[S1M-3351.1 (Amendment)] Decision Time — 5 Sep 2002 at 17:00
This looks like the vote on S1M-3351.1
The description in the bulletin on 2002-09-05 is:
*S1M-3351.1 Mrs Lyndsay McIntosh: Throughcare and Aftercare of Looked After Children-As an amendment to motion (S1M-3351) in the name of Cathy Jamieson, leave out from "and believes" to end and insert "but believes that the difficulties for young people leaving care should be addressed at an earlier stage to give them the best chance of coping with the challenges of successful adult living."
You can search for this motion (S1M-3351.1) on TheyWorkForYou
Text Introducing Division:
The fifth question is that amendment S1M-3351.1, in the name of Lyndsay McIntosh, which seeks to amend motion S1M-3351, in the name of Cathy Jamieson, on the throughcare and aftercare of looked-after children, 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 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 73.7% |
| Independent | 0 | 2 | 0 | 66.7% |
| Lab | 48 | 0 | 0 | 87.3% |
| LDem | 16 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SNP | 0 | 30 | 0 | 90.9% |
| SSP | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Total: | 64 | 47 | 0 | 87.4% |
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 | ||||