[S2M-2129.3 (Amendment)] Decision Time — 9 Dec 2004 at 17:00
This looks like the vote on S2M-2129.3
The description in the bulletin on 2004-12-09 is:
*S2M-2129.3 Mr Mark Ruskell: Fisheries—As an amendment to motion (S2M-2129) in the name of Ross Finnie, leave out from "based" to end and insert "; notes the North Sea Regional Advisory Council’s opinion that "the concept of a partially closed or restricted access area in the North Sea is not ruled out in principle", and calls on the Executive to make proportionate use of closed areas, on-board observers and bycatch quotas in addition to existing management controls in furtherance of its aim to maintain the sustainability of fish stocks at the heart of the strategic agenda for fisheries, as stated in the Strategic Framework for the Scottish Sea Fishing Industry and, with UK and European counterparts, to seek the necessary resources and investment required to support these measures and fishery-dependent communities while fish stocks recover." Supported by: Robin Harper*
You can search for this motion (S2M-2129.3) on TheyWorkForYou
Text Introducing Division:
The next question is, that amendment S2M-2129.3, in the name of Mark Ruskell, which seeks to amend motion S2M-2129, in the name of Ross Finnie, on fisheries, 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 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 83.3% |
| Green | 0 | 7 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Independent | 1 | 1 | 2 | 80.0% |
| Lab | 49 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% |
| LDem | 16 | 0 | 0 | 94.1% |
| SNP | 21 | 0 | 0 | 84.0% |
| SSCUP | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SSP | 0 | 0 | 6 | 100.0% |
| Total: | 102 | 9 | 8 | 93.0% |
All MPs Eligible to Vote - sorted by constituency
Includes MPs who were absent (or abstained) from this vote.
Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote