Civil Partnership Bill — Commons Amendment — 17 Nov 2004 at 17:43
Lord Hollick voted with the majority (Not-Content).
1 Clause 1, page 1, line 4, leave out from "relationship" to "between" in line 5
rose to move, as an amendment to the Motion that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 1, at end insert "and do propose Amendments Nos. 1A and 1B in lieu of the words so left out of the Bill":
1A Clause 253, page 125, line 29, at end insert-
"(10) No order may be made under this section until the Secretary of State has established a voluntary registration scheme, or schemes, whereby two persons can register their relationship where they-
(a) are within the specified degrees of family relationship,
(b) are both aged over thirty years,
(c) have lived together as co-dependents for a continuous period of twelve years immediately prior to the date of registration.
(11) The scheme or schemes referred to in subsection (10) above shall entitle two people who have registered their relationship to be treated no less favourably than two people who are civil partners of each other in respect of the following-
(a) inheritance tax,
(b) capital gains tax,
(c) housing and tenancies,
(d) fatal accident claims.
(12) Schedule (Specified degrees of family relationship) contains provisions for determining when two people are within the specified degrees of family relationship for the purposes of this section."
1B After Schedule 29, insert the following new schedule-
:TITLE3:Specified degrees of family relationship
(1) Two people are within the specified degrees of family relationship if one falls within the list below in relation to the other.
Former adoptive child
Former adoptive parent
(2) In the list "sibling" means a brother, sister, half-brother or half-sister."
On Question, Whether the said amendment shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 136; Not-Contents, 251.
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 is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (Not-Content)||Minority (Content)||Turnout|
|Con||10||97 (+1 tell)||52.2%|
|Crossbench||30||32 (+1 tell)||36.0%|
|Lab||137 (+2 tell)||0||68.8%|
|The Bishop of Chester||Bishop||aye|
|The Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham||Bishop||aye|
|Viscount Astor||Con (front bench)||no|
|Lord Bowness||Con (front bench)||no|
|Baroness Buscombe||Con (front bench)||no|
|Lord Crickhowell||Con (front bench)||no|
|Baroness Flather||Con (front bench)||no|
|Lord Gilmour of Craigmillar||Con||no|
|Baroness Noakes||Con (front bench)||no|
|Lord Norton of Louth||Con (front bench)||no|
|Lord St John of Fawsley||Con||no|
|Viscount Allenby of Megiddo||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Lord Best||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Lord Cameron of Dillington||Crossbench||no|
|Lord Cobbold||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Baroness Darcy de Knayth||Crossbench||no|
|Baroness Finlay of Llandaff||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Baroness Greengross||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Baroness Howarth of Breckland||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Baroness Howe of Idlicote||Crossbench||no|
|Lord Kerr of Kinlochard||Crossbench||no|
|Lord Laming||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|The Earl of Listowel||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Baroness Murphy||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve||Crossbench||no|
|Lord Patel||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Lord Robertson of Port Ellen||Crossbench||no|
|Lord Roll of Ipsden||Crossbench||no|
|The Earl of Sandwich||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Lord Slynn of Hadley||Crossbench||no|
|Baroness Warnock||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Lord Wright of Richmond||Crossbench (front bench)||no|