Identity Cards Bill — 28 Mar 2006 at 16:38
Lord Thomas of Gresford voted with the majority (Content).
commons reasons
<[i>The page and line references are to Bill 28 as first printed for the Lords.]
16 Clause 5, page 4, line 44, leave out "must" and insert "may, if the individual so chooses,"
22 Clause 8, page 7, line 42, leave out "must" and insert "may, if the individual so chooses,"
The Commons insist on their disagreement to Lords Amendments Nos. 16 and 22 but propose Amendments Nos. 22E and 22F in lieu-
22E Page 7, line 38, after "accompanies" insert "or includes"
22F Page 7, line 43, leave out from "manner" to the end and insert "ensure that an application to be issued with such a card accompanies or is included"
The Lords do not insist on their Amendments Nos. 16 and 22, in respect of which the Commons have insisted on their disagreement, do disagree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 22E and 22F in lieu, and do propose Amendments Nos. 22G and 22H in lieu-
22G Page 4, line 44, after "individual" insert "and is made on or before 31st December 2011, that application may, if the individual so chooses, include an application by that individual to be entered in the Register.
(2A) Where an application to be issued with a designated document is made by an individual and is made after 31st December 2011,"
22H Page 7, line 42, leave out from "card" to end of line 2 on page 8 and insert "may, if the individual so chooses, in the prescribed manner, include an application to be issued with such a card in any application made by him to be issued with a designated document, where that application is made on or before 31st December 2011.
(7A) An individual who is not already the holder of an ID card must, in the prescribed manner, include an application to be issued with such a card in any application made by him to be issued with a designated document, where that application is made after 31st December 2011."
The Commons disagree to these amendments for the following reason-
22GA & 22I Because the Commons do not consider it appropriate to delay until 1st January 2012 the commencement of the rule that a person applying for a designated document must at the same time apply to be entered in the Register and to have an ID Card issued to him
rose to move, as an amendment to Motion A, at end insert "but do propose Amendments Nos. 22J and 22K in lieu".
22J Clause 5, page 4, line 44, leave out from "individual" to end of line 4 on page 5 and insert-
"(a) if the individual is not already entered in the Register, his application for a designated document must include or be accompanied by an application by that individual to be entered in the Register unless he has stated in or with his application for a designated document that he does not wish to apply to be entered in the Register;
(b) if the individual is already entered in the Register, his application for a designated document must either state that he is already entered in the Register and confirm the contents of his entry or state that he is entered in the Register and confirm the contents of his entry subject to the changes notified in the application."
22K Clause 8, page 8, line 2, after "document" insert "in which he has not included or which is not accompanied by a statement in accordance with section 5(2) that he does not wish to be entered in the Register"
On Question, Whether the said Motion (No. A1) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 219; Not-Contents, 191.
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 is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.Party | Majority (Content) | Minority (Not-Content) | Turnout |
Bishop | 3 | 1 | 15.4% |
Con | 127 | 0 | 60.8% |
Crossbench | 23 (+1 tell) | 28 | 28.7% |
Green | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
Independent Labour | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
Lab | 1 | 157 (+2 tell) | 75.1% |
LDem | 58 (+1 tell) | 0 | 79.7% |
Total: | 214 | 186 | 57.3% |
Rebel Voters - sorted by party
Lords 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 lord who could have voted in this division
Name | Party | Vote |
The Bishop of Oxford | Bishop | no |
Lord Armstrong of Ilminster | Crossbench (front bench) | tellaye |
Lord Bridges | Crossbench | aye |
Viscount Colville of Culross | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Viscount Craigavon | Crossbench | aye |
Lord Craig of Radley | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Baroness D'Souza | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Baroness Darcy de Knayth | Crossbench | aye |
The Earl of Erroll | Crossbench | aye |
Lord Freyberg | Crossbench | aye |
Lord Greenway | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Baroness Howe of Idlicote | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Lord Hylton | Crossbench | aye |
Lord Inge | Crossbench | aye |
Lord Lloyd of Berwick | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Lord Monson | Crossbench | aye |
Lord Moran | Crossbench | aye |
Lord Neill of Bladen | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Lord Northbourne | Crossbench | aye |
Lord Owen | Crossbench | aye |
Lord Palmer | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Lady Saltoun of Abernethy | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Lord Skidelsky | Crossbench | aye |
Baroness Stern | Crossbench (front bench) | aye |
Lord Tanlaw | Crossbench | aye |
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws | Lab | aye |