House of Lords Bill — Exclusion of hereditary peers from voting — rejected — 15 Feb 1999
The majority No voters rejected an amendment[1] to the House of Lords Bill. The amendment sought to allow hereditary peers to remain in the House of Lords but they would not be allowed to vote in the Lords. However, it was defeated.
The main intention of the House of Lords Bill was to abolish the hereditary peers who sit within the Lords.
----
- [1] Sir Patrick Cormack MP, 15 February 1999, House of Commons
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.
| Party | Majority (No) | Minority (Aye) | Both | Turnout |
| Con | 0 | 131 (+2 tell) | 0 | 82.1% |
| Lab | 301 (+2 tell) | 0 | 0 | 72.7% |
| LDem | 29 | 0 | 0 | 63.0% |
| PC | 1 | 0 | 0 | 25.0% |
| SNP | 1 | 0 | 0 | 16.7% |
| Total: | 332 | 131 | 0 | 73.5% |
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
| Name | Constituency | Party | Vote | |
| no rebellions | ||||