Psychoactive Substances Bill — New Clause 2 — Closure of Premises Prior to a Court Decision — 20 Jan 2016 at 16:30

Anna Soubry MP, Broxtowe voted against allowing law enforcement officers or local councils to close down premises while awaiting a court's decision if there is suspicion of activities related to banned psychoactive substances.

The majority of MPs voted against allowing a local council or a senior police, customs or National Crime Agency officer to order a premises to cease trading while awaiting a court's decision where there is suspicion of activities related to the production, supply, import or export of a psychoactive substance.

MPs were considering the Psychoactive Substances Bill[1].

The proposed new clause[2] rejected in this vote began:

  • "(1) A senior officer or a local authority may issue a notice requiring a premises to cease trading if conditions A, B and C are met.
  • (2) Condition A is that the premises has been issued a premises notice under section 13 of this Act.
  • (3) Condition B is that in the view of the senior officer or a local authority that issued the premises notice, the terms of that notice are not being complied with.
  • (4) Condition C is that the senior officer or local authority has made an application to an appropriate court for a premises order under section 19 of this Act.

An explanatory note accompanying the rejected new clause stated[2]:

  • This new clause’s intention is to allow a senior officer or local authority to compel a premises to stop trading while it applies [to a court] for a premises order.

The premises orders referred to relate to the prohibition of production, supply, import or export of a psychoactive substance that is likely to be consumed by individuals for its psychoactive effects or assisting such activities. These are detailed in the sections of the Bill, from section 11[2], titled "Powers for dealing with prohibited activities".

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
Con300 (+2 tell) 0091.5%
DUP5 0062.5%
Independent1 1066.7%
Lab0 178 (+2 tell)077.6%
LDem0 000.0%
PC0 2066.7%
SDLP0 30100.0%
SNP0 41075.9%
UUP0 20100.0%
Total:306 227083.5%

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
no rebellions

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