Serious Crime Bill [HL] — intercept evidence in court — 25 Apr 2007 at 17:46

This is an amendment tabled by the Lib Dems which seeks to allow intercept evidence in courts, were a serious crime has been committed.

Those voting aye are voting for the amendment - i.e. to allow intercept evidence in court.

---------------------

moved Amendment No. 21:

After Clause 3, insert the following new Clause-
"Involvement in serious crime: evidence
(1) In considering for the purposes of this Part whether a person is involved in serious crime, the High Court may take account of any evidence admissible under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (c. 23).
(2) Schedule (Intercept evidence) (which makes provision for the admissibility of intercept evidence in cases involving serious crime) has effect."

On Question, Whether the said amendment(No. 21) shall be agreed to?

*Their Lordships divided: Contents, 182; Not-Contents, 121.

Debate in Parliament | 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.

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.

PartyMajority (Content)Minority (Not-Content)Turnout
Con102 (+1 tell) 250.7%
Crossbench25 (+1 tell) 516.4%
Green1 0100.0%
Independent Labour1 0100.0%
Lab1 111 (+2 tell)53.8%
LDem47 060.3%
UKIP2 0100.0%
UUP1 0100.0%
Total:180 11843.7%

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

Sort by: Name | Party | Vote

NamePartyVote
Baroness Elles Conno
Baroness Park of MonmouthConno
Lord Armstrong of IlminsterCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Birt Crossbenchno
Viscount Colville of CulrossCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Jay of EwelmeCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Sutherland of HoundwoodCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Judd Lab (minister)aye

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