Cameron suffers the biggest Tory rebellion yet

91 Tory MPs vote against House of Lords reform in the biggest revolt of this parliament.

With all three of the main parties whipping their MPs in favour of Lords reform, the result of tonight's vote (the programme motion having been withdrawn) was never in doubt. MPs voted overwhelmingly by 462-124 to give the bill a second reading.

But the real story is the size of the Conservative revolt. With 91 Tory MPs voting against the bill, it was the largest rebellion since the formation of the coalition, beating the previous record of 82 set by the EU rebels last year. The rebels were just four short of matching the largest Conservative rebellion of the post-war era over the Major government's post-Dunblane firearms legislation. Conor Burns, PPS to Northern Ireland Secretary Owen Paterson, resigned from the government in protest earlier today, and Angie Bray, PPS to Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude, was sacked immediately after the vote. As ConservativeHome notes, if one takes into account the number of Tory abstentions, more than half of all the party's backbenchers defied the whip and refused to vote for the bill.

By withdrawing the programme motion at the eleventh hour, Cameron avoided the ignominy of an outright Commons defeat. But his authority has been badly dented by tonight's vote. As in the case of the EU referendum vote, the PM was forced to rely on Labour votes to carry the day.

As I wrote earlier, the fate of Lords reform now lies in Labour's hands. If Ed Miliband agrees to the use of closure motions to prevent filibustering by the rebels, the bill could yet make it through the Commons. The key question is what the coalition will have to offer Labour in return for its backing. One possibility, as I suggested in my last post, is that Cameron and Clegg will agree to a referendum, a proposal that Labour endorsed in its 2010 manifesto and that a number of Tory rebels also support.

David Cameron relied on Labour votes to avoid defeat over House of Lords reform. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

As crime moves online, the police need the investment in technology to follow

Technology offers solutions, not just threats.

It’s perhaps inevitable that as the world becomes more digital, so does crime. This week Alison Saunders, director of public prosecutions, recognised that online crime is as serious as face-to-face crime. “Hate is hate,” Saunders wrote referring to internet abuse, and the police should protect people from it wherever they are. This will add demand to under-pressure police forces. And it is only the tip of the iceberg. 

Forty-seven per cent of crime involves an online element. Police recorded 30,000 instances of online stalking and harassment last year. People are 20 times more likely to be a victim of fraud than robbery, costing businesses an estimated £144bn a year. On a conservative estimate, 2,500 UK citizens use the anonymous dark web browser, Tor, for illegal purposes such as drug dealing, revenge porn and child sexual exploitation.

The police need new technology to meet demand, a Reform report published today finds. Some progress has been made in recent years. West Midlands Police uses an online portal for people to report incidents. Durham uses evidence-gathering software to collect social media information on suspects, and then instantly compile a report that can be shared with courts. Police have benefited from smartphones to share information, and body-worn cameras, which have reduced complaints against police by 93 per cent.

Yet, Theresa May’s 2016 remarks that police use “technology that lags woefully behind what they use as consumers” still stand. Officers interviewed for Reform’s research implored: “Give us the tools to do our job”.

Online evidence portals should be upgraded to accept CCTV footage. Apps should be developed to allow officers to learn about new digital threats, following the US army’s library of knowledge-sharing apps. Augmented-reality glasses are being used in the Netherlands to help officers identify evidence at digital crime scenes. Officers would save a trip back to the station if they could collect fingerprints on smartphones and statements on body-worn cameras.

New technology requires investment, but forces are reducing the resources put into IT as reserves have dried up. Durham plans to cut spend by 60 per cent between 2015-16 and 2019-20. The government should help fund equipment which can meet demand and return future productivity savings. If the Home Office invested the same as the Department of Health, another department pushing “transformative” technology, it would invest an extra £450m a year. This funding should come from administrative savings delivered through accelerating the Government’s automation agenda, which the think tank Reform has previously calculated would save Whitehall £2.6bn a year.

As crime moves online, police must follow. Saunders is right to point to the importance of meeting it. But technology offers solutions, not just threats. Installing the next generation of equipment will give police the tools to do their jobs, addressing online hate and more. 

Alexander Hitchcock is a senior researcher at reform