Skip to main content

1-20 of 156 results for subject:Death

Member X
Jack Straw

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More
Straw, Jack (156)

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More

Publisher


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

No one disputes for a second the Prime Minister's determination to meet what he describes as the first duty of Government to keep the streets safe, but does he not understand that his repetition of what amount to Treasury lines about police numbers and police budgets, and about prison numbers,...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
11 August 2011
Reference
531 c1061
House
House of Commons

The Prime Minister rightly talks about three strands of a strategy to deal with the continuing problem of al-Qaeda. May I suggest that there is an additional strand, to pick up his point about the pernicious ideology of al-Qaeda, which in many ways remains the most enduring threat posed by...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 May 2011
Reference
527 c458
House
House of Commons

I am announcing today the Government's intention to establish an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 to investigate the death of Azelle Rodney in April 2005. The inquiry will be established by the Ministry of Justice It is intended that this inquiry will be chaired by a retired judge and...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Department
Ministry of Justice
Type
Written statements
Date
30 March 2010
Reference
508 c114WS;508 c113WS
House
House of Commons

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much the Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths in Custody has spent on website maintenance and development in the last 12 months.

Asked by
Dominic Grieve (Conservative)
Answering body
Ministry of Justice
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
10 February 2010
Reference
505 c1080W; 316317
House
House of Commons

With great respect, I have not even finished my sentence. Their position is very different from that taken by most of those who signed the amendment to delete the existing clause 11. The hon. and learned Gentleman accepts that there can be non-jury inquests, but he also says that their...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c78-9
House
House of Commons

I think that the hon. Gentleman is misreading it. The judge has to decide that it is necessary to hold an inquest without a jury to avoid the given matter being made public or being unlawfully disclosed. As the de Menezes case made clear, plenty of other measures can be...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c79
House
House of Commons

I understand my hon. Friend's point, but I would just say this: it will be for the Secretary of State to make a judgment on national security grounds, or the other grounds set out, but doing so does not determine whether a jury is dispensed with. The Secretary of State...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c79
House
House of Commons

I simply disagree with the hon. and learned Gentleman. It is of note to the House that the position of the official Opposition is—

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c78
House
House of Commons

I will give way to the right hon. and learned Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg), followed by my hon. Friend, and then I need to bring my remarks to a close.

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c81
House
House of Commons

Public interest immunity is used in inquests, and the process worked successfully in the de Menezes case. The only problem is that it cannot be the only measure used to protect material in inquests because if a PII application is rejected, unusually, by the court in a criminal trial and...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c80-1
House
House of Commons

My point about the measures before us being light years away related to the Counter-Terrorism Bill, which was a Government Bill, and the measures in it were very different. The right hon. Gentleman must accept that the House cannot have it both ways. It cannot say that it wants Ministers...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c80
House
House of Commons

In the light of the overall changes being made, there will be a far greater opportunity for appeals against decisions by coroners than under the existing system. Such inquests will, in any event, be handled by the chief coroner or by another High Court judge on his or her behalf....

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c80
House
House of Commons

Absolutely. The whole purpose of the Bill's provisions on coroners is to strengthen and improve how the coronial system operates—not least in respect of military inquests investigating cases in which relatives have lost loved ones who were serving the country. There will be a chief coroner, who will be a...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c74
House
House of Commons

There is not a good reason in respect of the inquests to which the hon. Gentleman has referred. I shall detain the House without taking interventions to go through the changes that have been made. In respect of the system being set up, it is my wish that the occasions...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c74-5
House
House of Commons

It may assist the House if I try to respond to the points made by the hon. Member for Cambridge (David Howarth) and explain the changes that we have made in the amendments before the House, which are intended to meet the understandable criticisms that were raised on both sides...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c73
House
House of Commons

I shall explain that in a moment. The decision will not be made by the Secretary of State; we are strengthening the law in this respect.

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c75
House
House of Commons

The hon. and learned Gentleman has made an interesting choice. I commend him for doing so, but it is a much less acceptable choice than the one that I have made and commend to the House. Let us be clear about this. He is saying that there could be circumstances...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c78
House
House of Commons

What the hon. and learned Gentleman suggests is likely to be so in the vast majority of cases. I anticipate that the phrasing of the amendment means that applications will be few and far between, still more so the granting of those applications. That is a good thing, not a...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c77
House
House of Commons

I understand the point that the hon. Gentleman is making. One could argue that those decisions should be made ab initio by the court, although I do not. The court will make the decision, but someone has to trigger the process—the court cannot start it of its own volition—by saying...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c76-7
House
House of Commons

I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his acknowledgement that there is a problem with which we must deal. There is, and that view is widely shared. We have made a fundamental change with these proposals, and to those who say that the parliamentary process does...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
23 March 2009
Reference
490 c75-6
House
House of Commons