NewsHound

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

By | Tue 18th January 2022 - 12:51 pm

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.
Advert

3 Comments

  • 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.

  • Cassie 18th Jan '22 - 4:50pm

    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 ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Katharine Pindar
    A splendidly vigorous and broad-ranging speech from Ed which we hope will be well reported. It is to be hoped also that Federal Policy Committee will be bringin...
  • Mohammed Amin
    In his Financial Times Politics newsletter this morning, based on the advance copy of Ed’s speech, Stephen Bush was very complimentary about Ed’s strategic ...
  • Mohammed Amin
    In his Financial Times Politics newsletter this morning, based on the advance copy of Ed's speech, Stephen Bush was very complimentary about Ed's strategic posi...
  • Roland
    One highly significant consideration has been totally overlooked I all the discussions to date: just how much time and effort is actually needed for a typical b...
  • John Waller
    Thank goodness, it’s time too. Small businesses have been hit with the extra paperwork, the 90 days in 180 days rule restricts consultants trying to build up...