Justice and Security Bill — New Clause 4 — Closed Material Procedure — Expiry of Provisions Unless Renewed — 4 Mar 2013 at 21:45

Dominic Grieve MP, Beaconsfield voted against making the closed material procedure for introducing national security sensitive information to courts, but not making it available to the parties and their representatives, expire after a year unless it is actively renewed.

The majority of MPs voted against making the closed material procedure for introducing national security sensitive information to courts, but not making it available to the parties and their representatives, expire after a year unless it is actively renewed.

The new clause, new clause 4, rejected in this vote stated:

  • Expiry and renewal
  • (1) Sections 6 to 12 of this Act expire at the end of the period of one year beginning with the day on which this Act is passed.
  • (2) The Secretary of State may, by order made by statutory instrument, provide that sections 6 to 12 of this Act are not to expire at the time when they would otherwise expire under subsection (1) or in accordance with an order under this subsection but are to continue in force after that time for a period not exceeding one year.
  • (3) An order under this section may not be made unless a draft of it has been laid before Parliament and approved by a resolution of each House.’.

Sections 6-12 of the Bill[2] relate to the Closed material procedure introduced in the Bill which may be used in certain civil proceedings in the High Court, the Court of Session, the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court. The procedure enables material, the disclosure of which would be damaging to the interests of national security to be used in court but disclosed only to the court, special advocates, and the Secretary of State and not the parties to the case or their representatives.

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 (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con253 (+2 tell) 5085.2%
DUP3 0037.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Lab0 206 (+2 tell)080.6%
LDem40 8084.2%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 2066.7%
SNP0 5083.3%
Total:296 231082.7%

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
Steven BakerWycombeCon (front bench)aye
Graham BradyAltrincham and Sale WestCon (front bench)aye
Christopher ChopeChristchurchCon (front bench)aye
Andrew TyrieChichesterCon (front bench)aye
Charles WalkerBroxbourneCon (front bench)aye
Annette BrookeMid Dorset and North PooleLDem (front bench)aye
Michael CrockartEdinburgh WestLDem (front bench)aye
Tim FarronWestmorland and LonsdaleLDem (front bench)aye
John HemmingBirmingham, YardleyLDem (front bench)aye
Simon HughesBermondsey and Old SouthwarkLDem (front bench)aye
Julian HuppertCambridgeLDem (front bench)aye
Greg MulhollandLeeds North WestLDem (front bench)aye
Sarah TeatherBrent CentralLDemaye

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