires police authorities to defray such expenses.

The new section 86E(3) of the 1982 Act, as inserted by clause 6, would mean that expenses incurred by the chief constable in carrying out his functions in disposing of the relevant property are to be defrayed by the police authority. It is appropriate to provide that the chief constable's expenses in carrying out any of his new functions under part VILA should be defrayed by the police authority. There is no reason to restrict that to cases in which the police dispose of the property. The proposed new section 861, inserted by amendment No. 5, together with amendment No. 1, makes provision for all the chief constable's functions under the new part VILA.

Amendment No. 5 also defines the term "chief constable" in part VILA of the Act as the chief constable for the police area in which the property comes into police possession. The term also includes a constable acting under the chief constable's direction for those purposes. That is in line with the definition of the term in part VI of the Act, relating to lost or abandoned property.

With that simple explanation, I hope that the amendments will be accepted.

Mr. Evennett

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Minister for explaining those technical amendments. They make the Bill better and more effective and I therefore have great pleasure in accepting them.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Maclean

I beg to move amendment No. 2, in page 5, line 34, at end insert— (2A) Any person who, immediately before the date on which a determination under subsection (1) above is made, owns the property in question, shall be entitled within one year after that date to recover possession of it as owner.".

The Second Deputy Chairman

With this, it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 3 and 4.

Mr. Maclean

Section 71(2) and part VI of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 entitle the rightful owner of lost or abandoned property to recover possession of it within one year of the date on which it was disposed of, if it was disposed of by the police otherwise than for value. Amendment No. 2 gives a similar entitlement to the previous owners of property to which the new part VIIA of the 1982 Act applies, in circumstances in which the police have retained the property under the new powers. That means that owners will have at least two years in which to make a claim for their property.

Amendment No. 4 is the more substantial of the two other amendments in the group. Section 76 of the 1982 Act confers a right of appeal on a previous owner of lost or abandoned property against any decision made by the chief constable on entitlement to compensation under section 72.

Amendment No. 4 extends that right of appeal to a sheriff to previous owners of property disposed of by the chief constable under the new section 86E of the new part VII of the Act. Amendment No. 3 is a consequential drafting amendment to allow for the insertion of amendment No. 4.

I hope that the amendments are acceptable to my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Crayford and to the Committee.

Mr. Evennett

The Bill—I hope that it will soon be an Act—will apply not only to England and Wales, but to Scotland and Northern Ireland. I have pleasure in accepting the technical amendments to which my right hon. Friend the Minister has spoken.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments made: No. 3, in page 5, line 40, after "86G." insert "—(1)".

No. 4, page 5, line 42, leave out "; and subsections" and insert— (2) The previous owner of any property disposed of for value under section 86E of this Act may appeal to the sheriff against any decision of the chief constable made under section 72 of this Act as applied by subsection (3) of section 86E. (3) Subsections".

No. 5, in page 6, line 6, at end insert—

"Further financial provision

86I. Subsection (2) of section 77 of this Act shall apply in respect of functions under this Part of this Act as that subsection applies in respect of functions under Part VI of this Act.

References in this Part to "chief constable"

86J. In this Part of this Act, "chief constable" means the chief constable for the police area in which the person taken into custody, within the meaning of section 80 of this Act, is so taken; and includes a constable acting under the direction of the chief constable for the purposes of this Part of this Act.".—[Mr. Maclean.]

Clause 6, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 7 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill, as amended, reported.

Order for Third Reading read.—[Queen's Consent, on behalf of the Crown, signified.]

12.55 pm
Mr. Evennett

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

I have been privileged to present the Bill and I thank the supporters and sponsors from all three main political parties for their help and support. I also thank the Minister for his contributions and for his support during the Bill's progress.

The measure is modest, but it has considerable support not only in the House but throughout the country and among police forces. That is important. Currently, the police are required by law to dispose of unclaimed or forfeited property in their possession by auction and that needs to be amended. Police time and effort to dispose of such property is wasteful when they do so much other important work. We do not want them to look after lost property and it is important to assist them in whatever way we can so that they can get on with their real job of apprehending and dealing with criminals. My police chief, Philip Selwood of Bexleyheath police station, which covers Bexley, does an excellent job and has my total support for his continuing work. We congratulate all police forces on their tremendous work.

The Bill would allow some equipment to be taken into police use if that is appropriate. Alternatively, at the end of 12 months, the police would be able to dispose of property that has been forfeited or is unclaimed. This modest measure will help them in their work and it will be appreciated by the police and others in our society. I commend it to the House.

12.57 pm
Mrs. Jane Kennedy (Liverpool, Broadgreen)

I have been asked to respond to the measure on behalf of my right hon. and hon. Friends, and I shall be brief.

In his introduction to the Bill published in The House Magazine on 2 December last year, the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Evennett) referred to debates during the passage of the Bill that led to the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.

In Standing Committee B, in reply to an amendment that had been moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Michael), the Minister of State, Home Office, the right hon. Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Maclean) described the amendment as objectionable. because it would remove the existing legal safeguards which protect the interests of innocent people whose property has been used for a criminal purpose without their knowledge or consent. He also said. If a power for the police to make use of forfeited property were deemed desirable in principle, the necessary provision should be made by amendment to section 2(1) of the 1897 Act and regulations issued under it. That would ensure that the protection already afforded to the blameless owners of forfeited property under that Act was retained."[Official Report. Standing Committee B. 3 March 1994; c. 1172.] I acknowledge on behalf of the Opposition that the Bill does exactly that.

The earlier debate focused on the proposal to allow the police greater powers to determine what to do with computer hardware and software seized during the course of a criminal investigation. It was suggested that the police, in pursuit of the criminals who supply hardcore pornography via the Internet, should be empowered to turn that equipment against the criminals. That idea had arisen following evidence presented to the Select Committee on Home Affairs by the Association of Chief Police Officers, the Metropolitan police and the Police Federation.

We therefore welcome the Bill, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford on his success in winning a place in the ballot. We are satisfied that its provisions will ensure that the blameless owners of stolen property continue to be protected and, further, that the responsibility is placed squarely on the shoulders of chief police officers in Scotland to discover the owners of property wherever possible and to notify them of their right to reclaim it before action is taken to dispose of it.

As the hon. Gentleman acknowledged, it will be necessary to introduce new regulations governing the exercise of the powers conferred in the Bill and for the Home Office to issue guidance to chief officers of police. It has been a matter of education for me since I was elected to the House in 1992 to observe the increasingly numerous occasions on which changes to legislation are made by statutory instrument. Indignation has turned to interest as the general election draws closer. It may even be possible that it will be my hon. and right hon. Friends who introduce from the Dispatch Box the amendments that will be required as a result of the Bill.

I welcome the Bill and wish it a speedy passage on to the statute book.

1 pm

Mr. Maclean

I suggest that the hon. Lady does not risk her money on the Tote or anywhere else by betting on that latter point.

The Government warmly welcome the decision by my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Crayford to introduce a Bill whose purpose is to prevent the police from having in every case to dispose at auction of particular items of unclaimed or forfeited property which are of such specific use that it would be more efficient to keep them for use in the police service rather than having to sell them at an inadequate price on the second-hand market.

As the House knows, it is a terribly technical and complicated Bill. I am grateful that my hon. Friend has not been deterred by its complexities and technicalities or by having to make equivalent changes in the appropriate Scottish legislation. He sees the Bill as worthwhile, and the House agrees with him. It is certainly the Government's view. I congratulate him once again on his success in getting the Bill to this stage. I wish it a speedy journey through another place and look forward to seeing it on the statute book.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.

Back to