National Insurance Contributions Bill — 13 May 2002 at 21:55
Oliver Letwin MP, West Dorset voted in the minority (Aye).
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
There is a simple reason for supporting the Bill: it supports an NHS that is collectively funded, comprehensively available and free at the point of need, and which is the best insurance policy in the world. We are building on the Beveridge principles by raising resources to help fund the cost of the national health service through national insurance contributions. The Bill will raise resources to enable record extra investment to be made in a reformed NHS.
I beg to move, To leave out from 'That' to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof:
"this House declines to give a Second Reading to the National Insurance Contributions Bill because its provisions fail to reflect the need for change and improvement in the NHS to match additional resources, will hamper job creation and further increase the burdens on business, and will impose additional taxes on employees, including those on whom the public services rely."
Question put, That the amendment be made:-
The House divided: Ayes 134, Noes 357.
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
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.
|Party||Majority (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||0||133 (+2 tell)||0||82.3%|
|Lab||316 (+2 tell)||0||0||77.6%|