Thread by @DemDefCoalition

Second Reading of the Public Order Bill has started! Follow along here — for at least some of it. (I’ll be taking a break sometime between 6pm and 7pm.)
A thread…

The Minister is setting out the Public Order Bill. As this is a Home Office Bill, the Minister is Secretary of State Priti Patel.

The Minister and Conservative MPs have already a) highlighted the idea of protesters blocking ambulances and b) explained that many of these measures were blocked by the unelected Lords.

The Minister claims that our rights to protest in a democracy are not being taken away.

We beg to differ.

The Minister is giving way a fair amount — but generally using it as a chance to bash the opposition.

The Minister is spending most of the time on the Public Order Bill discussing the horrors of protest.

The key parts of the Public Order Bill are the same as the govt attempted in the #PolicingBill. Locking on is the part first discussed — and discussed as if it’s a new technique.

Just meters from the chamber is a statue which needed to be cut because a suffragette locked on.

MPs are raising the point that protesters are protesting for a reason — not because they like protesting. And some Courts have judged protesters to be acting correctly.

This is a chance for the Minister to say how Disruption Prevention Orders essentially get round pesky Courts.

The Minister has finished. The Labour front bench and junior Ministers are now proceeding to fire political barbs at each other.

Yvette Cooper is on the Front Bench for Labour. She’s starting by focusing on what is not in the Public Order Bill — ie what has been promised in terms of policing but never delivered.

Yvette Cooper MP: “It is a unwise Govt which seeks to silence protest, and an undemocratic one too.”

Public Order Bill

The Labour Front Bench is also allowing many interventions — we haven’t got to individual speeches yet, but the general sense is that there are angry MPs on both sides.

There is a lot of conflation between the method of protest and the cause being protested.

Next up is Conservative MP Nicki Aiken.

She’s talking about how the police are often stretched, particularly for protests.

(We’ll be back soon after 7pm.)

Good evening, and I’m back.

In the last hour we have heard from Anne McLaughlin (SNP), Ben Spencer (Con), Diana Johnson (Lab), Danny Kruger (Con), Diane Abbott (Lab), Tom Hunt (Con), Wera Hobhouse (LD), Marco Longhi (Con), John McDonnell (Lab), Jonathan Gullis (Con).

Clive Lewis (Lab) is speaking now, drawing in issues of climate crisis and protest.

Clive Lewis: “the real criminals are not the protesters, but those companies who keep on extracting fossil fuels, who are going to push us off a cliff”.

Clive Lewis: “freedom from the annoyance of protest is the same as freedom against the ability of the public to hold big business and this govt to account on the issues which matter, such as climate change”.

Lee Anderson (Con) is appealing to common sense and the common people.

Bell Ribeiro-Addy: “The message from this Govt is clear — it wants to make it harder to protest the cost of living crisis, not deal with it.”

Public Order Bill

Paul Bristow (Con): “Protest is important. If we go too far, we stand to lose so much.”

Paul Bristow: “Locking on is not a legitimate form of protest.”

I would like to invite him to take a look at the statue with the broken sword. It’s just round the corner from the Chamber. The sword is broken because a suffragette locked on.

The debate has a large number of very strident, determined Conservative MPs in support of the Public Order Bill.

Kat Osamor MP (Lab): “The Govt is trying to clamp down on the hard-earned right of people to protest.”

Stop and search without suspicion comes up time and time again.

Matt Vickers (Con) believes that there are prospers who do it because they want to cause problems and undermine campaigns.

Caroline Lucas (Green) arguing strongly against serious disruption prevention orders.

Caroline Lucas: “This Bill just about falls short of policing thoughts, but only just, and the direction of travel is clear.”

Caroline Lucas MP (Green): “Only a cowardly govt which does respect or trust it’s people would take such a step.”

Protesters are part of the community. It is the community which is protesting.

Richard Fuller MP (Con) expressing some reservations on the Public Order Bill.

Richard Fuller is sensibly setting out the many points of the Bill which are not defined.

Rebecca Long-Bailey MP (Lab) pointing out that change comes about because of people calling for change. It’s protest.

Andy McDonald (Lab) has mentioned the suffragettes who chained themselves to statues in St Stephen’s Chapel.

Oh dear - it’s DOESN’T!

Andy McDonald: “In a healthy democracy, these protests would not be quashed, but listened to and taken on board.”

Rupa Huq (Lab): “This Bill goes for the eye-catching. If it’s about a good story for the papers, then we have a problem.”

Alex Cunningham (Lab) says the govt is more interested in headlines than serious policies.

There are considerably more Labour MPs in the chamber than Conservatives.

Marsha De Cordova (Lab) highlighting how this is counter to Human Rights.

Marsha De Cordova: “Stop and search, as expressed in this Bill, will have a disproportionate impact on Black and ethnic minority communities.”

Beth Winter (Lab): “The Prime Minister threatened to lie down in front of bulldozers, which would be a crime under this Bill.”

Zarah Sultana (Lab): “It’s not about levelling up, or another empty slogan, it’s an attack on democracy and fear of protest from the cost of level increases.”

Mike Whitely (Lab) is the last of the backbenchers to speak. Strongly against the Public Order Bill.

Sarah Champion is summing up for Labour on the Public Order Bill. “This is a government with no guiding principles.”

The Minister (Kit Malthouse) is responding. As with the Bills passed last Parliament, it’s very snippy.

An amendment was put down on the Public Order Bill. It’s a motion to decline to give the Second Reading - ie, that the Bill go no further. There are two different motions with slightly different wording.

Currently in division.

It’s very unlikely that the Public Order Bill would fail to proceed. But still possible.

On the division — Ayes 200 vs Noes 292. This means that the amendment to prevent the Bill proceeding has not been successful.

However, there is now a division on the question as a whole, which in this case is the same question, but mirrored.

Second division — Ayes 292, Noes 202.

So the Public Order Bill has had its Second Reading and now proceeds to the Committee Stage.

That’s it for the Public Order Bill tonight. See you back here for more updates during future stages?