Judicial Review and Courts Bill — New Clause 4 — Publicly Funded Legal Representation for Bereaved People at Certain Inquests — 25 Jan 2022 at 15:45
The majority of MPs voted against providing publicly funded legal representation for bereaved people at inquests where a public body has a connection to the case.
MPs were considering the Judicial Review and Courts Bill.[1][2][3]
The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled: Publicly funded legal representation for bereaved people at inquests and stated:
- (1) Section 10 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 is amended as follows.
- (2) In subsection (1), after ‘(4)’ insert ‘or (7).’
- (3) After subsection (6), insert—
- ‘(7) This subsection is satisfied where—
- (a) the services consist of advocacy at an inquest where the individual is an Interested Person pursuant to section 47(2)(a), (b), or (m) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 because of their relationship to the deceased; and
- (b) one or more public authorities are Interested Persons in relation to the inquest pursuant to section 47(2) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 or are likely to be designated as such.
- (8) For the purposes of this section “public authority” has the meaning given by section 6(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998.’.”.
The rejected new clause was accompanied by the following explanatory statement from its proposer:
- This new clause would ensure that bereaved people (such as family members) are entitled to publicly funded legal representation in inquests where public bodies (such as the police or a hospital trust) are legally represented.
There is no requirement in the rejected clause for the public body to be legally represented at the inquest in question.
--
- [1] Parliament's webpage on the Judicial Review and Courts Bill, Parliament.uk
- [2] Judicial Review and Courts Bill as amended in committee, 23 November 2021, Parliament.uk
- [3] Explanatory notes to the Judicial Review and Courts Bill as introduced, 27 July 2021, 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 |
| Alba | 0 | 1 | 0 | 50.0% |
| Alliance | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Con | 308 (+2 tell) | 0 | 0 | 85.9% |
| DUP | 0 | 5 | 0 | 62.5% |
| Green | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Independent | 1 | 1 | 0 | 40.0% |
| Lab | 0 | 156 (+2 tell) | 0 | 79.4% |
| LDem | 0 | 13 | 0 | 100.0% |
| PC | 0 | 2 | 0 | 66.7% |
| SDLP | 0 | 2 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SNP | 0 | 0 | 4 | 8.9% |
| Total: | 309 | 182 | 4 | 78.0% |
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 | |
| no rebellions | ||||