Policing and Crime Bill — After Clause 26 — Inquiry into Complaints Alleging Corrupt Relationships Between Police and Newspaper Organisations — 10 Jan 2017 at 18:30

John Baron MP, Basildon and Billericay did not vote.

The majority of MPs voted against an inquiry into the operation of the police complaints system in respect of allegations of corrupt relationships between the police and newspaper organisations.

MPs were considering the Policing and Crime Bill[1].

The motion supported by the majority of MPs, and the majority of MPs representing English constituencies was:

  • That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 24

Lords amendment 24[2] sought to introduce a new clause titled: Inquiry into complaints alleging corrupt relationships between police and newspaper organisations and stated:

  • (1) Within one month of the condition in subsection (3) being satisfied, the Prime Minister must commission an independent inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 into the operation of the police complaints system in respect of allegations of corrupt relationships between the police and newspaper organisations.
  • (2) The inquiry’s terms of reference must include, but are not limited to—
  • (a) how adequately police forces have investigated complaints about police officers in dealing with people working within, or connected to, newspaper organisations;
  • (b) the thoroughness of any reviews by police forces into complaints of the type specified in paragraph (a);
  • (c) in those cases where a complaint of the type referred to in paragraph (a) led to a criminal investigation, the conduct of prosecuting authorities in investigating the allegation;
  • (d) whether and to what extent, if any, police officers took illegal payment to suppress investigations of complaints of relationships between police officers and people working within, or connected to, newspaper organisations;
  • (e) the implications of paragraphs (a) to (d) for the relationships between newspaper organisations and the police, prosecuting authorities, and relevant regulatory bodies, and recommend actions in that respect.
  • (3) The condition in this subsection is that the Attorney-General determines that the inquiry, if conducted effectively and fairly, would not be likely to prejudice any ongoing relevant criminal investigations or court proceedings cases.
  • (4) The Attorney-General must consider and reach a decision on the matter specified in subsection (3) within one month of this section coming into force, and if necessary must reconsider the matter each month until the Attorney-General is able to make a determination as set out in subsection (3).


Debate in Parliament |

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 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 (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Con293 (+2 tell) 0089.7%
DUP6 0075.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Lab0 179 (+2 tell)078.0%
LDem0 8088.9%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 30100.0%
UUP0 20100.0%
Total:299 196085.0%

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

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.

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