Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Bill — Training in Appropriate Use of Force — Role of the Police — 15 Jun 2018 at 13:45

The majority of MPs voted against requiring those providing NHS treatment to in-patients for mental disorders to be trained, in relation to the use of force, on "the roles, responsibilities and procedure in the event of police involvement".

MPs were considering the Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Bill[1].

The amendment rejected in this vote was:

  • Amendment 11, page 4, line 18, at end insert—
  • “(l) the roles, responsibilities and procedure in the event of police involvement,”.

The rejected amendment would have impacted Clause 5 of the Bill[2] which was titled: Training in appropriate use of force. The clause provided that: "The responsible person for each mental health unit must provide training for staff that relates to the use of force by staff who work in that unit." The amendment sought to add to the list of topics which that training must include.

A mental health unit was defined in Clause 1 of the Bill[3] as:

  • a health service hospital, or part of a health service hospital, in England, the purpose of which is to provide treatment to in-patients for mental disorder,

or

  • an independent hospital, or part of an independent hospital, in England—
  • (i) the purpose of which is to provide treatment to in-patients for mental disorder, and
  • (ii) where at least some of that treatment is provided, or is intended to be provided, for the purposes of the NHS.

No explanatory statement accompanied the rejected amendment.[4]

==

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 £100 credit (until 20th December) 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 (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con35 (+2 tell) 1 (+2 tell)012.6%
Lab3 073.8%
LDem2 0016.7%
Total:40 178.8%

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
Christopher ChopeChristchurchCon (front bench)tellaye
Philip DaviesShipleyCon (front bench)tellaye
Philip HolloboneKetteringCon (front bench)aye
Alan CampbellTynemouthLab (minister)both
Justin MaddersEllesmere Port and NestonLab (minister)both
Sandy MartinIpswichLab (minister)both
Fiona OnasanyaPeterboroughLab (minister)both
Steve ReedCroydon NorthLab (minister)both
Andrew SlaughterHammersmithLabboth
Alex SobelLeeds North WestLab (minister)both

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