Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Bill — 22 Jun 2000 at 16:39
Lord Henley voted in the minority (Teller for the Contents).
moved Amendment No. 8:
Page 100, line 32, at end insert--
("(3) The regulations shall in any event provide that the net weekly income of the non-resident parent shall be reduced in the circumstances mentioned in sub-paragraph (4) and by the method mentioned in sub-paragraph (5), but subject to the limit mentioned in sub-paragraph (6).
(4) The circumstances referred to in sub-paragraph (3) are where the parent with care has a gross annual income from all sources for the most recently completed financial year of more than £25,000.
(5) The method referred to in sub-paragraph (3) is that for every pound by which the gross annual income of the parent with care exceeds £25,000 the net weekly income of the non-resident parent shall be reduced by one penny.
(6) The limit referred to in sub-paragraph (3) is that the net weekly income of the non-resident parent shall not be reduced by more than 50 per cent.
(7) The regulations shall in any event provide that net weekly income shall include both earned and unearned income.").
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 8) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 94; Not-Contents, 124.
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|
|Con||0||49 (+2 tell)||22.7%|
|Lab||115 (+2 tell)||0||60.6%|
|Lord Craig of Radley||Crossbench (front bench)||no|
|Lord Williamson of Horton||Crossbench (front bench)||no|