University Tuition Fee Cap raise to £6,000 — Government should consult — rejected — 14 Dec 2010 at 19:56
Lord Maxton voted in the minority (Content).
The majority of Lords voted against changing the motion before the house from:
- That the draft regulations laid before the House on 29 November be approved.
to:
- This House
- regrets that the Government has failed to consult adequately with parents, students, higher education bodies, employers and local authorities on raising student tuition fees and to convince many people of the fairness and sustainability of its proposals for funding higher education;
- urges the Government to undertake more public consultation on the issue, including consultation with future graduates and their families who did not contribute to the consultation over the Browne review;
- further considers that there should be an independent impact assessment on (a) the financial consequences of the proposed fees on students from both lower and middle income families, and (b) the financial consequences of the proposed fees on women, including a full assessment of the impact of the fees on equalities and fairness, and further calls on Her Majesty's Government to commission new research to analyse the probable impact on demand for university courses of fees being increased to the range of £6,000 to £9,000 per annum from students from lower and middle income families and women; and
- further considers that, prior to contemplating any increase to the basic amount specified in section 24 of the Education Act 2004, the Government should publish a White Paper on reform of higher education funding, allowing for consultation and for consideration of alternative proposals.[1]
This was the House of Lords verstion of the vote in the House of Commons on the same Statutory Instrument required for setting the basic university fee to £6,000 per year.[2]
- [1] Lord Triesman, House of Lords, 14 December 2010
- [2] University Tuition Fee Cap - Set Basic Limit at £6,000 Per Year, House of Commons Division, 9 December 2010.
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 (Not-Content) | Minority (Content) | Turnout |
| Bishop | 0 | 2 | 8.0% |
| Con | 168 (+1 tell) | 0 | 82.0% |
| DUP | 0 | 2 | 50.0% |
| Ind Lab | 0 | 1 | 100.0% |
| Lab | 0 | 171 (+2 tell) | 70.9% |
| LDem | 59 (+1 tell) | 5 | 77.4% |
| Other | 0 | 2 | 50.0% |
| UKIP | 2 | 0 | 100.0% |
| UUP | 1 | 1 | 66.7% |
| Crossbench | 50 | 29 | 41.4% |
| Total: | 280 | 213 | 65.1% |
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 |
| Lord Cotter | LDem | aye |
| Lord Dykes | LDem | aye |
| Lord Fearn | LDem | aye |
| Lord Smith of Clifton | LDem | aye |
| Baroness Tonge | LDem | aye |