Police and Justice Bill — extradition — 1 Nov 2006 at 18:33

Baroness Rendell of Babergh voted in the minority (Not-Content).

Those voting Content carried amendments (despite the fact that Commons had previously rejected them) that would have given scope for an independent judge to rule on whether a defendant should be tried in Britain instead of being extradited. This would have been implemented through Schedule 14 of the Police and Justice Bill (here) which, in turn, would have amended the conditions of the Extradition Act 2003.

In spite of the fact that the 2003 Extradition Treaty had now been ratified by the United States and there was now a greater degree of reciprocity in extradition proceedings, those voting Content still argued that the proceedings were not reciprocal.The Treaty would not come into full effect until 26th April 2007 (see here) and there was still therefore an opportunity to make amendments.

Charter barrister Ben Cooper writes in the London Advocate, Number 42, September 2007 that:

The Criminal Bar Association, in conjunction with Justice, Liberty and the CBI, lobbied Parliament in November 2006 to introduce a forum amendment to the Extradition Act. However, despite a Lords' majority in favour, the government resisted its introduction. The amendment would have permitted an independent judge to decide the appropriate forum for trial where a case could be tried in either the US or the UK. This would have helped the CPS out of the difficulty that they face in acting for the USA while simultaneously considering the merits of a domestic prosecution.

Debate in Parliament | Source |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Content)Minority (Not-Content)Turnout
Con101 (+1 tell) 047.9%
Crossbench8 67.4%
Green1 0100.0%
Independent Labour1 0100.0%
Lab0 127 (+2 tell)59.2%
LDem57 (+1 tell) 073.4%
UUP0 1100.0%
Total:168 13443.5%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

Lords for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible lord who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Party | Vote

NamePartyVote
Viscount Bledisloe Crossbenchno
Lord Boston of FavershamCrossbenchno
Viscount Colville of CulrossCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Dahrendorf Crossbenchno
Baroness Howarth of BrecklandCrossbenchno
Lord Trimble Crossbenchno

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive