Academies Bill — Decline Second Reading — 19 Jul 2010 at 21:46

Ian Murray MP, Edinburgh South voted against enabling more schools in England to gain "Academy Status" and the consequent financial independence and removal from local authority control.

The majority of MPs voted not to decline a second reading for Academies Bill[1] ie. the majority of MPs voted in favour of the Academies Bill continuing on its path towards becoming law.

The original motion being debated was:

  • That the Bill be now read a Second time.

An opposition amendment, which was defeated in the vote, stated:

  • That this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Academies Bill (Lords) because
  • it creates the legal framework for the expensive free market schools reforms which will be funded by scrapping existing school building programmes;
  • its approach is based on reforms in other countries which have seen falling standards and rising inequality;
  • it contains no measures to drive up standards, improve discipline or deliver greater equality in schools;
  • it fails to build on the success of the previous Government's Academies programme and instead focuses additional support and resources on those schools that are already succeeding at the expense of the majority of schools;
  • it deprives schools with the biggest behaviour and special educational needs challenges of local authority support for special needs provision, the funding for which will go to those with the fewest such challenges;
  • it permits selective schools to convert to Academy status, which risks the unplanned expansion of selective education;
  • it removes any proper requirement to consult local authorities or the community before the creation of an Academy and centralises power in the hands of the Secretary of State over the future of thousands of schools without adequate provision for local accountability.

References:

Debate in Parliament | Source |

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 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.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con283 (+1 tell) 0092.8%
DUP3 0037.5%
Lab0 232 (+2 tell)090.7%
LDem46 (+1 tell) 0082.5%
SDLP0 1033.3%
Total:332 234090.0%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs 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 MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive