I am not sure what the copy of the Bill held by the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome says, but subsection (10) in my copy says:

“Subject to any directions given to the Commissioner by the Secretary of State, it is for the Commissioner to determine the scope of, and the procedure to be applied to, an investigation under this section.”

It is therefore not the Secretary of State who determines what the scope of any investigation should be.

It might help the Committee if I explain the circumstances in which we envisage use of this element of the remit and the type of case in which it has been used in the past. In some cases, a swift investigation by an existing body with proven technical expertise into a set of circumstances that requires urgent independent scrutiny might be a very useful method—indeed, the best method—of getting to the bottom of what has happened. That is the purpose of having the powers set out in the clause in the Bill at all.

For example, in 2004, the prisons and probation ombudsman investigated a major fire and disturbance at Yarl’s Wood immigration removal centre that happened suddenly one night. It obviously caused a lot of concern and needed a swift, independent look at what had happened. Other examples of what the ombudsman has been asked to investigate include attempted suicides in prison that resulted in serious injury short of death. The purpose of the clause is to continue the current practice— which is not set on a statutory basis—of the prisons and probation ombudsman that he can be asked to investigate an incident of concern on request by the Secretary of State. We are merely replicating that in the statutory provisions.

Investigations under clause 37 will, by definition, be special commissions from the Secretary of State. That is why it provides for the Secretary of State to give the commissioner directions as to the matters to be investigated—the terms of reference or the overall remit. “Will you go and have a look at what happened at Yarl’s Wood last night?” is the sort of direction that we anticipate the Secretary of State will give. It would then be for the commissioner to decide precisely the scope of the his action and how he does what he does.