[S2M-974] Decision Time — 4 Mar 2004 at 16:58
This looks like the vote on S2M-974
The description in the bulletin on 2004-03-01 is:
*S2M-974 Cathy Jamieson: Civil Contingencies Bill - UK Legislation-That the Parliament agrees the principle of a single statutory framework for civil protection across the UK, as set out in the Civil Contingencies Bill, and agrees that the relevant provisions in the Bill should be considered by the UK Parliament. Supported by: Hugh Henry*
You can search for this motion (S2M-974) on TheyWorkForYou
Text Introducing Division:
The third and last question is, that motion S2M-974, in the name of Cathy Jamieson, on the Civil Contingencies Bill, which is UK legislation, 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 (Aye) | Minority (No) | Abstentions | Turnout |
| Con | 8 | 0 | 0 | 44.4% |
| Green | 0 | 7 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Independent | 0 | 2 | 1 | 100.0% |
| Lab | 46 | 0 | 0 | 92.0% |
| LDem | 15 | 0 | 0 | 88.2% |
| SNP | 0 | 0 | 22 | 84.6% |
| SSCUP | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SSP | 0 | 4 | 0 | 66.7% |
| Total: | 69 | 14 | 23 | 82.8% |
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 | ||||