Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill — Clause 1 — Police and Crime Commissioners — 12 Sep 2011 at 20:16

Jamie Reed MP, Copeland voted against directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners and in favour instead of Police and Crime Panels electing commissioners from among their number.

The majority of MPs voted to introduce directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners and against an alternate option proposed of having commissioners elected by, and from Police and Crime Panels; the majority of MPs also voted in favour of allowing the Secretary of State to vary the date of future Police and Crime Commissioner elections.

MPs were considering the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill[1]. This vote was on:

  • Amendments (a) to (d) proposed in lieu of Lords amendments 1 to 4 and 6.

Lords amendments 1 to 4 were to leave out clause one subsections 1 to 4 respectively[2]; clauses which relate to the establishment of Police and Crime Commissioners.

Lords amendment 6 introduced a "Police Commission" consisting of a "Police and Crime Panel" and a "Police and Crime Commissioner" with the Police and Crime Commissioner appointed by the Police and Crime Panel from among its members.

In the amendment papers[3] the amendments in lieu of the above are designed 6(a)-(d):

  • 6A Page 14, line 8, at end insert—
  • “(3A) In carrying out functions, an elected local policing body must have regard to any financial code of practice issued by the Secretary of State.
  • (3B) The Secretary of State may from time to time revise the whole or any part of any financial code of practice.
  • (3C) The Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a copy of—
  • (a) any financial code of practice, and
  • (b) any revision of a financial code of practice.
  • (3D) In this section “financial code of practice” means a code of practice relating to the proper administration by elected local policing bodies of their financial affairs.”
  • 6B Page 31, line 40, at end insert—
  • “(1A) The poll at the ordinary election of police and crime commissioners in 2012 is to be held on 15 November 2012.”

This affected Clause 50 of the Bill[4]; and set the date of the first Police and Crime Commissioner election.

  • 6C Page 32, leave out lines 2 to 8 and insert “after 2012 is to be held on the ordinary day of election in the year of the election.
  • (2A) But, if the Secretary of State so specifies in an order, the poll at an ordinary election of police and crime commissioners in any year after 2012 is to be held on such day in the year of the election as may be specified in the order.
  • (2B) An order under subsection (2A)-
  • (a) may not specify, as the day of a poll, a day which is before the ordinary day of election in the year of the election;
  • (b) may not be made within the period of six months ending with the ordinary day of election in relation to England, or (if earlier) the ordinary day of election in relation to Wales, in the year of the election (or the first of the elections) to which the order relates.
  • (2C) In this section, “the ordinary day of election” in any year means—
  • (a) in relation to England, the day which is the ordinary day of election in that year of councillors for counties in England and districts (see sections 37 and 37A of the Representation of the People Act 1983),

and

  • (b) in relation to Wales, the day which is the ordinary day of election in that year of councillors for counties in Wales and county boroughs (see sections 37 and 37B of that Act).”

This again affected Clause 50 of the Bill; and introduced the option of the Secretary of State to vary the date of Police and Crime Commissioner elections after 2012.

  • 6D Page 103, line 39, after “section” insert “50 or”

This affected Clause 155 of the Bill and would have required orders made under Clause 50 of the Bill must be laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament, ie. introducing greater oversight of any order by the Secretary of State to vary the date of Police and Crime Commissioner elections.

==

Debate in Parliament | Source |

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 are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

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

PartyMajority (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con245 (+1 tell) 2081.0%
DUP0 1012.5%
Lab0 216 (+2 tell)084.5%
LDem46 (+1 tell) 1084.2%
PC0 30100.0%
Total:291 224082.0%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs 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 MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
Philip DaviesShipleyConno
Philip HolloboneKetteringConno
David WardBradford EastLDemno

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.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive