Public Order Bill — 23 May 2022 at 21:38

“It is a defence for a person charged…to prove that they had a reasonable excuse for the act mentioned”.
That this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Public Order Bill because, notwithstanding the importance of safeguarding vital national infrastructure alongside the right to protest peacefully, the Bill does not include provisions for cooperation between police, public and private authorities to prevent serious disruption to essential services, includes instead measures that replicate existing powers, includes powers that are too widely drawn and which erode historic freedoms of peaceful protest, ignores the need for effective use of existing powers and does not recognise emergency NHS services as vital national infrastructure.
“tackle dangerous and disruptive protests”;
“From day one, this Government have put the safety and the interests of the law-abiding majority first.”
“the powers are sufficient; it is the ability to implement them that is the challenge due to lack of resources”.
“substantial backlogs in court”
“so much time passing since the alleged offence that the CPS deemed prosecution to be no longer in the public interest”.
“a severe restriction on a person’s rights to protest and in reality, is unworkable”.
“however many safeguards might be put in place, a banning order would completely remove an individual’s right to attend a protest. It is difficult to envisage a case where less intrusive measures could not be taken to address the risk”.
“This proposal essentially takes away a person’s right to protest and…we believe it unlikely the measure would work as hoped.”
“causes, or is capable of causing, serious disruption”.
“a staggering escalation of the Government’s clampdown on dissent”.
“a little inconvenience is more acceptable than a police state”.
“it is a long-standing tradition that people are free to gather together and to demonstrate their views. This is something to be rightly proud of.”
“intentionally obstructs a constable in the exercise of the constable’s powers”
“it is entirely reasonable for you to seek further reassurance of that officer’s identity and intentions”.
“most interviewees did not wish to criminalise protest actions through the creation of a specific offence concerning locking-on.”
“Too few forces regularly review body-worn video footage”,
“too many forces still do not analyse and monitor enough information and data on stop and search to understand”
“significant emotional and psychological damage”.
“They came over twice and we said, ‘No thank you.’ She was very pushy, in your face…it has left me anxious as I suffer from poor mental health. When we walked past, she said, ‘Your baby wants to live.’ We had driven for 7 1/2 hours and did not expect this at all.”
“A person commits an offence if they have an object with them…with the intention that it may be used in the course of or in connection with the commission”
“being equipped for locking on”,
“staggering escalation of the Government’s clampdown on dissent”.
“the Government cannot legislate people into silence”.
“no third…runway, no ifs, no buts”
“Climate activists are sometimes depicted as dangerous radicals. But the truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels.”
“these authoritarian provisions…are similar to repressive policies in countries the UK regularly criticises-including”
“Russia, Hong Kong, and Belarus”.
“such as glue or a padlock”.
“staggering escalation of the Government’s clampdown on dissent.”
“It is difficult to envisage a case where less intrusive measures could not be taken to address the risk that an individual poses, and where a court would therefore accept that it was proportionate to impose a banning order.”
“A constable may, in the exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (6), stop any person or vehicle and make any search the constable thinks fit whether or not the constable has any grounds for suspecting that the person or vehicle is carrying a prohibited object.”
“It is without doubt that it includes some of the most undemocratic, anti-protest measures seen in the UK for decades.”
“would pose a significant threat to the UK’s adherence to its domestic and international human rights obligations.”
“would seriously curtail human rights in this country and damage the UK’s international standing, potentially irreparably.”
“or contributed to the carrying out by any other person of activities related to a protest that resulted in, or were likely to result in, serious disruption”
“made or adapted for use in the course of or in connection”
“would neither be compatible with human rights legislation nor create an effective deterrent.”
“That this House commemorates the 100th anniversary on 27 April 2009 of the day that Margery Humes, Theresa Garnet, Sylvia Russell and Bertha Quinn, suffragettes from the Women's Social and Political Union, chained themselves to statues in St. Stephen's Hall to protest for the right of women to vote”,
“pays tribute to those and all other heroic women who fought for the rights of women during a time when society, and Parliament, thought them undeserving of equal rights”.
“criminalise a breathtakingly wide range of peaceful behaviour”.
“a staggering escalation of the Government’s clampdown on dissent.”
“a little inconvenience is more acceptable than a police state”.
“Non-specialist officers receive limited training in protest policing.”

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 (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Alba0 1050.0%
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con285 (+2 tell) 0079.5%
DUP4 0050.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent2 3083.3%
Lab0 145 (+2 tell)073.5%
LDem0 130100.0%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 20100.0%
SNP0 31068.9%
Total:291 200077.1%

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
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.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive