Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (Codes of Practice) (Codes B to E) Order 2003 (Hansard, 4 March 2003)

§ Lord Falconer of Thoroton
rose to move, That the proceedings of Monday 24th February be vacated.
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I should like briefly to explain why this Motion is necessary. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (Codes of Practice) (Codes B to E) Order 2003 was laid before the House on 30th January and approved on 24th February. With approval in another place, the order would have brought into effect from 1st April 2003 revised codes of practice in connection with the exercise of certain police powers. Four draft codes of practice were laid before the House on 28th January. However, we now know that, due to an administrative error, one of the codes was incomplete. The noble Lord, Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, drew that point to the attention of the House, for which I thank him. The Motion passed last Monday also referred in error to the order as a draft rather than a made order.
Fresh versions of the draft codes were laid before the House on 26th February. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (Codes of Practice) (Codes B to E) (No. 2) Order 2003 was laid before the House on 27th February. I think that the right thing to do is to ask the House to approve the order again. However, before I can ask the House to approve that order, it is first necessary to revoke the order laid on 30th January. I apologise for the error. I beg to move.

Lord Renton
My Lords, although I am in my 58th year in Parliament, may I confess my ignorance in being unable to understand how proceedings are vacated in accordance with the Motion? Can the Minister explain what "vacated" really means in this context?

§ Lord Falconer of Thoroton
My Lords, it means annulled. I am doing this because I cannot ask the House to approve an order that it has already approved. I am withdrawing the order that the House, because of the missing pages, approved before it had a proper opportunity to consider it. Once the House has agreed to the annulment of that order, I can again move that the order be considered.