Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill — custody — 22 May 2007 at 16:03

Lord Sutherland of Houndwood voted in the minority (Not-Content).

<[i>The page and line references are to HL Bill 19 as first printed for the Lords.]

Motion A

Clause 2, page 2, line 29, at end insert-

"(d) a duty owed to anyone held in custody."

Page 3, line 12, at end insert-
""custody" includes being held in prison, secure mental healthcare facilities, secure children's homes, secure training centres, immigration removal centres, court cells and police cells, and being subject to supervision by court, prisoner and detainee escort services;"
Clause 3, page 3, line 37, leave out "or (b)" and insert ", (b) or (d)"
Page 3, line 40, leave out "or (b)" and insert ", (b) or (d)"
Clause 5, page 5, line 8, leave out "or (b)" and insert ", (b) or (d)"

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 but propose Amendment No. 10A in lieu-

10A The Commons disagree to Lords Amendments Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 but propose Amendment 10A in lieu-
Page 2, line 43, at end insert-
"(5A) The Secretary of State may by order make amendments to this section to the effect that a duty of care owed by an organisation under the law of negligence to a person who-

(a) is in any specified form of custody or detention, or is otherwise on premises of a specified description or on premises in specified circumstances, and(b) is by reason of that fact a person for whose safety the organisation is responsible,

is a "relevant duty of care".
(5B) An order under subsection (5A)-

(a) may amend this Act so as to specify exceptions with respect to the application of any provision contained in this section as a result of such an order;(b) may make any amendment to this Act that is incidental or supplemental to, or consequential on, an amendment made by such an order.

(5C) An order under subsection (5A) is subject to affirmative resolution procedure."

On Question, Whether the said Motion (A1) shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 227; Not-Contents, 136.

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
Bishop1 03.8%
Con119 057.8%
Crossbench40 (+1 tell) 524.0%
DUP1 033.3%
Green1 0100.0%
Independent Labour1 0100.0%
Lab1 128 (+2 tell)61.8%
LDem58 (+1 tell) 075.6%
UKIP1 050.0%
UUP1 0100.0%
Total:224 13350.0%

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
Lord Haskins Crossbenchno
Lord May of OxfordCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord McCluskey Crossbenchno
Lord Patel of BradfordCrossbenchno
Lord Robertson of Port EllenCrossbenchno
Lord Sutherland of HoundwoodCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Brooks of TremorfaLabaye

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.

TWe're working on updating the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive