Finance Act — General fuel duty regulator — rejected — 2 Jul 2008 at 18:30
Mike Hancock MP, Portsmouth South voted both ways.
The majority of MPs voted against establishing a regime in which the Government would be required to make a forecast for oil prices when it sets out the fuel duty, and respond to differences between the actual price and the predicted price.
The new law, which was rejected, would have said:
- In every Budget Statement and pre-Budget Statement the Chancellor of the Exchequer must provide a forecast for oil prices and set out anticipated yield from fuel duty and VAT on fuel for that price and for a range of prices up to 50 per cent. above his forecast.
- The Treasury must, following each such statement, by regulations made by statutory instrument reduce the rates of duty specified above in direct proportion to the increase in the costs accounted for by VAT.
- Whenever international oil prices rise above the level estimated by the forecast made above, indexed fuel duty increases shall not take effect until the international oil prices return to the forecast level or the forecast price is amended by the next Budget or pre-Budget Statement.
No Liberal Democrat MPs and only 2 Conservative MPs voted in this division.
-  Stewart Hosie MP, House of Commons, 2 July 2008
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|
|Lab||307 (+2 tell)||0||0||88.3%|
|PC||0||2 (+1 tell)||0||100.0%|
|SNP||0||5 (+1 tell)||0||100.0%|