Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 11 July 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill.


Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

My Lords, I was rather disappointed that the Minister did not come back to the point about why the vote should not be of those present and voting. That is a perfectly normal, appropriate action and standing order for public bodies. I see no reason why it should not relate to the precept. The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, was quite right in spotting that I should I have put down a similar amendment to the Government’s proposal in relation to the appointment of a chief constable. I have no doubt that that can be dealt with at Third Reading. The substantive point is that there will not always be huge amounts of time—you cannot guarantee that. By not attending, one is effectively voting against the veto. I do not think that that is right. I therefore seek to test the opinion of the House. Division on Amendment 103A Contents 180; Not-Contents 197. Amendment 103A, as an amendment to Amendment 103, disagreed. Amendment 103 agreed. Amendment 104 not moved. Clause 29 : Police and crime panels outside London Amendment 105 Clause 29 : Police and crime panels outside London Amendment 105 Tabled by


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c482 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Conditions of employment Devolved matters Accountability Audit Council tax Finance Elections Eligibility Greater London Misconduct Police Membership Public appointments Members Political parties Mayor of London Political impartiality Metropolitan Police Security Reform Wales Mayors Olympic Games 2012 Police and crime commissioners Police and crime panels
Legislation
Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk