← Back to MPs
Mr Brian Sedgemore

Mr Brian Sedgemore

Last served Hackney South and Shoreditch (1983-06-09 – 2005-05-05)
86
Total votes
25
Ayes
61
Noes
0
Other

Parliamentary History

9 Jun 1983 – 5 May 2005 (21 yrs 10 mo)

Voting trends (most recent 12 months of activity)

Voting record

February 2005 8 votes
Division Date Vote
I should like to say a few words in support of both new clauses. My hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Mr. Laws) sends his apologies as he is unable to attend. He was immersed in the detail of the Bill and supported its broad outlines. I will deal with the Bill's final stages but, as a newcomer, I lack his depth of understanding. The new clauses are constructive and well worth supporting. There ar... 3 Feb 2005 NO
I want the Paymaster General to become an advocate for a change— Order. Before we proceed, let me say that general discussion about programming is not appropriate. The debate is about programming for this particular Bill. Indeed, and I wish to keep to that. My right hon. Friend is making a powerful and cogent case, but does he not accept that when Government impose timetables unnecessarily—when th... 3 Feb 2005 AYE
I am aware that the Minister is keen to respond even in the limited time we have to discuss the limited time that we have to discuss the Bill on Report. I have a few brief points. The Minister said that the Government held the debate today so that they could listen to what was said. She has heard from across the House blanket condemnation of the motion. Will she now withdraw it? No, I will not. I ... 3 Feb 2005 AYE
"be removed or suspended except after consultation with the Lord Chief Justice." It would defy my understanding of the rules of debate if I were not allowed to argue that the question of removal or suspension should include reference to clause 106(3). In conclusion, the words "neglect of duty" have been omitted from that subsection, although the draftsman included the words "misbehaviour or inabil... 1 Feb 2005 NO
I only want to intervene briefly to say that the obverse could apply. If the tribunal has made that recommendation, it would be a peculiar decision by any member of the Executive, whether Prime Minister or Lord Chancellor, to go against the advice. That is properly a matter for a subsequent clause, however. The hon. Gentleman says that it would be a peculiar Prime Minister. It is not unknown to ha... 1 Feb 2005 AYE
The input of the current Law Lords is highly valued in the scrutiny of legislation, particularly in Committee, where they bring their technical experience of interpreting legislation. In addition, they contribute informed criticism on social issues, drawing on their practical experience in the courts. They also help to promote the type of legal reform measures that can sometimes be a low legislati... 1 Feb 2005 NO
With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 367, in page 17, leave out lines 24 and 25. It is time to repatriate to post-devolution Scotland final appellate jurisdiction in Scots civil law cases. The Bill as it stands represents a missed opportunity, which the amendments are designed to rectify. Given the constitutional importance of the matter, it is a great pity that no other Scotti... 1 Feb 2005 NO
I am a practising solicitor and, technically, a solicitor of the Supreme Court. The Minister may wish to consider the fair point made by the hon. Member for Southwark, North and Bermondsey (Simon Hughes) that there are complications surrounding the use of the words "supreme court". Those will need to be dealt with if the Bill is passed in its current state. The arguments against the creation of th... 1 Feb 2005 NO
January 2005 18 votes
Division Date Vote
or—and it is either/or so obviously one does not have to be a High Court judge—to have "practised as a qualifying practitioner . . . for at least 12 years". Under clause 22, a qualifying practitioner must have "a Supreme Court qualification" under section 71 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, which states that a person must have rights of audience in all the proceedings of the Supreme Cour... 31 Jan 2005 NO
I congratulate the Select Committee on footnote 21, which deals with the relevant recommendation and states: "Nothing in the use of the word "Lord" necessarily indicates membership of the House of Lords: eg Lord President of the Council and Lord Privy Seal have frequently been members of the House of Commons." Clearly, the title is not important. My right hon. Friend's Committee may well recall th... 31 Jan 2005 NO
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for putting forward that plea. Does my hon. and learned Friend accept that one advantage of new clause 8 is that it places a duty on the Lord Chancellor to do something specific—namely, to "use his best endeavours to ensure that the rule of law is respected"— and, I would add in parenthesis, to do so in the Cabinet? At least the conscience role of the Lord Chancello... 31 Jan 2005 NO
Question accordingly negatived. Amendment proposed : No. 38, in page 21, line 2, at end insert— 27 Jan 2005 NO
My right hon. Friend makes a valid point about benefits for the Government, but there are also benefits for South Eastern Trains from bringing maintenance contracts in-house. All that we are asking for is a rational process of decision making. We do not come with any ideological baggage from the past about the danger of relying on the hidden hand of the market or about the perfection of the public... 27 Jan 2005 AYE
Does my hon. Friend agree that the potential for increased capacity at Fenchurch Street station—used by the constituents of other south Essex Members, if not by his, to come into central London— is also limited. I therefore recognise the issues that he raises about the potentially large increase in housing capacity in the Thames gateway region. My hon. Friend raises an important point. I commuted ... 27 Jan 2005 NO
I am attracted to the new clause not on health grounds but on the simple premise that where a service is introduced with certain criteria, and that service is to be withdrawn, it is right that the public should have an opportunity to be consulted. Moreover, we know from the figures on traffic growth that it stems mostly from more affluent drivers, and if we are to persuade them to come off the roa... 27 Jan 2005 NO
I would have preferred such a review to take place before the merger proceeded. However, it is now going to proceed, so it is a good idea for us to be able to come back in two years' time to find out what the costs and benefits are. I certainly support new clause 1 and I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester has attracted more and more support for it as the debate has unfolded. I hop... 26 Jan 2005 NO
and insert— 'or Tuesday, four o'clock on'. (l), in line 77, leave out from 'insert' to 'Wednesdays' in line 80 and insert— 'or Tuesdays, between the hours of twenty-five minutes past eleven o'clock in the morning and half-past one o'clock in the afternoon on'.— [Mr. Donohoe.] Amendment proposed: (m), in line 64, at end insert— 26 Jan 2005 NO
Hon. Members on all sides of the argument would be well advised to listen to my next point, which I want to emphasise. If the motion in the name of my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House were to fall, in the next Parliament we would have to revert to the hours of 2.30 pm to 10 pm on Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays, and to the hours of 11.30 am to 7 pm on Thursdays. I do not think that even ... 26 Jan 2005 AYE
Division 46 25 Jan 2005 AYE
The concessions include time scales for implementation, the ability to keep products on the market until the EFSA had ruled on them, and the guarantee that the dossier presented by 12 July need not be exhaustive. We also got a substantial lead-in time to enable our industry to present its arguments on vitamins and minerals. Our aim is to ensure that the directive is implemented in a way that allow... 25 Jan 2005 NO
The tough powers in the Licensing Act 2003 also means that, as we have underlined, anyone who sells unlawfully to people who are drunk puts their business at risk. Will the Secretary of State give way? No, I am not giving way. The answer to the problems that we have lies in local democracy, a more responsible drink industry and police with the power to take on the yobs. The problems have developed... 25 Jan 2005 NO
Division 37 19 Jan 2005 AYE
In the constituency of the hon. Member for North Wiltshire, there are now 2,365 more nurses, and 849 more doctors, in his strategic health authority area. North Wiltshire has 290 more teachers than in 1997, and Wiltshire has 63 more police officers. Unemployment has fallen 63 per cent. since 1997. None of that was mentioned in the criticisms that he levelled. That comes on top of announcements thi... 19 Jan 2005 NO
"The tax plans unveiled by the Tories fail the credibility test." It is worth reading a little more. It says: "The White Queen in Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland claimed she had believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast. The Conservatives are less ambitious in wanting voters to believe in only three". One thing we do know is that even on the basis of those numbers that fail th... 19 Jan 2005 NO
That the following provisions shall apply to the Constitutional Reform Bill [ Lords ]: 1. The following shall be committed to a Committee of the whole House— (a) Clauses 1 to 7, 20, 21, 37, 94, 95 and 105 to 109; (b) Schedule 8; (c) any new Clauses amending section 12 of the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002; 17 Jan 2005 AYE
We are still consulting on that, as the hon. and learned Gentleman knows as a court recorder. It specious to suggest that the House of Lords will lose expertise. Retired Law Lords can remain in the House and contribute if they wish. There has been discussion about the location of the new court, as I said. Lord Millett said: "The fact is that this House can no longer provide the accommodation, reso... 17 Jan 2005 NO
Page 3/3