Counter-Terrorism Bill — Post-charge questioning: England and Wales — 4 Nov 2008 at 18:42
Lord Judd was Not-Content.
Clause 23 <[i>Post-charge questioning: England and Wales]:
moved Amendment No. 6:
Clause 23, page 16, line 33, leave out subsections (2) to (5) and insert-
"( ) A judge of the Crown Court may authorise the questioning of a person about an offence-
(a) after the person has been charged with the offence or been officially informed that they may be prosecuted for it, or(b) after the person has been sent for trial for the offence,if the offence is a terrorism offence or it appears to the judge that the offence has a terrorist connection.
( ) The judge-
(a) must specify the period during which questioning is authorised, and(b) may impose such conditions as appear to be necessary in the interests of justice, which may include conditions as to the place where the questioning is to be carried out.
( ) The period during which questioning is authorised-
(a) begins when questioning pursuant to the authorisation begins and runs continuously from that time (whether or not questioning continues), and(b) must not exceed 48 hours.
This is without prejudice to any application for a further authorisation under this section.
( ) Where the person is in prison or otherwise lawfully detained, the judge may authorise the person's removal to another place and detention there for the purpose of being questioned.
( ) A judge must not authorise the questioning of a person under this section unless satisfied-
(a) that further questioning of the person is necessary in the interests of justice,(b) that the investigation for the purposes of which the further questioning is proposed is being conducted diligently and expeditiously, and(c) that what is authorised will not interfere unduly with the preparation of the person's defence to the charge in question or any other criminal charge."
moved, as an amendment to Amendment No. 6, Amendment No. 7:
Clause 23, line 13, after "to" insert-
"(i)"
On Question, Whether Amendment No. 7, as an amendment to Amendment No. 6, shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 130; Not-Contents, 130.
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.Party | Majority (Not-Content) | Minority (Content) | Turnout |
Con | 0 | 71 (+1 tell) | 35.5% |
Crossbench | 10 | 19 (+1 tell) | 15.6% |
Independent Labour | 0 | 1 | 100.0% |
Lab | 117 (+2 tell) | 1 | 55.0% |
LDem | 0 | 33 | 43.4% |
UUP | 0 | 1 | 100.0% |
Total: | 127 | 126 | 37.2% |
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
Name | Party | Vote |
Lord Cameron of Lochbroom | Crossbench | no |
Baroness Cox | Crossbench | no |
Lord Elystan-Morgan | Crossbench | no |
Baroness Howarth of Breckland | Crossbench (front bench) | no |
Lord Jay of Ewelme | Crossbench | no |
Lord Kerr of Kinlochard | Crossbench (front bench) | no |
Baroness Manningham-Buller | Crossbench | no |
Baroness Meacher | Crossbench | no |
Lord Patel of Bradford | Crossbench (front bench) | no |
Viscount Slim | Crossbench | no |
Lord Slynn of Hadley | Crossbench | no |
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws | Lab | aye |