Policing and Crime Bill

My Lords, I am not naive and I know that there are issues here. That was brought home to me recently by a talk from our neighbourhood police officer near my flat in Kennington. She was talking about particular problems at the moment, and one was hanging Staffordshire bull terriers—Staffies—off trees to strengthen their jaws. She requested that we ring her should we see any Staffies hanging off trees by their jaws, so I know that really horrible things happen. Undoubtedly those Staffies are put in that position for an unpleasant reason: to use them in dog fights or to make their jaws stronger to attack the other gang. I know that these things are happening right on our doorstep. Nevertheless, there are very big questions here. The House sat through endless debates on control orders, and quite rightly, but where are we with control orders now? Have they been found to be legal and appropriate to apply even to terrorists? We are in effect bringing in a very similar thing here, but applying much less debate to it because there are many fewer of us in the House this evening. This was not subject to wide debate in the other place. Yet the implications of it are very great—the contents of injunctions being drafted as widely as they are now—and I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, for bringing our attention particularly to Clause 34(7), which could include a whole area. We are dealing with a very wide set of requirements, or prohibitions, here, and it is unavoidable that we will return to this on Report. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 132 withdrawn.