[S1M-1771.2 (Amendment)] Decision Time — 22 Mar 2001 at 17:18
This looks like the vote on S1M-1771.2
The description in the bulletin on 2001-03-22 is:
*S1M-1771.2 Fergus Ewing: Rural Scotland—As an amendment to motion (S1M-1771) in the name of Ross Finnie, leave out from "the Scottish Executive’s" to end and insert "welcomes the united approach taken by the Executive and opposition parties in recognising the need to eradicate the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease; believes that the rural economy is facing unprecedented difficulties; urges the Executive to launch a public information campaign in relation to the disease with clearer and more precise guidelines governing access to the countryside, and believes that the extent of the financial difficulties now being suffered is so grave that a comprehensive package of measures must be introduced to assist all aspects of economic life in our rural communities." Supported by: Richard Lochhead*, Alasdair Morgan*
You can search for this motion (S1M-1771.2) on TheyWorkForYou
Text Introducing Division:
The second question is, that amendment S1M-1771.2, in the name of Fergus Ewing, which seeks to amend motion S1M-1771, in the name of Ross Finnie, on rural Scotland, be agreed to. Are we agreed?
No.
There will be a division.
Party Summary
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
Party | Majority (No) | Minority (Aye) | Abstentions | Turnout |
Con | 19 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% |
Green | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
Independent | 0 | 3 | 0 | 100.0% |
Lab | 52 | 0 | 0 | 94.5% |
LDem | 16 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% |
SNP | 0 | 28 | 0 | 84.8% |
SSP | 0 | 0 | 1 | 100.0% |
Total: | 87 | 32 | 1 | 93.8% |
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
Name | Constituency | Party | Vote | |
no rebellions |