Prevention of Terrorism Bill — Second Reading — 23 Feb 2005 at 19:59
The Aye-voters agreed that the Prevention of Terrorism Bill should be "read a Second time", which is Parliamentary speak for sending it to the next stage of the process where it is reviewed section by section in Committee, after which it is read a Third time (another debate and vote) before going to the House of Lords for further work.
This Bill was "read a first time" on 22 February (a day earlier) by the act of being printed. The relevant document quoted at the start of the debate (which took place over 6 hours) was Memorandums laid before the Constitutional Affairs Committee on the Operation of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC), HC323-II. It requires some sort of a crisis to cause the procedure to move this quickly. In this case it is because there is a perceived need to replace parts of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 which had been subjected to many votes and problems in Parliament since it was passed.
Party Summary
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
Party | Majority (Aye) | Minority (No) | Both | Turnout |
Con | 0 | 135 (+1 tell) | 0 | 84.5% |
DUP | 0 | 4 | 0 | 57.1% |
Independent | 0 | 3 | 0 | 100.0% |
Lab | 309 (+2 tell) | 32 | 0 | 84.1% |
LDem | 0 | 47 (+1 tell) | 0 | 87.3% |
PC | 0 | 4 | 0 | 100.0% |
SNP | 0 | 3 | 0 | 60.0% |
UUP | 0 | 5 | 0 | 100.0% |
Total: | 309 | 233 | 0 | 84.3% |
Rebel Voters - sorted by constituency
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