EU Constitution — 8 Jun 2005 at 18:59
Oliver Letwin MP, West Dorset did not vote.
The issue in this division was whether to approve a Government amendment to a motion proposed by the Conservative front bench on the Constitutional Treaty of the European Union. The previous division had seen the House reject the wording proposed by the Conservatives.
The amended wording proposed was:
That this House endorses the Statement of 6th June by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, which set out the Government's response to the results of the French and Dutch referenda on the EU Constitutional Treaty; recognises that discussions will now take place on the future of the Constitutional Treaty between European leaders collectively; and agrees that the EU should uphold the concept of subsidiarity and pursue greater flexibility and better regulation, and continue the contribution it has made to peace, democracy and prosperity over recent decades for the benefit of the people of Europe.
Under the Standing Orders of the House, if this amendment was agreed then the motion (as amended) would be agreed without a further division. Those voting Aye were agreeing with this motion, while those voting No were disagreeing with it.
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 (Aye)||Minority (No)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||0||177 (+2 tell)||0||91.8%|
|Lab||320 (+2 tell)||0||1||91.2%|
|Stephen Hesford||Wirral West||Lab||both|