Orders of the Day — New Clause 12 — Impaired decision making — 19 Jun 2007 at 19:45
Jamie Reed MP, Copeland voted with the majority (No).
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
My speech will take a little longer than the Minister just took in eventually forcing herself to say that she supported the last amendment we discussed. I hope that she will take a little less time to reach the same denouement on new clause 12. It should come as no surprise to her, as it mirrors amendments tabled in the Lords which she promptly savaged in Committee on very poor grounds. I hope that she has reconsidered and consulted experts, and will admit the error of her ways by now agreeing to restore this rightful amendment to the Bill, whose provisions were originally added to it in the Lords.
It being two and a half hours after commencement of proceedings on the motion, Mr. Deputy Speaker put forthwith the Question already proposed from the C hair, pursuant to Order <[/i> 18 June ].
Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:-
The House divided: Ayes 206, Noes 289.
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||0||137 (+2 tell)||0||70.9%|
|Lab||287 (+2 tell)||2||0||82.7%|
|Jeremy Corbyn||Islington North||Lab||aye|
|Lynne Jones||Birmingham, Selly Oak||Lab||aye|