UK-US Extradition Treaty — 12 Jul 2006 at 15:32
This division was on the motion that the House adjourns immediately, but it followed a debate on the extradition treaty between the United Kingdom and the United States which focussed on the 'Natwest Three' or 'Enron Three' who were then attempting to resist extradition. Those MPs voting to adjourn the House were expressing a protest against the treaty which, while remaining unratified by the United States, was not reciprocal.
The Labour whips officially ordered their MPs to abstain, and so any Labour MP who voted in the division was breaking the whip, contrary to what you may see elsewhere on this page. As the Labour whips did not put up tellers for the Noes, the Conservatives did so in order to make sure a division happened. These two Conservatives were not breaking the whip, contrary to what you may see elsewhere on the page.
It is a mark of shame that the site is unable to cope with the reality of political life and prefers instead a simplistic mathematical calculation of what constitutes a revolt. (Editors note - It is also a mark of shame that no political party will officially publish its whipping instructions.)
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||175 (+1 tell)||0 (+2 tell)||0||90.8%|
|LDem||57 (+1 tell)||0||0||92.1%|
|Harry Cohen||Leyton and Wanstead||Lab (minister)||no|
|Douglas Hogg||Sleaford and North Hykeham||Con||tellno|
|David Maclean||Penrith and The Border||Con (front bench)||tellno|
|Alan Simpson||Nottingham South||Lab||no|
|Dennis Skinner||Bolsover||Lab (minister)||no|
|David Taylor||North West Leicestershire||Lab (minister)||both|