Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — New Clause 97 — Video Recorded Cross-Examination or Re-examination of Complainants in Respect of Sexual Offences and Modern Slavery Offences — 5 Jul 2021 at 21:00
The majority of MPs voted not to permit the questioning of vulnerable witnesses in cases of sexual offences and modern slavery offences to be carried out remotely without the accused being physically present and for a recording to be admitted as evidence.
MPs were considering the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill[1][2]
The proposed new clause rejected by the majority of MPs in this vote was titled: Video recorded cross-examination or re-examination of complainants in respect of sexual offences and modern slavery offences and stated:
- (1) Section 28 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 comes into force in relation to proceedings to which subsection (2) applies on the day on which this Act is passed.
- (2) This subsection applies where a witness is eligible for assistance by virtue of section 17(4) of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (complainants in respect of a sexual offence or modern slavery offence who are witnesses in proceedings relating to that offence, or that offence and any other offences).
- (3) This section has effect notwithstanding section 68(3) of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999
The rejected new clause was accompanied by the following statement from its proposer:
- This new clause would bring section 28 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, which provides for the cross-examination of vulnerable witnesses to be recorded rather than undertaken in court, fully into force for victims of sexual offences and modern slavery offences.
The motion rejected in this vote was:
- That the clause be added to the Bill.
--
- [1] Parliament's webpage on the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, Parliament.uk
- [2] Explanatory notes to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, Parliament.uk
- [3] Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, as introduced on 12 May 2021, Parliament.uk
- [4] Section 61 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 as of 31 October 2011 (before the proposal being voted on here), Parliament.uk
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.
| Party | Majority (No) | Minority (Aye) | Both | Turnout |
| Alliance | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Con | 356 (+2 tell) | 1 | 0 | 98.6% |
| DUP | 0 | 8 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Green | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Independent | 0 | 4 | 0 | 80.0% |
| Lab | 0 | 195 (+2 tell) | 0 | 99.0% |
| LDem | 0 | 12 | 0 | 100.0% |
| PC | 0 | 3 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SDLP | 0 | 2 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Total: | 356 | 227 | 0 | 98.7% |
Rebel Voters - sorted by vote
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
| Name | Constituency | Party | Vote |
| Peter Bottomley | Worthing West | Con (front bench) | aye |