City of London (Ward Elections) Bill (By Order) — Statement of compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights — 11 Jan 2001

John Prescott MP, Kingston upon Hull East voted with the majority (Aye).

As amended, considered.

Brought up, and read the First time.

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

With this it will be convenient to take amendment No. 11, in clause 2, page 1, line 19, at end insert--

Mr. Secretary Hoon has made the following statement under section 19(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998:

In my view, the provisions of the Armed Forces Bill are compatible with the Convention rights.

The High Contracting Parties undertake to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature.

will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature.

On receipt of a request from the Secretary General of the Council of Europe any High Contracting Party shall furnish an explanation of the manner in which its internal law ensures the effective implementation of any of the provisions of the Convention.

Section 3 of the Act shall not have force until the Secretary of State has made a statement to the effect

be published in such manner as the Minister making it considers appropriate.

European Convention on Human Rights,

In the view of Barclays Bank PLC the provisions of the Barclays Group Reorganisation Bill are compatible with the Convention rights.

European Convention on Human Rights,

Jane L. Shirran, Senior General Counsel to National Australia Group Europe Limited, the promoter of the Bill, has made the following statement on behalf of the company:

In my view, the provisions of the National Australia Group Europe Bill are compatible with the Convention rights.

Section 19 of the Human Rights Act 1998 does not apply to Private Bills. However, like all legislation, any Act resulting from the passage of such a Bill can be judged in the courts, either in the UK or in Strasbourg, for its compatibility with the ECHR. In future when Private Bills are deposited, promoters will be asked to

undertake a full assessment of the compatibility of their proposals with the ECHR and to make a statement setting out their conclusion as to whether the Bill is compatible or not. A Minister in the Government department within whose policy responsibilities the subject matter of the Bill falls will make a formal statement saying that he believes that the promoters have undertaken a full assessment and that he does not (or, if necessary, that he does) see any need to dispute their conclusions.

The High Contracting parties undertake to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature.

The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.

Thurrock, but I think we have covered the business encompassed by the proposal. I beg to move that the Question be now put.

Question put, That the Question be now put:--

The House proceeded to a Division.

The House having divided: Ayes 99, Noes 18.

Historical Hansard | Online Hansard |

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Con65 (+2 tell) 0041.9%
Lab27 15 (+2 tell)010.6%
LDem7 3021.3%
UUP1 0011.1%
Total:100 18019.3%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
Mr Tony BanksWest HamLab (minister)no
Mr Harry BarnesNorth East DerbyshireLabno
Michael ConnartyFalkirk EastLab (minister)no
Jeremy CorbynIslington NorthLabtellno
John CryerHornchurchLab (minister)no
Andrew DismoreHendonLabno
Brian IddonBolton South EastLabno
Lynne JonesBirmingham, Selly OakLabno
Andrew MacKinlayThurrockLabno
John Martin McDonnellHayes and HarlingtonLab (minister)no
Mr Tony McWalterHemel HempsteadLabno
Mr Peter PikeBurnleyLabno
Steve PoundEaling NorthLab (minister)tellno
Mr Malcolm SavidgeAberdeen NorthLabno
Dennis SkinnerBolsoverLab (minister)no
Angela SmithBasildonLabno
Rudi VisFinchley and Golders GreenLabno
Mr Richard AllanSheffield, HallamLDem (front bench)no
David HeathSomerton and FromeLDem (front bench)no
Andrew StunellHazel GroveLDem (front bench)no

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive