Criminal Justice Bill — 4 Nov 2003 at 18:00

moved Amendments Nos. 169 to 173:

Page 54, line 6, after "68(1)" insert "and (2)"
Page 54, line 6, at end insert-

"( ) Section 68(6) has effect-

(a) as if any reference to a provision of Part 10 were a reference to any corresponding provision contained in an Order in Council to which section 310(1) applies, at any time when such corresponding provision is in force;

(b) at any other time, with the omission of the words from "unless" to the end." Page 54, line 11, leave out "committed" and insert "returned"

Page 54, line 13, at end insert-

"( ) In section 71-

(a) in subsection (3), for "Part 4 of the 1984 Act" substitute "Part 5 of the Police and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 (S. I. 1989/1341 (N.I. 12)) ("the 1989 Order")",

(b) in paragraph (b) of that subsection, for "section 34(7) of that Act" substitute "Article 35(8) of that Order",

(c) in subsection (6)-

(i) for the words from the beginning to "40(8) of that Act)" substitute "Article 38 of that Order (including any provision of that Article as applied by Article 41(8) of that Order)",

(ii) for "subsection" in each place substitute "paragraph",

(iii) in paragraph (e), for "subsections (7A), (7B) and (8)" substitute "paragraph (8)", and

(iv) in paragraph (f), in the inserted paragraph (10A) omit "above",

(d) for subsection (7) substitute-

"(7) Article 41 of that Order has effect as if in paragraphs (8) and (9) of that Article after "(6)" there were inserted "and (10A).",

(e) in subsection (8)-

(i) for "Section 42 of that Act" substitute "Article 43 of that Order", and

(ii) for "subsection (1) of that section" substitute "paragraph (1) of that Article".

( ) For section 72(1) substitute-

"(1) In relation to a person charged in accordance with section 71(4)-

(a) Article 39 of the 1989 Order (including any provision of that Article as applied by Article 41(10) of that Order) has effect as if, in paragraph (1), for "either on bail or without bail" there were substituted "on bail",

(b) Article 48 of that Order has effect as if for paragraphs (1) to (11) there were substituted-

"(1) A person who is released on bail shall be subject to a duty to appear before the Crown Court at such place as the custody officer may appoint and at such time, not later than 24 hours after the person is released, as that officer may appoint.

(2) The custody officer may require a person who is to be released on bail to enter into a recognisance conditioned upon his subsequent appearance before the Crown Court in accordance with paragraph (1).

(3) A recognisance under paragraph (2) may be taken before the custody officer.", and

(c) Article 132A of the Magistrates Courts (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 (S.I. 1981/1675 (N.I. 26)) does not apply.

( ) In section 72(2)-

(a) for paragraph (b) substitute-

"(b) detained in a place of safety in pursuance of arrangements made under Article 39(6) of the 1989 Order,", and.

(b) for "section 46 of the 1984 Act" substitute "Article 47 of the 1989 Order".

( ) In section 73(6) for "section 81(5) of the Supreme Court Act 1981" substitute "section 51(8) of the Judicature (Northern Ireland) Act 1978 (c. 23)".

( ) For section 74(4) substitute-

"(4) The court may at any time, as it sees fit, vary the conditions of bail granted under this section."" Page 54, line 21, at end insert-

"( ) In section 77(3) after "enactment" insert "(including any provision of Northern Ireland legislation)"."

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 173A not moved.]

moved Amendment No. 174:

After Clause 80, insert the following new clause-

"APPLICATION OF CRIMINAL APPEAL ACTS TO PROCEEDINGS UNDER PART 9

Subject to the provisions of this Part, the Secretary of State may make an order containing provision, in relation to proceedings before the Court of Appeal under this Part, which corresponds to any provision, in relation to appeals or other proceedings before that court, which is contained in the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (c. 19) or the Criminal Appeal (Northern Ireland) Act 1980 (c. 47) (subject to any specified modifications)."

On Question, amendment agreed to.

moved Amendment No. 174A:

Before Clause 81, insert the following new clause-

"EVIDENCE OF BAD CHARACTER

(1) The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (c. 60) ("the 1984 Act") is amended as follows.

(2) After section 82 of the 1984 Act (Part VIII-interpretation) insert-

:TITLE3:"PART VIII A EVIDENCE OF BAD CHARACTER

82A BAD CHARACTER

References in this Part to evidence of a person's bad character are references to evidence which shows that-

(a) he has committed an offence, or

(b) he has behaved, or is disposed to behave, in a way that, in the opinion of the court, would be viewed with disapproval by a reasonable person.

82B REQUIREMENT OF LEAVE

(1) In criminal proceedings, evidence of a person's bad character is admissible only with leave of the court, unless the evidence-

(a) has to do with the alleged facts of the offence with which the defendant is charged, or

(b) is evidence of misconduct in connection with the investigation or prosecution of that offence.

(2) This section does not apply in relation to an item of evidence if-

(a) all parties to the proceedings agree to the evidence being admissible, or

(b) in the case of evidence of the defendant's bad character, the evidence is adduced by the defendant himself or is given in answer to a question asked by him in cross-examination and intended to elicit it.

82C NON-DEFENDANT'S BAD CHARACTER

In the case of evidence of the bad character of a person other than the defendant, the court is not to give leave under section 82B unless the evidence falls within section 82D or 82E.

82D EVIDENCE WITH EXPLANATORY VALUE

Evidence falls within this section if-

(a) without it, the court or jury would find it impossible or difficult properly to understand other evidence in the case, and

(b) its value for understanding the case as a whole is substantial.

82E EVIDENCE GOING TO A MATTER IN ISSUE

(1) Evidence falls within this section if it has substantial probative value in relation to a matter which-

(a) is a matter in issue in the proceedings, and

(b) is of substantial importance in the context of the case as a whole.

(2) In assessing the probative value of evidence for the purposes of this section, the court must have regard to the following factors (and to any others it considers relevant)-

(a) the nature and number of the events, or other things, to which the evidence relates;

(b) when those events or things are alleged to have happened or existed;

(c) where-

(i) the evidence is evidence of a person's misconduct, and

(ii) it is suggested that the evidence has probative value by reason of similarity between that misconduct and other alleged misconduct,

the nature and extent of the similarities and the dissimilarities between each of the alleged instances of misconduct;

(d) where-

(i) the evidence is evidence of a person's misconduct,

(ii) it is suggested that that person is also responsible for the misconduct charged, and

(iii) the identity of the person responsible for the misconduct charged is disputed,

the extent to which the evidence shows or tends to show that the same person was responsible each time.

(3) In subsection (2)(d) "misconduct charged" means the misconduct constituting the offence with which the defendant is charged.

82F DEFENDANT'S BAD CHARACTER

In the case of evidence of the defendant's bad character, the court is not to give leave under section 82B, unless the evidence falls within section 82G, 82H, 82I, 82J or 82K.

82G EVIDENCE WITH EXPLANATORY VALUE

(1) Evidence falls within this section if the following three conditions are met.

(2) The first condition is that, without the evidence, the court or jury would find it impossible or difficult properly to understand other evidence in the case.

(3) The second condition is that the value of the evidence for understanding the case as a whole is substantial.

(4) The third condition is that the court is satisfied-

(a) that, in all the circumstances of the case, the evidence carries no risk of prejudice to the defendant, or

(b) that the value of the evidence for understanding the case as a whole is such that, taking account of the risk of prejudice, the interests of justice nevertheless require the evidence to be admissible.

82H EVIDENCE GOING TO A MATTTER IN ISSUE

(1) Evidence falls within this section if the following two conditions are met.

(2) The first condition is that the evidence has substantial probative value in relation to a matter which-

(a) is a matter in issue in the proceedings, and

(b) is of substantial importance in the context of the case as a whole.

(3) The second condition is that the court is satisfied-

(a) that, in all the circumstances of the case, the evidence carries no risk of prejudice to the defendant, or

(b) that, taking account of the risk of prejudice, the interests of justice nevertheless require the evidence to be admissible in view of-

(i) how much probative value it has in relation to the matter in issue,

(ii) what other evidence has been, or can be, given on that matter, and

(iii) how important that matter is in the context of the case as a whole.

(4) In determining whether the two conditions are met, the court must have regard to the factors listed in section 5(2) (and to any others it considers relevant).

(5) For the purposes of this section, whether the defendant has a propensity to be untruthful is not to be regarded as a matter in issue in the proceedings.

(6) Only prosecution evidence can fall within this section.

82I EVIDENCE GOING TO CREDIBILITY

(1) This section applies only where-

(a) the defendant makes an attack on a person's character, and

(b) the effect of the attack is to suggest, or to support a suggestion, that the person has a propensity to be untruthful.

(2) For the purposes of this section, a defendant makes an attack on a person's character where-

(a) he adduces evidence of the person's bad character, other than-

(i) evidence that has to do with the alleged facts of the offence with which the defendant is charged, or

(ii) evidence of misconduct in connection with the investigation or prosecution of that offence,

(b) he asks questions in cross-examination that are intended to elicit evidence of the kind referred to in paragraph (a), or

(c) evidence is given of an assertion made about the person by the defendant-

(i) on being questioned under caution, before charge, about the offence with which he is charged, or

(ii) on being charged with the offence or officially informed that he might be prosecuted for it,

and the assertion is such that, if it were made in evidence, the evidence containing the assertion would be evidence of the kind referred to in paragraph (a).

(3) Evidence falls within this section if the following three conditions are met.

(4) The first condition is that the evidence has substantial probative value in showing that the defendant has a propensity to be untruthful.

(5) The second condition is that, without the evidence, the court or jury would get an inaccurate impression of the defendant's propensity to be untruthful in comparison with that of the other person.

(6) The third condition is that the court is satisfied-

(a) that, in all the circumstances of the case, the evidence carries no risk of prejudice to the defendant, or

(b) that, taking account of the risk of prejudice, the interests of justice nevertheless require the evidence to be admissible in view of-

(i) how much probative value it has in showing that the defendant has a propensity to be untruthful,

(ii) what other evidence has been, or can be, given on that matter, and

(iii) how important it is, in the context of the case as a whole, to prevent the impression mentioned in subsection (5).

(7) In determining whether the three conditions are met the court must have regard to the following factors (and to any others it considers relevant)-

(a) the nature and number of the events, or other things, to which the defendant's attack relates and of those to which the evidence in question (the responding evidence) relates;

(b) when those events or things are alleged to have happened or existed;

(c) how important is the defendant's propensity to be untruthful, and that of the other person, in the context of the prosecution case and of the defence case;

(d) in a case where this section applies by virtue of subsection (2)(b), whether or not the evidence intended to be elicited is actually given;

(e) how inaccurate the impression mentioned in subsection (5) would be;

(f) where the responding evidence is of a spent conviction, the fact that the conviction is spent;

(g) any risk that admitting the responding evidence would be confusing or misleading, or would unduly prolong the proceedings.

(8) Only prosecution evidence can fall within this section.

82J EVIDENCE TO CORRECT FALSE IMPRESSION

(1) This section applies only where the defendant is responsible for the making of an express or implied assertion which is apt to give the court or jury a false or misleading impression about the defendant.

(2) Evidence falls within this section if the following two conditions are met.

(3) The first condition is that the evidence has substantial probative value in correcting the false or misleading impression.

(4) The second condition is that the court is satisfied-

(a) that, in all the circumstances of the case, the evidence carries no risk of prejudice to the defendant, or

(b) that, taking account of the risk of prejudice, the interests of justice nevertheless require the evidence to be admissible in view of-

(i) how much probative value it has in correcting the false or misleading impression,

(ii) what other evidence has been, or can be, given to correct that impression, and

(iii) how important it is, in the context of the case as a whole, for that impression to be corrected.

(5) For the purposes of this section, a defendant is responsible for the making of an assertion if-

(a) the assertion is made by the defendant in the proceedings (whether or not in evidence given by him),

(b) the assertion was made by the defendant-

(i) on being questioned under caution, before charge, about the offence with which he is charged, or

(ii) on being charged with the offence or officially informed that he might be prosecuted for it,

and evidence of the assertion is given in the proceedings,

(c) the assertion is made by a witness called by the defendant,

(d) the assertion is made by any witness in cross-examination in response to a question asked by the defendant and intended, in the opinion of the court, to elicit it, or

(e) the assertion was made by any person out of court, and the defendant adduces evidence of it in the proceedings.

(6) Where it appears to the court that a defendant, by means of his conduct (other than the giving of evidence) in the proceedings, is seeking to give the court or jury an impression about himself that is false or misleading, the court may if it appears just to do so treat the defendant as being responsible for the making of an assertion which is apt to give that impression.

(7) In subsection (6) "conduct" includes appearance or dress.

(8) In determining whether the two conditions are met, the court must have regard to the following factors (and to any others it considers relevant)-

(a) the nature of the impression given by the assertion referred to in subsection (1), and how false or misleading that impression is;

(b) by whom and in what circumstances the assertion is or was made;

(c) the nature and number of the events, or other things, to which the evidence in question (the correcting evidence) relates;

(d) when those events or things are alleged to have happened or existed;

(e) where the correcting evidence is of a spent conviction, the fact that the conviction is spent;

(f) any risk that admitting the correcting evidence would be confusing or misleading, or would unduly prolong the proceedings.

(9) Where in proceedings before a magistrates' court-

(a) the defendant is responsible for the making of an assertion which is apt to give the court a certain impression about the defendant,

(b) the prosecution allege that the impression is false or misleading, and

(c) in reliance on this section the prosecution propose to apply for leave under section 82B to adduce or elicit evidence to correct the impression,

the court must first rule (without being given any details about the evidence) whether, however false or misleading the impression may be, it is unimportant in the context of the case as a whole for it to be corrected; and if the court makes a ruling to that effect, no evidence can fall within this section in relation to the assertion in question.

(10) Only prosecution evidence can fall within this section.

82K EVIDENCE GOING TO AN ISSUE BETWEEN CO-DEFENDANTS

(1) Evidence falls within this section if it has substantial probative value in relation to a matter which-

(a) is a matter in issue between the defendant and a co-defendant, and

(b) is of substantial importance in the context of the case as a whole.

(2) For the purposes of this section, evidence is not to be treated as having the probative value mentioned in subsection (1) by virtue of its relevance to the question whether the defendant has a propensity to be untruthful unless the nature or conduct of his defence is such as to undermine the co-defendant's defence.

(3) In assessing the probative value of evidence for the purposes of this section, the court must have regard to the factors listed in section 82B(2) (and to any others it considers relevant).

(4) Only evidence-

(a) which is to be (or has been) adduced by the co-defendant, or

(b) which a witness is to be invited to give (or has given) in cross-examination by the co-defendant,

can fall within this section.

82L Trying more than one offence together

(1) In section 5 of the Indictments Act 1915 (c. 90) (orders for separate trial etc) insert after subsection (2)-

"(2A) Where-

(a) a person is charged with more than one offence in the same indictment,

(b) the prosecution propose to adduce evidence which is admissible in relation to one of the offences but which, in relation to another, is evidence of the person's bad character and is inadmissible, and

(c) the person applies before trial for an order that the offences mentioned in paragraph (b) above be tried separately,

the court shall grant the application unless satisfied that trying the offences together would not prevent the defendant having a fair trial.

(2B) The reference in subsection (2A) above to evidence of the person's bad character shall be read in accordance with section 1 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (c. 16).

(2) In subsection (3) of that section, after "before trial" insert (in a case not falling within subsection (2A) above).

(3) Where in proceedings before a magistrates' court-

(a) it is proposed that the defendant be tried for two or more offences together,

(b) the prosecution propose to adduce evidence which is admissible in relation to one of the offences but which, in relation to another, is evidence of the person's bad character and is inadmissible, and

(c) the defendant objects before trial to the offences mentioned in paragraph (b) being tried together,

the court may order those offences to be tried together only if satisfied that doing so would not prevent the defendant having a fair trial.

82M STOPPING THE CASE WHERE EVIDENCE CONTAMINATED

(1) If on a defendant's trial on indictment for an offence-

(a) evidence of his bad character has been admitted with leave under section 82B, and

(b) the court is satisfied at any time after the close of the case for the prosecution that-

(i) the evidence is contaminated, and

(ii) the contamination is such that, considering the importance of the evidence to the case against the defendant, his conviction of the offence would be unsafe,

the court must either direct the jury to acquit the defendant of the offence or, if it considers that there ought to be a retrial, discharge the jury.

(2) Where-

(a) a jury is directed under subsection (1) to acquit a defendant of an offence, and

(b) the circumstances are such that, apart from this subsection, the defendant could if acquitted of that offence be found guilty of another offence,

the defendant may not be found guilty of that other offence if the court is satisfied as mentioned in subsection (1)(b) in respect of it.

(3) If-

(a) a jury is required to determine under section 4A(2) of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 (c. 84) whether a person charged on an indictment with an offence did the act or made the omission charged,

(b) evidence of the person's bad character has been admitted with leave under section 82B, and

(c) the court is satisfied at any time after the close of the case for the prosecution that-

(i) the evidence is contaminated, and

(ii) the contamination is such that, considering the importance of the evidence to the case against the person, a finding that he did the act or made the omission would be unsafe,

the court must either direct the jury to acquit the defendant of the offence or, if it considers that there ought to be a rehearing, discharge the jury.

(4) This section does not prejudice any other power a court may have to direct a jury to acquit a person of an offence or to discharge a jury.

(5) For the purposes of this section, a person's evidence is contaminated where-

(a) as a result of an agreement or understanding between the person and one or more others, or

(b) as a result of the person being aware of anything alleged by one or more others who are, or could be, witnesses in the proceedings,

the evidence is false or misleading in any respect, or is different from what it would otherwise have been.

82N ASSUMPTION OF TRUTH IN ASSESSMENT OF PROBATIVE VALUE

(1) Subject to subsection (2), a reference in this Act to the probative value of evidence is a reference to its probative value on the assumption that it is true.

(2) In assessing the probative value of an item of evidence for any purpose of this Act, a court need not assume that the evidence is true if it appears, on the basis of any material before the court (including any evidence it decides to hear on the matter), that no court or jury could reasonably find it to be true.

82O COURT'S DUTY TO GIVE REASONS FOR RULINGS

(1) Where the court makes a relevant ruling-

(a) it must state in open court (but in the absence of the jury, if there is one) its reasons for the ruling;

(b) if it is a magistrates' court, it must cause the ruling and the reasons for it to be entered in the register of the court's proceedings.

(2) In this section "relevant ruling" means-

(a) a ruling on whether an item of evidence is admissible only with leave under section 82B;

(b) a decision whether to give leave under that section;

(c) a ruling under section 82M.

82P RULES OF COURT

(1) Rules of court may make such provision as appears to the appropriate authority to be necessary or expedient for the purposes of this Act; and the appropriate authority is the authority entitled to make the rules.

(2) The rules may require a party who-

(a) proposes to adduce evidence of a defendant's bad character that is admissible only with leave under section 82B, or

(b) proposes to cross-examine a witness with a view to eliciting such evidence,

to serve on the defendant such notice, and such particulars of or relating to the evidence, as may be prescribed.

(3) The rules may provide that the court or the defendant may, in such circumstances as may be prescribed, dispense with a requirement imposed by virtue of subsection (2).

(4) If a party fails to comply with a requirement that has been imposed in relation to an item of evidence by virtue of subsection (2) (and not dispensed with by virtue of subsection (3)) the court may take the failure into account-

(a) in deciding whether to grant leave under section 82B; and

(b) where leave is given, in considering the exercise of its powers with respect to costs.

(5) The rules may-

(a) limit the application of any provision of the rules to prescribed circumstances;

(b) subject any provision of the rules to prescribed exceptions; and

(c) make different provision for different cases or circumstances.

(6) Nothing in this section prejudices the generality of any enactment conferring power to make rules of court; and no particular provision of this section prejudices any general provision of it.

(7) In this section-

"prescribed" means prescribed by rules of court;

"rules of court" means-

(a) Crown Court Rules;

(b) Criminal Appeal Rules; and

(c) rules under section 144 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 (c. 43).

82Q INTERPRETATION

(1) In this Chapter-

"bad character" is to be read in accordance with section 82A;

"criminal proceedings" means criminal proceedings in relation to which the strict rules of evidence apply;

"defendant" in relation to criminal proceedings, means a person charged with an offence in those proceedings; and "co-defendant", in relation to a defendant, means a person charged with an offence in the same proceedings;

"misconduct" means-

(a) the commission of an offence, or

(b) behaviour of a kind that, in the opinion of the court, might be viewed with disapproval by a reasonable person;

"prejudice", in relation to an item of evidence and a defendant, is to be read in accordance with subsection (2);

"probative value" is to be read in accordance with section 82N;

"prosecution evidence" means evidence which is to be (or has been) adduced by the prosecution, or which a witness is to be invited to give (or has given) in cross-examination by the prosecution.

(2) For the purposes of this Act, evidence carries a risk of prejudice to a defendant where-

(a) there is a risk that the court or jury would attach undue weight to the evidence, or

(b) the nature of the matters with which the evidence deals is such as to give rise to a risk that the court or jury would find the defendant guilty without being satisfied that he was.

(3) Where a defendant is charged with two or more offences in the same criminal proceedings, this Act has effect as if each offence were charged in separate proceedings; and references to the offence with which the defendant is charged are to be read accordingly.

82R MINOR AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS

(1) In section 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1865 (c. 18) (witness's conviction for offence may be proved if not admitted)-

(a) for "A witness may be" substitute "If, upon a witness being lawfully";

(b) omit "and upon being so questioned, if".

(2) In section 1(2) of the Criminal Evidence Act 1898 (c. 36) (restriction of privilege against self-incrimination where defendant gives evidence) at the beginning insert "Subject to section 6 of the Criminal Evidence Act 2001 (inadmissibility of evidence of defendant's bad character)".

(3) In section 16(2) of the Children and Young Persons Act 1963 (c. 37) (offences committed by person under 14 disregarded for purposes of evidence relating to previous convictions) for the words from "notwithstanding" to the end substitute "even though the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (c. 16) would not prevent the question from being asked".

82S REPEALS

(1) The common law rules governing the admissibility of evidence of bad character in criminal proceedings are abolished.

(2) The rules referred to in subsection (1) include any rule under which, as an exception to the inadmissibility of hearsay evidence, evidence of a person's reputation is admissible for the purpose of proving his character, but only so far as the rule relates to evidence of bad character.

(3) The following cease to have effect-

(a) section 1(3) of the Criminal Evidence Act 1898 (c. 36) (which makes provision as to the questions that a defendant may be asked about his bad character in cross-examination);

(b) section 27(3) of the Theft Act 1968 (c. 60) (admission of evidence of previous convictions for theft etc to prove that defendant knew goods to be stolen).""

On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 174A) shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 182; Not-Contents, 111.

Debate in Parliament | Historical Hansard | Source |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

All Votes Cast - sorted by party

Lords for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party are marked in red. Also shows which lords were ministers at the time of this vote. You can also see every eligible lord including those who did not vote in this division.

Sort by: Name | Party | Vote

NamePartyVote
The Bishop of ChesterBishopaye
The Bishop of OxfordBishopaye
Lord Alexander of WeedonConaye
Baroness Anelay of St JohnsConaye
Lord Ashcroft Conaye
Lord Astor of HeverConaye
Earl Attlee Conaye
Lord Biffen Conaye
Lord Blackwell Con (front bench)aye
Lord Blaker Conaye
Baroness Blatch Conaye
Lord Brougham and Vaux Con (front bench)aye
Baroness Buscombe Conaye
Baroness Byford Conaye
Lord Campbell of AllowayCon (front bench)aye
Lord Carlisle of BucklowConaye
Baroness Carnegy of LourConaye
Lord Cavendish of FurnessCon (front bench)aye
Lord Colwyn Con (front bench)aye
Lord Cope of BerkeleyCon (front bench)tellaye
Lord Crathorne Conaye
Lord Crickhowell Con (front bench)aye
Baroness Cumberlege Conaye
Lord Dixon-Smith Conaye
Baroness Eccles of MoultonConaye
Lord Elliott of MorpethConaye
Lord Elton Con (front bench)aye
Lord Feldman Conaye
Baroness Fookes Con (front bench)aye
Lord Forsyth of DrumleanCon (front bench)aye
Lord Freeman Con (front bench)aye
Baroness Gardner of ParkesCon (front bench)aye
Lord Glenarthur Conaye
Lord Glentoran Conaye
Viscount Goschen Conaye
Lord Gray of ContinConaye
Lord Hanningfield Conaye
Lord Hanson Conaye
Lord Harris of PeckhamConaye
Lord Higgins Conaye
Lord Hodgson of Astley AbbottsConaye
Baroness Hooper Conaye
Earl Howe Conaye
Lord Howe of AberavonCon (front bench)aye
Lord Howell of GuildfordCon (front bench)aye
Lord Hunt of WirralCon (front bench)aye
Lord Hurd of WestwellConaye
Lord Jenkin of RodingConaye
Lord Kimball Con (front bench)aye
Lord King of BridgwaterCon (front bench)aye
Lord Kingsland Conaye
Baroness Knight of CollingtreeCon (front bench)aye
The Earl of LindsayConaye
The Earl of LiverpoolConaye
Lord Lucas Con (front bench)aye
Lord Luke Con (front bench)aye
Lord Lyell Conaye
Lord MacGregor of Pulham MarketCon (front bench)aye
Lord Mackay of ClashfernCon (front bench)aye
Lord MacLaurin of KnebworthConaye
Lord Mancroft Con (front bench)aye
Lord Marlesford Con (front bench)aye
Lord Mayhew of TwysdenCon (front bench)aye
Lord McColl of DulwichCon (front bench)aye
Baroness Miller of HendonConaye
Lord Monro of LangholmConaye
The Duke of MontroseConaye
Lord Mowbray and Stourton Conaye
Lord Moynihan Conaye
Baroness Noakes Conaye
Lord Northbrook Conaye
Lord Norton of LouthCon (front bench)aye
Baroness O'Cathain Con (front bench)aye
The Earl of OnslowConaye
Baroness Park of MonmouthConaye
Lord Pearson of RannochCon (front bench)aye
Lord Pilkington of OxenfordCon (front bench)aye
Lord Plummer of St MaryleboneConaye
Lord Rees Conaye
Lord Renton Conaye
Lord Renton of Mount HarryCon (front bench)aye
Lord Rotherwick Conaye
Lord Ryder of WensumConaye
Lord Sanderson of BowdenConaye
Baroness Seccombe Conaye
Lord Selsdon Conaye
Baroness Sharples Conaye
Lord Skelmersdale Con (front bench)aye
Lord St John of FawsleyConaye
Lord Strathclyde Con (front bench)aye
Lord Swinfen Conaye
Lord Taylor of WarwickConaye
Lord Thomas of GwydirConaye
Viscount Ullswater Conaye
Lord Vinson Con (front bench)aye
Lord Vivian Con (front bench)aye
Lord Waddington Con (front bench)aye
Lord Wade of ChorltonCon (front bench)aye
Lord Wakeham Conaye
Lord Willoughby de Broke Conaye
Lord Ackner Crossbenchaye
Viscount Allenby of MegiddoCrossbenchaye
Lord Alton of LiverpoolCrossbenchaye
Viscount Bledisloe Crossbenchaye
Lord Cameron of LochbroomCrossbenchaye
Viscount Colville of CulrossCrossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Craig of RadleyCrossbench (front bench)aye
Baroness Darcy de Knayth Crossbenchaye
Lord Donaldson of LymingtonCrossbenchaye
Baroness Finlay of LlandaffCrossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Greenway Crossbench (front bench)aye
Baroness Howarth of BrecklandCrossbenchaye
Lord Hylton Crossbenchaye
Lord Lloyd of BerwickCrossbench (front bench)aye
The Countess of MarCrossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Marshall of KnightsbridgeCrossbenchaye
Baroness Masham of IltonCrossbenchaye
Lord Monson Crossbenchaye
Lord Neill of BladenCrossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Palmer Crossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Powell of BayswaterCrossbench (front bench)aye
Baroness Prashar Crossbench (front bench)aye
Lady Saltoun of AbernethyCrossbench (front bench)aye
The Earl of SandwichCrossbench (front bench)aye
Baroness Strange Crossbenchaye
Lord Walpole Crossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Weatherill Crossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Williamson of HortonCrossbench (front bench)aye
Lord Boston of FavershamCrossbenchno
The Earl of ErrollCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Marsh Crossbenchno
Lord Stoddart of SwindonIndependent Labouraye
Baroness Hilton of EggardonLab (minister)aye
Lord Judd Lab (minister)aye
Baroness Mallalieu Lab (minister)aye
Lord Mishcon Labaye
Lord Sheldon Lab (minister)aye
Lord Wedderburn of CharltonLabaye
Lord Ahmed Lab (minister)no
Lord Alli Labno
Baroness Amos Lab (minister)no
Baroness Andrews Lab (minister)no
Lord Ashley of StokeLabno
Lord Bach Lab (minister)no
Lord Bassam of BrightonLab (minister)no
Lord Berkeley Labno
Lord Bernstein of CraigweilLabno
Baroness Billingham Lab (minister)no
Baroness Blackstone Labno
Lord Borrie Labno
Lord Brett Labno
Lord Brooke of AlverthorpeLab (minister)no
Lord Brookman Labno
Lord Burlison Labno
Lord Campbell-Savours Labno
Lord Carter Lab (minister)no
Lord Christopher Lab (minister)no
Lord Clarke of HampsteadLabno
Lord Clark of WindermereLabno
Baroness Cohen of PimlicoLab (minister)no
Lord Corbett of Castle ValeLabno
Baroness Crawley Lab (minister)no
Baroness David Labno
Lord Davies of OldhamLab (minister)tellno
Lord Dixon Labno
Lord Donoughue Lab (minister)no
Lord Dormand of EasingtonLabno
Lord Dubs Lab (minister)no
Lord Elder Lab (minister)no
Lord Evans of ParksideLab (minister)no
Lord Evans of Temple GuitingLab (minister)no
Lord Falconer of ThorotonLab (minister)no
Baroness Farrington of RibbletonLab (minister)no
Lord Faulkner of WorcesterLab (minister)no
Baroness Gale Lab (minister)no
Lord Gavron Lab (minister)no
Baroness Gibson of Market RasenLab (minister)no
Lord Goldsmith Lab (minister)no
Lord Gordon of StrathblaneLabno
Baroness Goudie Lab (minister)no
Baroness Gould of PotternewtonLab (minister)no
Lord Graham of EdmontonLab (minister)no
Lord Grantchester Labno
Lord Grocott Lab (minister)tellno
Lord Harrison Lab (minister)no
Lord Haskel Lab (minister)no
Baroness Hayman Labno
Lord Hogg of CumbernauldLabno
Baroness Hollis of HeighamLab (minister)no
Baroness Howells of St DavidsLab (minister)no
Lord Howie of TroonLab (minister)no
Lord Hoyle Labno
Lord Hughes of WoodsideLabno
Lord Hunt of Kings HeathLabno
Lord Irvine of LairgLabno
Lord Janner of BraunstoneLab (minister)no
Baroness Jay of PaddingtonLabno
Lord Jones Lab (minister)no
Lord King of West BromwichLab (minister)no
Lord Kirkhill Labno
Lord Layard Labno
Lord Lea of CrondallLab (minister)no
Lord Levy Labno
Lord Lipsey Labno
Baroness Lockwood Labno
Lord Lofthouse of PontefractLabno
Lord Macdonald of TradestonLabno
Lord MacKenzie of CulkeinLabno
Lord Mackenzie of FramwellgateLabno
Lord Mason of BarnsleyLabno
Baroness Massey of DarwenLab (minister)no
Lord Merlyn-Rees Labno
Lord Mitchell Lab (minister)no
Lord Murray of Epping ForestLabno
Baroness Nicol Lab (minister)no
Lord Parekh Lab (minister)no
Lord Patel of BlackburnLabno
Lord Pendry Labno
Lord Peston Lab (minister)no
Baroness Pitkeathley Lab (minister)no
Lord Plant of HighfieldLab (minister)no
Lord Radice Lab (minister)no
Lord Randall of St BudeauxLabno
Lord Rea Lab (minister)no
Baroness Rendell of BaberghLab (minister)no
Lord Rogers of RiversideLabno
Lord Rooker Lab (minister)no
Lord Sainsbury of TurvilleLab (minister)no
Lord Sawyer Labno
Baroness Scotland of AsthalLab (minister)no
Viscount Simon Lab (minister)no
Lord Smith of LeighLabno
Lord Stallard Labno
Lord Stone of BlackheathLabno
Baroness Symons of Vernham DeanLab (minister)no
Lord Taylor of BlackburnLabno
Baroness Thornton Labno
Lord Turnberg Lab (minister)no
Baroness Turner of CamdenLabno
Lord Warner Lab (minister)no
Baroness Warwick of UndercliffeLab (minister)no
Baroness Whitaker Lab (minister)no
Lord Whitty Lab (minister)no
Baroness Wilkins Lab (minister)no
Lord Williams of ElvelLab (minister)no
Lord Addington LDemaye
Lord Alderdice LDem (front bench)aye
Lord Avebury LDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Barker LDem (front bench)aye
Lord Carlile of BerriewLDemaye
Lord Clement-Jones LDemaye
Lord Dholakia LDem (front bench)aye
Viscount Falkland LDem (front bench)aye
Lord Goodhart LDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Hamwee LDemaye
Baroness Harris of RichmondLDem (front bench)aye
Lord Holme of CheltenhamLDemaye
Lord Jacobs LDemaye
Lord Lester of Herne HillLDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Linklater of ButterstoneLDemaye
Lord Livsey of TalgarthLDemaye
Lord Mackie of BenshieLDemaye
Lord Maclennan of RogartLDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Maddock LDem (front bench)aye
The Earl of Mar and KellieLDem (front bench)tellaye
Lord McNally LDemaye
Lord Methuen LDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne DomerLDem (front bench)aye
Lord Newby LDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Northover LDem (front bench)aye
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove BayLDem (front bench)aye
Lord Rennard LDemaye
Lord Rodgers of Quarry BankLDem (front bench)aye
Lord Roper LDem (front bench)aye
Earl Russell LDemaye
Lord Sandberg LDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Scott of Needham MarketLDem (front bench)aye
Lord Sharman LDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Sharp of GuildfordLDemaye
Lord Shutt of GreetlandLDem (front bench)aye
Lord Smith of CliftonLDemaye
Lord Steel of AikwoodLDemaye
Lord Taverne LDem (front bench)aye
Lord Thomas of GresfordLDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Thomas of WalliswoodLDem (front bench)aye
Lord Tope LDemaye
Lord Tordoff LDem (front bench)aye
Lord Wallace of SaltaireLDem (front bench)aye
Baroness Walmsley LDem (front bench)aye
Lord Watson of RichmondLDem (front bench)aye
Lord Wigoder LDemaye
Lord McAlpine of West GreenOtheraye
Lord Fitt Otherno

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.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive