House of Lords Reform — Remove Hereditary Places once Reform has taken place — rejected — 7 Mar 2007 at 17:09
Stuart Bell MP, Middlesbrough voted with the majority (No).
The majority Noes rejected an amendment to a motion that proposed removing the remaining hereditary peers in the House of Lords. The amendment would have meant that hereditary peers would only be removed after elected members took their place in the Lords. However, it was defeated.
-  Theresa May MP, 7 March 2007, House of Commons
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 (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||8||173 (+1 tell)||0||92.9%|
|Lab||309 (+2 tell)||5||0||89.8%|
|LDem||0||62 (+1 tell)||0||100.0%|
|John Bercow||Buckingham||whilst Con (front bench)||no|
|Philip Davies||Shipley||Con (front bench)||no|
|Julie Kirkbride||Bromsgrove||Con (front bench)||no|
|John Maples||Stratford-on-Avon||Con (front bench)||no|
|Richard Shepherd||Aldridge-Brownhills||Con (front bench)||no|
|Andrew Turner||Isle of Wight||Con||no|
|Andrew Tyrie||Chichester||Con (front bench)||no|
|Ann Winterton||Congleton||Con (front bench)||no|
|Gwyneth Dunwoody||Crewe and Nantwich||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Louise Ellman||Liverpool, Riverside||Lab (minister)||aye|
|Patrick Hall||Bedford||Lab (minister)||aye|