division_name: Bill Presented &#8212; Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill
motion: <p class="" pid="a.707.3/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid="a.707.3/2" pwmotiontext="yes">From the very start of British policing, Sir Robert Peel's key principle that the</p>
  
  <p class="" pid="a.718.0/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move,</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="a.718.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">That this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill because it introduces an expensive set of reforms which will do nothing to bring the police closer to the communities they serve; because it risks a single elected politician remote from the frontline overruling operational policing decisions, thus ending one hundred and seventy years of tradition of police independence from politicians; because it gives insufficient attention to the risks of police force collaboration being undermined by the creation of individually elected police commissioners; and because the Government has indicated that it will implement this expensive and disruptive reform in the same year as the Government is making the biggest annual cut to police funding as set out in the Spending Review.</p>
  
  <p pid="a.771.8/1" pwmotiontext="yes"><i> Question put, </i>That the amendment be made.</p>
  
  <p pid="a.771.8/2" pwmotiontext="yes"><i> The House divided:</i> Ayes 230, Noes 321.</p>