Schedule 1 — Duty or power to suspend or resume investigations

Part of Coroners and Justice Bill – in the House of Commons at 12:45 pm on 12th November 2009.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Andrew Dismore Andrew Dismore Labour, Hendon 12:45 pm, 12th November 2009

Well, that is my concern, because I am not entirely convinced that the wording under the Lords amendment would achieve that. We would end up in limbo: on the one hand, the Lord Chancellor would say, "Secret inquiry"; on the other hand, the Lord Chief Justice would say, "You can't have a judge." We would end up exactly where we are with the Azelle Rodney case-four years on and no inquiry into it.

My right hon. Friend knows that when we last debated the issue, he won the Division by eight votes. It was probably closer than he thinks, however, because several people said to me afterwards, "We went into the wrong Lobby by mistake." That demonstrates the strength of feeling on the Labour Benches. There is nothing to be lost in accepting the Opposition's formulation, because it would strengthen the wording and achieve, beyond peradventure, what my right hon. Friend says he wants to achieve through the Lords amendment.

Embed this video

Copy and paste this code on your website

Annotations

Richard Taylor
Posted on 15 Nov 2009 3:53 am (Report this annotation)

Link to details of the division referred to which was won by a majority of only eight votes:

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2009-11-09&am...

--

Richard Taylor
Cambridge
http://www.rtaylor.co.uk