Policing and Crime Bill
Agenda item 6 is consideration of a legislative consent memorandum on the Policing and Crime Bill, which is United Kingdom Parliament legislation. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Gerard Bonnar remain with us for this item; Elizabeth Sadler returns to the table; and we are joined by Anna Ross, the policy manager of the police division of the Scottish Government.
The legislative consent motion will seek approval for the UK Parliament to apply provisions in three areas of the Policing and Crime Bill to Scotland. Those areas are the creation of an offence in Scotland of breaching a football banning order that has been issued in England and Wales; outgoing extradition requests in other EU member states; and the amendment of provisions in the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 on publishing and laying the appointed person report in the Scottish Parliament.
In the week following the UEFA cup final last year, I wrote to the Home Secretary to ask when legislation would be brought forward to address the loophole in the law on cross-border recognition of football banning orders. I am glad that that has been done in the Policing and Crime Bill, and I consider that this matter of mutual concern is best resolved in one piece of legislation. The bill provides that football banning orders that are issued by courts in England and Wales apply to matches that are played in Scotland and makes it an offence to breach such an order in Scotland. It creates an offence in Scotland of breaching the conditions of an FBO that has been issued in England and Wales. It also makes it easier for police to enforce FBOs when the individuals concerned live in a different part of the UK. I want to ensure that Scotland cannot be seen as a safe haven for those who would involve themselves in violence and disorder at football matches. I support the provisions of the Policing and Crime Bill that will help to achieve that by ensuring that FBOs can be recognised and enforced on both sides of the border, regardless of where they were made.
The bill makes a number of changes in relation to outgoing extradition requests to other EU member states. The provisions alter the executive competence of the Scottish ministers and will therefore be subject to the legislative consent motion. First, the bill makes provision to cover situations in which extradition is sought from another country and the person is, at the time of the request, imprisoned or serving some other form of detention. For example, another EU state that receives a European arrest warrant under such circumstances may make surrender subject to a condition that, after the case has been heard in the UK, the person is returned to the EU country in question.
There are a number of difficulties with the existing rules that govern the process, as set out in the Extradition Act 2003. The bill clarifies some technical points in that regard and grants Scottish ministers the power to give an undertaking to return the person to the requesting state at the conclusion of the Scottish proceedings. The bill also enables Scottish ministers to give an undertaking in relation to the treatment of that person in the UK. Furthermore, provision is made in relation to the effect of any sentence that is given by a UK court should the person subsequently return to the UK.
Secondly, the bill makes provision for ministers to undertake to return an extradited person when that person is not currently serving a sentence in the other country. It is possible that the country may allow extradition on the condition that the subject of the extradition request is returned. The bill will enable Scottish ministers to undertake that the subject of an extradition request will be returned to the extraditing state at the conclusion of the UK criminal proceedings, so that they may serve any sentence that is handed down by the Scottish courts in that country. Further provision is made in relation to the effect of the sentence that is given by a UK court.
Thirdly, in relation to the operation of both the new undertakings, it is confirmed that nothing in the provisions will require the return of a person where the Scottish ministers are not satisfied that that would be compatible with the European convention on human rights.
The third and final area of the Policing and Crime Bill that will be dealt with by the legislative consent motion amends the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The amendments mostly fall under areas of competence that are reserved to Westminster. There is one measure, however, that alters the executive competence of the Scottish ministers in laying the appointed person report in the Scottish Parliament and publishing it. The bill will allow the police to seize high-value goods on arrest, but only when a criminal confiscation order is anticipated and if there is a danger that the assets will be dissipated. The appointed person report will cover searches that are conducted under the new provisions and which did not receive prior judicial approval or approval by a senior police officer, and which led to no property being seized or detained for more than 48 hours. In such cases, a report must be made to the appointed person outlining why the investigators thought that they had the power to carry out such a search and why it was not possible to obtain prior approval. The appointed person will be under an obligation to submit an annual report to Scottish ministers, with general conclusions and, if necessary, to make recommendations. The report will be laid in Parliament and will be published. The consent of the Scottish Parliament is required, as appointing the appointed person and laying the report in the Scottish Parliament will add to the functions of the Scottish ministers.
Although the Scottish Parliament would be able to legislate for devolved matters, there is no suitable opportunity for it to do so in the near future. I therefore believe that it is sensible that the provisions in the Policing and Crime Bill relating to football banning orders, extradition and the proceeds of crime should be dealt with through the Westminster route on this occasion. I therefore ask the committee to support the draft legislative consent motion in the memorandum that is before it. I am happy to deal with any questions.
I have a question regarding football banning orders. Has any work been done on, or consideration been given to, situations involving UK nationals who now reside outwith the UK? Would it be a matter of them returning to the UK to show or hand over their passport before any international matches took place?
Such situations are usually the subject of criminal surveillance. I am referring to the people who are sometimes viewed as the main players—no football-related pun intended—some of whom might indeed have gone elsewhere. The purpose of the bill is to deal with the lacuna that has existed whereby we have not been able to deal with people—on either side of the border—because of certain problems.
Your point relates to police intelligence. Having been out with the police at a football match in Glasgow, and knowing about the cross-border travel that takes place—people had come up from south of the border seeking to get involved in football violence—I have no doubt about the information that is provided to the Scottish police from south of the border. Information is available about people from the UK, from north or south of the border, who have gone to reside elsewhere.
We are aware that, tragically, football hooliganism exists not just within the confines of the British islands; there is trouble in Russia and elsewhere. It is dealt with by Europol, Interpol and police intelligence north and south of the border.
I will explain why I posed that question. With the international life that some people have these days, football fans do not necessarily stay in Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Many people travel back to the UK for club and international matches. An individual may have had a banning order placed on them, but may now stay in Hong Kong, for example, or a European country. Is that situation being considered?
The short answer is yes, but it is not dealt with under the legislative consent memorandum before us; perhaps it would be dealt with more under the legislative consent memorandum that the committee considered previously, on the UK Border Agency. Some people will be flagged up—sex offenders, football casuals or whoever—and we wish to ensure that they are dealt with. The LCM that is before the committee is about the reciprocity of football banning orders; it deals with the gap or omission that had, through nobody's fault, arisen. We had to remedy that.
I have no doubt that people travel not just from London to Glasgow or Glasgow to Manchester, but such matters are dealt with elsewhere. To an extent, that is more of a matter for the databases and information that we collate, subject—as Mr Brown and others mentioned—to our getting the balance right.
The issue is fairly straightforward, I think. Are there any further questions?
The Policing and Crime Bill includes all sorts of things about prostitution and sex offences that will not be covered by the legislative consent motion. Does the Scottish Government propose to examine that area in the future?
We legislated on sex offences very early on in our term of office, and action is under way. Crime changes and evolves—not just in relation to where prostitution takes place, but with regard to its connection with people trafficking. Prostitution is being dealt with by specific legislation here in Scotland, and it is an area that we continue to review.
On football banning orders, we see clear merit and benefit in working with the UK authorities. In other aspects, we are seeking to consolidate the law in Scotland; the law in those areas has always been significantly different north and south of the border.
There are no further questions. I thank the cabinet secretary and his officials for their attendance. That concludes the public part of the meeting.
Meeting continued in private until 12:42.