§ Lords amendment: No. 38.
§ Mrs. McGuireI beg to move, That the House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this, it will be convenient to consider Lords amendments Nos. 39 to 42, 68 to 72, 105 to 109, 261, 262, 265, 267, 268, 271, 278 to 280, 285 to 309, 314 to 316 and 319.
§ Mrs. McGuireIt has probably taken you longer to say that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, than it will take me to explain it.
The amendments respond to concerns expressed in the House that the offences attracting the criminal lifestyle regime were not set out in the Bill. As hon. Members will see, new schedules 2, 4 and 5 now set out a detailed list of such offences. We have approached the list by identifying offences that are inherently acquisitive and known to generate large profits. It is striking how many of the offences in the resulting list are serious, associated with organised crime or relate to matters of immediate public concern. That underlines once again how much of the criminal activity affecting our communities is driven by the profit motive.
It will be possible for the Secretary of State to add further offences to the list by order. In case there is any anxiety about that, I stress that the order-making power will be subject to the affirmative procedure. In addition, we have amended the test stating that a defendant who commits an offence lasting for six months or more has a criminal lifestyle. The test would theoretically have caught defendants convicted of offences from which they had not benefited. We would not wish that to be possible, because the criminal lifestyle regime is intended to catch only offenders who have been involved in acquisitive crime.
As a whole, the amendments represent a major improvement to the Bill, and I hope that the House will agree to them.
§ Mr. HawkinsThe Minister drew attention to the fact that, in relation to amendment No. 40 for England and Wales, amendment No. 70 for Scotland and amendment No. 107 for Northern Ireland, there is an order-making power allowing the Secretary of State and Scottish Ministers to amend by order. I am grateful to her for confirming that that is subject to the affirmative procedure, as the Opposition are always very concerned about legislation that gives Secretaries of State or Scottish Ministers power simply to amend by order without full debate in the House. Will she confirm that when such matters are debated, if Opposition Members or the Liberal Democrats wish, they can be taken on the Floor of the House?
§ Mr. GrieveOn a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We are now within a few seconds of ending this evening's 530 debate, and, by virtue of the fact that we had two statements this afternoon, we are quite unable, through no fault of any of the hon. Members participating in this debate, to do justice to the issues before the House on the Lords amendments. Is this not a travesty of the procedures of the House? We are in this position because of the way in which the Government wish to spin their business through statements, which overload the programme.
§ Mr. David Wilshire (Spelthorne)Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy SpeakerI think that I can deal with that point of order. These matters have already been decided by the House, and they are not a matter for the Chair at this time.
§ Mr. WilshireOn a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
§ It being Seven o'clock, MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER put the Question already proposed from the Chair, pursuant to Order [this day].
§ Lords amendment agreed to.
§ It being after Seven o'clock, MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER put the remaining Questions required to be put at that hour.
§ Lords amendments Nos. 43, 47, 66, 73, 78 and 99 disagreed to.