Local Government Bill — Clause 11 — Use of Capital Receipts — 15 Sep 2003 at 17:15
Mark Field MP, Cities of London and Westminster voted in the minority (Teller for the Noes).
I beg to move, That this House disagrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
We are considering a vital issue. Agreement with the amendment would undermine one of the fundamental principles of housing finance, which allows the redistribution of housing capital receipts to the areas of greatest need. Accepting the amendment would deprive housing authorities in areas of high housing stress of the resources that they need to fulfil pressing demands for housing. Simply letting housing authorities keep their housing capital receipts, irrespective of need and of how they intended to apply them, would be an unfair and irresponsible way of allocating limited resources.
Question put, That this House disagrees with the Lords in the said amendment:-
The House divided: Ayes 258, Noes 154.
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.
|Party||Majority (Aye)||Minority (No)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||0||116 (+2 tell)||0||72.4%|
|Independent Ulster Unionist||0||1||0||33.3%|
|Lab||258 (+2 tell)||0||0||63.6%|