Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (Code of Practice C and Code ofPractice H) Order 2006

My Lords, I thank the Minister for her explanation of the order. As my honourable friend Nick Herbert made clear in another place when this matter was debated last week, we do not wish to rehearse again the debate about whether detaining terrorist suspects without charge for 90 days was justified. Parliament agreed on the28 days. It is very clear that the subject matter of this order is very narrowly confined to whether Code H is appropriate to be put into effect. We certainly support the making of the order on that basis. In another place, my honourable friend Mr Herbert asked two questions, one of which was satisfactorily answered. He was assured by the Minister, Mr McNulty, that it was envisaged that if the police need to interview detainees after they have been transferred to prison, arrangements will be made for them to be moved back to the appropriate police station. That was a welcome assurance, since it is in keeping with the needs of an investigation. However, my honourable friend also pointed out that the code provides that detainees may receive visits from friends, family or others at the custody officer’s discretion. He therefore asked to what extent that provision would be subject to supervision or review, whether such visits would be left to the discretion of a single custody officer and what appeal procedure would be available if the custody officer decided not to allow the visits? In glancing through the report of that debate on 28 June, I did not readily see that Mr McNulty had responded. I should be grateful if the Minister could take the opportunity to do so today.