Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill — Allowing Greater Variation from Mean Number of Electors in MP Constituency in Exceptional Circumstances — 16 Feb 2011 at 14:08

Lord Grade of Yarmouth voted against allowing geographical considerations or local ties to justify greater variation from the mean number of electors in a parliamentary constituency.

The majority of members of the House of Lords voted to allow geographical considerations or local ties to justify greater variation from the mean number of electors in a parliamentary constituency.

In this vote the members of the House of Lords were insisting on their amendment despite elected MPs in the House of Commons disagreeing with it.

The House of Lords was considering the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill[1]. The amendment rejected in this vote was:

  • Amendment B1
  • As an amendment to Motion B, leave out from "House" to end and insert "do insist on its Amendments 16 and 19".

Motion B stated:

  • That this House do not insist on its Amendments 16 and 19 to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reasons 16A and 19A:
  • Because the amendments would produce too much variation in the electorate of constituencies and would result in a system that was unduly difficult to operate.

Amendment 16 stated[2]:

  • Page 9, line 23, after “4(2),” insert “5A,”

"5A" is a reference to the new "Exceptional circumstances" clause referred to below:

Amendment 19 stated[2]:

  • Page 10, line 22, at end insert—
  • "Exceptional circumstances
  • 5A If, but only if, a Boundary Commission is satisfied that-
  • (a) it is necessary to do so in order to achieve a viable constituency, and
  • (b) such necessity arises from special geographical considerations or local ties, as defined in rule 5(1)(a) or (d) above, of an exceptionally compelling nature, the Boundary Commission may decide that the electorate of the constituency shall be-
  • (c) no less than 92.5% of the United Kingdom electoral quota; and
  • (d) no more than 107.5% of that quota."

This would have had the effect of allowing geographical considerations or local ties to justify greater variation from the mean number of electors in a parliamentary constituency.

==

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 is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Not-Content)Minority (Content)Turnout
Con152 (+1 tell) 069.2%
Crossbench16 48 (+2 tell)35.3%
DUP0 250.0%
Independent Labour0 1100.0%
Lab0 17973.7%
LDem67 (+1 tell) 171.1%
Other0 111.1%
PC0 1100.0%
UUP1 150.0%
Total:236 23461.8%

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

Sort by: Name | Party | Vote

NamePartyVote
Lord Alton of LiverpoolCrossbenchno
Lord Bew Crossbenchno
Lord Bichard Crossbench (front bench)no
Lord Condon Crossbenchno
Baroness Deech Crossbench (front bench)no
The Earl of ErrollCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Fellowes Crossbench (front bench)no
Baroness Greengross Crossbenchno
Lord Jay of EwelmeCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Lloyd of BerwickCrossbench (front bench)no
Baroness Manningham-Buller Crossbench (front bench)no
Lord Neill of BladenCrossbenchno
Lord Powell of BayswaterCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Scott of FoscoteCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Tombs Crossbench (front bench)no
Lord Wright of RichmondCrossbench (front bench)no
Viscount Falkland LDemaye

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