[S1M-2993.2 (Amendment)] Decision Time — 18 Apr 2002 at 17:02
This looks like the vote on S1M-2993.2
The description in the bulletin on 2002-04-18 is:
*S1M-2993.2 Roseanna Cunningham: Prison Estates Review-As an amendment to motion (S1M-2993) in the name of Mr Jim Wallace, leave out from "welcomes" to end and insert "notes the publication of the consultation paper Proposals for the Future of the Scottish Prison Service Estate; believes that to help achieve a safer Scotland the prison estate should facilitate the secure holding of prisoners and the delivery of effective rehabilitation programmes, and that prisons should provide a reasonable standard of accommodation; recognises that these objectives can only be achieved by substantial modernisation of the present prison estate; further notes that private prisons have serious deficiencies, in their management of both inmates and staff, and asserts that, in the interest of public safety, such a key component of the criminal justice system should remain in the public sector."
You can search for this motion (S1M-2993.2) on TheyWorkForYou
Text Introducing Division:
There are seven questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first question is, that amendment S1M-2993.2, in the name of Roseanna Cunningham, which seeks to amend motion S1M-2993, in the name of Jim Wallace, on the prison estates review, 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 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 73.7% |
| Green | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Independent | 0 | 1 | 0 | 33.3% |
| Lab | 49 | 0 | 0 | 89.1% |
| LDem | 13 | 0 | 0 | 81.3% |
| SNP | 0 | 25 | 0 | 75.8% |
| SSP | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Total: | 76 | 28 | 0 | 81.3% |
All MPs Eligible to Vote - sorted by party
Includes MPs who were absent (or abstained) from this vote.
Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote