Skip to main content

1-20 of 1,687 results for subject:Evidence

Session X
2008-09

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More

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

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether children involved in care and related proceedings will be informed that discussions they have with child care professionals such as doctors and social workers may be subject to media reporting due to the media having access to written evidence and the substance of proceedings...

Asked by
Lord Rooker (Labour Independent)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
6225; 714 c204WA
House
House of Lords

To ask Her Majesty's Government how, in allowing the media access to the written evidence and substance of cases in the family courts, they have sought to protect other children in families with a child involved in care proceedings from media exposure.

Asked by
Lord Rooker (Labour Independent)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
6224; 714 c203-4WA
House
House of Lords

One of the millionaires on the Opposition Front Bench says, "What?" I will send him my book, and if he can say to me that the letters sent by the Ministry of Defence or the then Prime Minister to the families were acceptable, I will give him even more money...

Member
Denis MacShane (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c383
House
House of Commons

I am broadly in the same camp as my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore), because I feel that I voted the wrong way on Monday. However, I am a serial loyalist, and sometimes that overwhelms me. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and Lord Chancellor...

Member
Denis MacShane (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c382-3
House
House of Commons

What? Pathetic.

Member
Lord Robathan (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c383
House
House of Commons

There will have to be an inquest. If the request is turned down and there is, therefore, no suspension, the inquest will continue in any event. There is a separate issue about whether that inquest would then be article 2-compliant, which sort of begs the original question. Of course, if...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c382
House
House of Commons

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...

Member
Andrew Dismore (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c382
House
House of Commons

The point is that the situation would arise only when a view was taken that there could not be an article 2-compliant inquest with a jury, because of the existence of information that could not go before a jury for reasons that we have all discussed, such as the Regulation...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c382
House
House of Commons

I am not sure that that is right. Can my right hon. Friend absolutely assure us that if the Lord Chief Justice turns down a judge, the secret inquiry will not take place and the inquest will? If he can, that will go a long way to resolving the issue.

Member
Andrew Dismore (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c382
House
House of Commons

My main concern throughout this long-running debate, going right back to the counter-terrorism legislation, has been whether we will have an article 2-compliant process. I am still not entirely convinced—even with the Lords amendment and, indeed, amendment (a) from the Opposition Front-Bench team—that we will end up with an article...

Member
Andrew Dismore (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c381
House
House of Commons

I do not disagree with that, but what is the material on which the Lord Chief Justice will make his decision, and what will be the grounds for it? If he has to decide whether to appoint a judge to an inquiry, his view about the criteria, the material that...

Member
Oliver Heald (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c381
House
House of Commons

This issue is really important, because Lords amendment 1B would amend paragraph 3(1) of schedule 1 so that it stated:""Subject to sub-paragraph (2), a senior coroner must suspend an investigation under this Part of this Act into a person's death if—""(b) a senior judge has been appointed under that Act"—"...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c380
House
House of Commons

Mr. Deputy Speaker, if I am insulted and cat-called from a sedentary position, Members will get as good as they give. Along with my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon and others, I am worried, if there is a change of Government, about handing to the state and the judiciary...

Member
Denis MacShane (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c383-4
House
House of Commons

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It would be useful if the Secretary of State could make a statement on the fact that the Government appear to have run up the white flag on Lord Waddington's amendment. This is a great victory for free speech, and we should...

Member
Edward Leigh (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c387-8
House
House of Commons

I am grateful to all the hon. Members who have participated in the debate and to the Secretary of State for the way in which he has responded, but I remain of the view that our amendment is useful. I hate to think that if we did not press it...

Member
Dominic Grieve (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c384
House
House of Commons

Does the hon. Gentleman think that there will be a full lock in the sense that the Lord Chief Justice could continue to refuse to accept the appointment of any judge—in effect, refusing one after another—thus dealing with the point made by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for...

Member
Oliver Heald (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c375
House
House of Commons

As the hon. Gentleman is pleading—improbably—the consistency of the Liberal Democrat party, can he explain how last week in the other place, Baroness Miller managed to get through a comprehensive set of proposals that would have allowed intercept evidence to be adduced in coroners' inquests? That was far more significant...

Member
Jack Straw (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c374
House
House of Commons

To say that we sat on our hands when we supported in a very close Division the proposals of the hon. Member for Hendon seems a most extraordinary position for the Lord Chancellor to take, but rather than pursue an utterly sterile argument—

Member
David Heath (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c374
House
House of Commons

Again, my hon. Friend has made a good point. One of the deficiencies of the system that the Government have decided to adopt—although at this late stage, it is the best that we shall get—is that the nature of the communications that would take place between the Lord Chancellor and...

Member
Dominic Grieve (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c373-4
House
House of Commons

I am a little surprised to be called ahead the Lord Chancellor, but I am grateful for the opportunity to say a few words. At this stage of a Bill, it worries me that expediency and pragmatism often take over from principle and legal accuracy, and we end up with...

Member
David Heath (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
12 November 2009
Reference
499 c374
House
House of Commons