Baroness Flather

has never voted on the policy

Civil aviation pollution - For limiting

by scoring 50.0% compared to the votes below

Someone who believes that there is too little protection for residents under flight paths, and we need to increase the industry's transparency and give those who are aggrieved some form of redress would cast votes described by the policy.

Civil Aviation Bill — Night flights — removal of quota - 8 Mar 2006 - Division No. 3
Policy 'Civil aviation pollution - For limiting'Aye (strong)
Baroness Flatherabsent
Con980
Lab0116
LDem490
Total167127

Those voting 'Content' agreed to remove Clause 2(2) from the Civil Aviation Bill which would have deliberately weakened the power of the Secretary of State to impose limits on the number of takeoffs and landings at an airport. It would have done so by deleting Section 78(3)(c) of the Civil Aviation Act 1982, and replaced it with:

[The Secretary of State may] impose other restrictions for limiting cumulative amounts of noise and vibration caused by aircraft of descriptions so specified taking off or landing at the aerodrome...

This is similar in effect to the 'Night Flights' amendment that was rejected by the Commons on 10 October 2005.

Essentially, the Lords voted to preserve the status quo, whereby nightflights are limited by a simple cap on numbers rather than a complex system of 'noise quotas'. Campaigners fear that this is deliberately weak and would mean more night flights, causing more disturbance, even if each one is marginally quieter.

Civil Aviation Bill - 28 Mar 2006 - Division No. 2
Policy 'Civil aviation pollution - For limiting'Aye
Baroness Flatherabsent
Con730
Lab1142
LDem480
Total140152

Read a third time.

moved Amendment No. 1:

After Clause 4, insert the following new clause-

"SOUND-PROOFING OF DOMESTIC AND COMMUNITY BUILDINGS AFFECTED BY AERODROME USE

(1) The Secretary of State shall, no later than one year after this section comes into effect, make regulations under section 20(1) of the Land Compensation Act 1973 (c. 26) (sound-proofing of buildings affected by public works) imposing a duty on responsible authorities to insulate domestic and community buildings, such as schools and nurseries, hospitals, nursing homes, hospices, places of worship, libraries and other public use buildings against noise caused, or expected to be caused, by the use of aerodromes for the taking off and landing of aircraft.

(2) Such insulation should provide for internal noise environments equivalent or better than the "good" category of BS 8233 where relevant.

(3) In making provision as to the level of noise giving rise to such a duty in respect of a building or class of buildings, and the area in which a building must be situated if the duty is to arise in respect of it, the regulations must make reference to the noise attenuation of individual rooms in domestic and community buildings such as those outlined in subsection (1) above."

On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 1) shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 140; Not-Contents, 152.

Civil Aviation Bill - 28 Mar 2006 - Division No. 3
Policy 'Civil aviation pollution - For limiting'Aye
Baroness Flatherabsent
Con620
Lab5117
LDem410
Total119123

moved Amendment No. 3:

After Clause 10, insert the following new clause-

"AIR TRAVEL TRUST: CONTRIBUTIONS BY INDIVIDUAL PASSENGERS

(1) There shall be a levy to be known as the Air Passenger Levy ("the levy"), which shall be charged on the carriage on an aircraft of a chargeable passenger.

(2) A "chargeable passenger" is one whose flight begins at an aerodrome in the United Kingdom and who travels outside the United Kingdom.

(3) Regulations under this section may-

(a) specify the amount of the levy,

(b) set a ceiling on the amount to be collected from the levy, and

(c) require operators of the aircraft to pay the levy to the Air Travel Trust.

(4) Regulations under subsection (3)(b) which set a ceiling for the amount to be raised by the levy must-

(a) ensure that contributions to the Air Travel Trust Fund cease once this ceiling is reached, and

(b) allow for the levy to be reintroduced if the level of funds accrued from the levy falls below 50% of the amount specified by the ceiling."

On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 3) shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 119; Not-Contents, 123.

How the number is calculated

The MP's votes count towards a weighted average where the most important votes get 50 points, less important votes get 10 points, and less important votes for which the MP was absent get 2 points. In important votes the MP gets awarded the full 50 points for voting the same as the policy, no points for voting against the policy, and 25 points for not voting. In less important votes, the MP gets 10 points for voting with the policy, no points for voting against, and 1 (out of 2) if absent.

Questions about this formula can be discussed on the forum.

No of votesPointsOut of
Most important votes (50 points)   
MP voted with policy000
MP voted against policy000
MP absent12550
Less important votes (10 points)   
MP voted with policy000
MP voted against policy000
Less important absentees (2 points)   
MP absent*224
Total:2754

*Pressure of other work means MPs or Lords are not always available to vote – it does not always indicate they have abstained. Therefore, being absent on a less important vote makes a disproportionatly small difference.

agreement score
MP's points
total points
 = 
27
54
 = 50.0 %.


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.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive