Skip to main content

121-140 of 2,307 results for subject:Injunctions

Type

-
Early day motions (1)
+ Legislation (11) + Acts (2)
-
Public acts (2)
+ Bills (5) + Public bills (5)
-
Government bills (4)
+ Private members' bills (1)
-
Ten minute rule bills (1)
+ Delegated legislation (4)
-
Statutory instruments (4)
+ Members' contributions (1,991)
-
Business questions (4)
-
Maiden speeches (2)
-
Oral answers to questions (32)
+ Oral questions (34)
-
Prime Minister's questions (3)
-
Topical questions (1)
-
Proceeding contributions (1,924)
-
Speaker's rulings (1)
+ Parliamentary committees (72) + Committee proceedings (61)
-
Committee of the Whole House (HC) (2)
-
Committee of the Whole House (HL) (11)
-
Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings (2)
-
Public Bill Committee proceedings (22)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (22)
-
Select Committee reports (7)
-
Select Committee reports (Government responses) (3)
-
Select Committee written evidence (3)
+ Parliamentary papers (57)
-
Command papers (3)
-
Consultation papers (2)
-
Deposited papers (15)
-
House of Commons papers (29)
-
House of Lords papers (6)
-
Impact assessments (4)
-
Unprinted papers (3)
-
White papers (2)
+ Parliamentary proceedings (117) + Debates (87)
-
Adjournment debates (2)
+ Committee proceedings (61)
-
Committee of the Whole House (HC) (2)
-
Committee of the Whole House (HL) (11)
-
Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings (2)
-
Public Bill Committee proceedings (22)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (22)
-
Debates on select committee reports (1)
+ Legislative debates (58)
-
Debates on bills (53)
-
Debates on delegated legislation (5)
+ Monarch's speech debates (1)
-
Queen's speech debates (1)
-
Questions for short debate (1)
+ Formal proceedings (1)
-
Non-legislative formal proceedings (1)
-
Private notice questions (1)
+ Statements (26) + Oral statements (6)
-
Ministerial statements (5)
-
Personal statements (1)
-
Written statements (20)
-
Urgent questions (2)
+ Parliamentary questions (179)
-
Business questions (4)
+ Oral questions (34)
-
Prime Minister's questions (3)
-
Topical questions (1)
-
Private notice questions (1)
-
Urgent questions (2)
-
Written questions (138)
+ Research briefings (13)
-
Commons Briefing papers (8)
-
Commons Debate packs (1)
+ Lords In Focus (1)
-
Lords In Focus - Debates (1)
+ Lords Library Briefings (3)
-
Lords Library Briefings - Bills (2)
-
Lords Library Briefings - Debates (1)

House

Session

Year

Department

More

Member

More

Primary member

More

Answering member

More

Legislative stage

Legislation

More

Subject

More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

My Lords, there are those in the other place who are spreading misinformation about the nature of the checks that were undertaken for those coming from Afghanistan to the United Kingdom. It is in the Statement, but it would be helpful for the House—and the public—if the Minister could reassure...

Member
Lord Harper (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1848
House
House of Lords

Indeed. Under both the previous Government and this Government, the fact that you are deemed eligible with respect to the Afghan resettlement programme does not mean that you do not have security checks made upon you. Let me be clear: that is for everybody who is said to be eligible...

Member
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1848
House
House of Lords

I think noble Lords in this House would agree that the last Government and this Government acted properly in handling this, in every

substantive respect. Unfortunately, that is not how this case, at least in part, is being presented in the media. Part of the media is still presenting this...

Member
Lord Tyrie (Non-affiliated)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1848
House
House of Lords

As I said to the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, and others, the last Government acted in good faith in a way that they believed would protect people who had been put at risk by the data breach. They also went to the court for an injunction. The court itself granted...

Member
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1849
House
House of Lords

My Lords, the logic behind the basic injunction to protect these vulnerable people in the wake of a catastrophic data breach is understandable and the application is laudable; the super-injunction is less so. Is my noble friend the Minister able to open up a little more? Has he been briefed...

Member
Baroness Chakrabarti (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1849
House
House of Lords

I understand my noble friend’s point. I respond with trepidation, because I do not want to get into a legal discussion with her, as her legal knowledge is far greater than mine.

My understanding was that the previous Government asked for an injunction and then the court decided, on the basis...

Member
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 cc1849-1850
House
House of Lords

My Lords—

Member
Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1850
House
House of Lords

My Lords—

Member
Lord Dobbs (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1850
House
House of Lords

My Lords—

Member
Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1850
House
House of Lords

My Lords, as I am sure the Minister is aware, there are a number of Afghans who are on the run from the Taliban, some of them in Pakistan, terrified about being sent back. The Taliban threatened to hunt down any woman who had played a public role. Could the...

Member
Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1850
House
House of Lords

We are trying to contact anybody on the list, whether they are in Afghanistan or Pakistan, who has been designated eligible for the scheme, to ensure that they understand that we will honour the commitment we have made to them. Whether they are in Pakistan or in any other country,...

Member
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1850
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I say, if I might, how encouraging it is that the Government are working so closely with the Opposition on this issue. It helps increase respect for and trust in the British political system. It was absolutely right that there should have been a super-injunction. My question is...

Member
Lord Harries of Pentregarth (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1850
House
House of Lords

We will keep everything under review and look to see what the consequences of the decision we have made are. Following on from what the noble Baroness said about women in Pakistan, our initial focus is to try to ensure that, for everybody who is eligible for the various schemes,...

Member
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1850
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I do not know whether my question is for my noble friend the Minister or for the party opposite. While I can totally understand why an injunction was sought to protect the content of the leak and to protect lives, I would like to understand—perhaps my noble friend...

Member
Baroness O'Grady of Upper Holloway (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1851
House
House of Lords

It is difficult for me to comment exactly on the motivation of the last Government, although I believe they acted in good faith. If I put myself in their position, I think the motivation behind the injunction would be to protect not only the names but the fact that the...

Member
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1851
House
House of Lords

I am afraid I am a little less sanguine about some of this than others. This catastrophic cock-up—and it was a cock-up, not a criminal event—is a direct consequence of us getting involved in a war in which we should never have got involved in the first place, which we...

Member
Lord Dobbs (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1851
House
House of Lords

I think that we all need to learn lessons from anything that has happened in our history, whatever steps or decisions have been taken. The only thing I would say is that non-decisions and not doing anything also have consequences. It is about balance, and that is a debate and...

Member
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1851
House
House of Lords

My Lords, further to the point raised earlier by a noble Lord opposite about the lies, misinformation and fake news being spread, let us not pussyfoot around: it is by Nigel Farage and other members of Reform UK. Can the Minister confirm that this could actually put some of the...

Member
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1851
House
House of Lords

My noble friend makes a really good point. Let us be clear: these are people who stood with us, fought with us and, in many cases, died with us. I think that the British public understand and welcome that.

By the end of this scheme, some 56,000 applicants under ARAP, plus...

Member
Lord Coaker (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
16 July 2025
Reference
847 c1852
House
House of Lords

Statement on Afghanistan.

Lead member
John Healey
Department
Ministry of Defence
Type
Ministerial statements
Date
15 July 2025
Reference
771 cc149-169
House
House of Commons