Policing and Crime Bill — Schedule 1 — Report on Funding Requirement Prior to Police and Crime Commissioners Gaining Responsibility for Fire and Rescue Service — 26 Apr 2016 at 15:46

John Penrose MP, Weston-Super-Mare voted against requiring a report on the funding requirements of the fire and rescue service before transferring responsibility for them to a Police and Crime Commissioner.

The majority of MPs voted against requiring a report on the funding requirements of the fire and rescue service before transferring responsibility for them to a Police and Crime Commissioner.

MPs were considering the Policing and Crime Bill[1].

The amendment rejected in this vote was:

  • Amendment 20, page 145, line 16, at end insert—
  • ‘(7) No order can be made under this section until the Secretary of State has conducted a review assessing the funding required by the fire and rescue service to secure the minimum level of cover needed to secure public safety and maintain fire resilience.
  • (8) The review carried out under section (7) must assess the impact of the level of cover on—
  • (a) fire related fatalities;
  • (b) non-fatal fire related casualties;
  • (c) the number of dwelling fires and other fires;
  • (d) the number of incidents responded to, and
  • (e) the strength and speed of response to incidents.”

The rejected amendment was accompanied by an explanatory note stating:

  • This amendment would require the Home Secretary to conduct a review on the level of funding the FRS requires in order to secure public safety before she may make allows police and crime commissioner to be a fire and rescue authority.

Had the amendment not been rejected the text contained within it would have been added to Schedule 1 of the Bill, and in particular the proposed new section 4A of the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 contained within it.

==

Debate in Parliament |

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
Con303 (+2 tell) 0092.4%
DUP0 3037.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 1033.3%
Lab0 191 (+2 tell)083.9%
LDem0 6075.0%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 2066.7%
UUP0 20100.0%
Total:303 209087.8%

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