Government loses 14 further votes on Police, Crime Sentencing and Courts Bill

BBC News reports:

The government has suffered a series of defeats in the House of Lords over its plans to clamp down on disruptive and noisy protesters.

Opposition peers voted against a range of measures in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, with Labour calling some of the plans “outrageous”.

Peers also voted to make misogyny a hate crime in England and Wales in another government defeat.

Baroness (Liz) Barker tweeted:

Lord (Brian) Paddick, our spokesperson on Home Affairs in the House of Lords tweeted:

Sky News quotes Brian as saying:

If the government is determined to bring in these draconian, anti-democratic laws, reminiscent of Cold War eastern bloc police states, they should withdraw them now and introduce them as a separate bill to allow the democratically elected House time to properly consider them.

The anti-protest measures in the original bill were dreadful. These measures and the way they have been introduced are outrageous.

More on this later from our Second Chamber watcher, Mark Valladares.

* Newshound: bringing you the best Lib Dem commentary in print, on air or online.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in News.


  • Paul spiller 18th Jan '22 - 2:01pm

    This is why we need the House of Lords. My heartfelt thanks to peers from all parties who stood up to this nonsense.

  • Paul Holmes 18th Jan '22 - 4:09pm

    This is why we need a properly elected revising chamber or Second Chamber.

    Unelected people should not be passing/amending laws in a democracy. Although of course while we are stuck with this medieval hangover we have to make the best of it just as we have to do with FPTP elections.

  • It’s sad that it takes an unelected chamber to save us from a government that has no respect for democracy.
    The government inserted the worst clauses into this draconian Bill after it had cleared the Commons, so Parliament hadn’t had the chance to scrutinise them. At least now they’ll get that chance, if the government reinserts them.
    The right to protest is a fundamental right, which these clauses would have shut down. How can anyone guarantee a protest won’t be ‘noisy’?

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Michael BG
    Currently working people do not pay income tax or national insurance on the first £12,570 that they earn. If these were abolished a person would need a UBI of ...
  • Michael BG
    Simon R, Sorry, I made a mistake in my maths. 2.6 million is only about 7.65% of the working age population; making a total of 11.95%....
  • Michael BG
    Simon R, If a person or family receives an income at the poverty level they are not living in poverty because poverty is below this level. If you don’t ...
  • Michael BG
    Michael Kilpatrick, There were two consultation papers on UBI which included how the £30 billion needed on top of abolishing the Income Tax Personal Allowan...
  • Martin
    In my experience of paying any local government tax – I’ve never seen it reduced ….& no doubt this pen pushers 4 day week won’t make one iota of...