Labour has decided today that it will be opposing the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill when it has its second reading in the Commons tomorrow. Some of the party’s MPs say they had been told they would be whipped to abstain on this stage of the Bill, but following the scenes on Clapham Common last night, shadow frontbenchers have rushed to say they will vote against.
I understand that the party hadn’t reached a firm position on whipping until today, though there had been discussions within the PLP about what the position would be. But there was a discussion this morning between Sir Keir Starmer, Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds and Shadow Justice Secretary David Lammy where the three agreed that though they do not oppose all of the measures in the bill, as a package it needs to be opposed.
As I said earlier today, the Bill couldn’t be starting its progress through the Commons at a worse time politically, given the way the Clapham vigil in memory of Sarah Everard was policed. Even though police say they were enforcing Coronavirus laws, their actions have become entangled in a wider row about whether the government is trying to restrict the right to protest more generally.
The problem for Sir Keir Starmer is that this legislation isn’t just about protest. It is an enormous bill, covering sentences for sex offenders and people who assault emergency workers, as well as homicide reviews involving offensive weapons and reforms to pre-charge bail. One of the reasons, of course, for lumping all these things together is that if you’re going to vote against the bill because you disagree with one part, you end up being accused of opposing tougher sentences for paedophiles – which is exactly what the Conservatives have already said about Labour.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Don't miss out
Join the conversation with other Spectator readers. Subscribe to leave a comment.
UNLOCK ACCESSAlready a subscriber? Log in