Skip to main content

1-20 of 682 results for subject:Prisons

Legislation X
Police and Justice Bill 2005-06

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Police and Justice Bill 2005-06 (682)
More

Subject

More

Publisher


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

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that point, which he makes very well. He is rightly proud of his local police force. Had that merger been enforced, it would have been against the will of one of the major police forces concerned, which felt very strongly that such...

Member
Lord Herbert of South Downs (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1444
House
House of Commons

I am sorry to stop the hon. Gentleman mid-flow, but I just want to make clear two points. First and importantly, Staffordshire was not the force resisting merger with the West Midlands. Secondly, I need to correct the hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant): we did not publish any such...

Member
Tony McNulty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1444
House
House of Commons

The Minister knows that he has published performance assessments. People are entitled to compare different forces’ performance. He is right about Staffordshire—the force did not object to the merger. Indeed, the former chief constable of Staffordshire was the Minister’s chief adviser on amalgamations. However, that does not reflect the view...

Member
Lord Herbert of South Downs (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1444
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend is right. The Minister knows that Staffordshire Labour Members were also greatly concerned about the merger, just as we were worried about the merger of the Staffordshire ambulance service with that of the west midlands.

Member
Michael Fabricant (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1444
House
House of Commons

It is clear in my own mind that if we are a democracy and if we hold justice high it is appropriate that any of our constituents who are threatened with withdrawal from our jurisdiction should have a prima facie case brought against them. At the earliest possible stage, they...

Member
Richard Shepherd (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1428-9
House
House of Commons

The Government’s assurances on many of those questions have proved quite worthless. I want to return to the central point about forum provision. I do not wish to revive the polemical arguments that were made in an earlier debate about my constituents and my hon. Friends constituents who are involved...

Member
Boris Johnson (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1428
House
House of Commons

Was the hon. Gentleman as anxious as I was about the Minister’s hollow response, namely, that the UK has received assurances from the US Government that our citizens will not be sent to Guantanamo Bay, especially given the practice of extraordinary rendition, which the Government have failed to condemn publicly?

Member
Baroness Teather (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1427-8
House
House of Commons

I must press on, so I shall give way only briefly.

Member
Boris Johnson (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1427
House
House of Commons

In that case, Mr. Crook would have the protection of forum. He would have the protection provided for in the European convention on extradition, under which, if the alleged crime took place in the UK’s jurisdiction, or partly in it, a person would have the protection of the fact that...

Member
Boris Johnson (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1427
House
House of Commons

May I take the hon. Gentleman back a bit to the unfortunate situation of Mr. Crook? How would his situation be different if he were being extradited not from the United Kingdom to the United States, but from the UK to Albania, for example?

Member
Rob Marris (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1427
House
House of Commons

I am saying that when we require the extradition of someone from America, it is possible for the defendant or suspect to contest the evidence, or supply countervailing evidence in his defence, in court before he is extradited. That is the key. I see the hon. and learned Gentleman smirking...

Member
Boris Johnson (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1427
House
House of Commons

I have a brief query: is the hon. Gentleman saying that, in extradition proceedings in America, one has the right to cross-examine evidence?

Member
Robert Marshall-Andrews (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1427
House
House of Commons

On level 2 protective services, does the Minister agree that one of the benefits of closing the gap was raising the focus within all constabularies on the need to provide such services? One of the perverse benefits of the decision not to proceed with mergers was that many forces—my own...

Member
Philip Dunne (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1455
House
House of Commons

I am grateful, to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I apologise for sitting down too soon. Lords amendment No. 71 concerns intervention in a failing police force. When a police force is failing, people will indeed want to be protected by Government intervention to ensure that they are safe and have...

Member
Baroness Featherstone (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1452-3
House
House of Commons

With the leave of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We have had a reasonable and reflective debate, rightly looking at some of the contextual issues around mergers in the summer. I do not deprecate that—it is perfectly reasonable in that context. It seems rather strange that I have prayed in...

Member
Tony McNulty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1454-5
House
House of Commons

Moving on slightly from that point, does the Minister accept that the mergers discussion postponed precisely the sort of—[Interruption.] I do not wish to disagree with the Minister while he is still sitting, but I have to declare an interest here as my husband is the chairman of the Sussex...

Member
Jacqui Lait (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1456
House
House of Commons

No, I disagree with that, and I think that the hon. Lady will find that she meant to refer to the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath), not the hon. Member for Northavon (Steve Webb). I believe that I have met the hon. Lady’s spouse and he is...

Member
Tony McNulty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1456-7
House
House of Commons

The Minister is absolutely right that collaborations and discussions did happen. It seems to me that what has emerged from the merger process is a realisation of how multi-dimensional these relationships have to be. If we take the example of my own force, Avon and Somerset, it was looking into...

Member
David Heath (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1456
House
House of Commons

Much of that work is at least under way, if not developed, in some parts of the country. Avon and Somerset force is developing a very interesting model that does not go the strategic or operational service level, but to back-office services, as the hon. Gentleman mentioned. It is looking...

Member
Tony McNulty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1456
House
House of Commons

I am sorry if the hon. Gentleman missed it, but I did say that any merger order would be subject to affirmative procedure. I will ensure that we learn the lessons of the summer in terms of exploring options for additional parliamentary debate and scrutiny. I will do all I...

Member
Tony McNulty (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
24 October 2006
Reference
450 c1458-9
House
House of Commons