Comparison of Divisions: Sale of Radar System (Tanzania) — 30 Jan 2007 at 21:47 with Division No. 162 on 13 Feb 2006 at 22:17
(Swap the two divisions around).
Vote (a) : Sale of Radar System (Tanzania) - 30 Jan 2007 at 21:47 - Division No. 40
The majority of MPs voted against the motion:[1]
- This House
- notes the protests of citizens of Tanzania in a demonstration in Dar es Salaam on 20th January 2007 demanding the arrest of any wrongdoers involved in the sale of a radar system to Tanzania in 2001-02;
- further notes that the Serious Fraud Office is investigating the propriety of the deal and allegations of corruption;
- further notes that Tanzania is one of the poorest countries in the world and a leading recipient of British aid;
- further notes that Tanzania borrowed to finance this deal, whilst simultaneously seeking and receiving debt relief;
- calls upon the Government to explain whether adequate enquiries were made into the propriety of the deal at the time;
- further calls upon the Government to explain why the views of the World Bank were not adequately considered in the process of deciding whether to issue an export licence, in breach of Criterion Eight of the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria; and
- further calls upon the Government to explain why consent to the deal was forced through a divided Cabinet by the Prime Minister in the face of the opposition of the then Secretary of State for International Development, the Rt Hon Member for Birmingham, Ladywood.
In its place, a new motion was proposed:
- This House
- notes that it would be inappropriate to comment on allegations of corruption in connection with the sale of a radar system to Tanzania in light of the current investigation by the Serious Fraud Office;
- notes the great progress made by Tanzania since 2002 in achieving debt relief, poverty reduction and public service reform;
- notes that the decision to grant an export licence for the air traffic control system was taken after due consideration of the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria;
- acknowledges that that decision took place after full discussion at Cabinet level;
- further notes that the UK subsequently established its own cross-Whitehall methodology for the assessment of applications against Criterion 8 of the consolidated criteria and was subsequently instrumental in establishing a shared methodology with its EU partners; and
- further notes the Government's efforts to promote an International Arms Trade Treaty.
which then passed without a vote.
- [1] Andrew Mitchell MP, House of Commons, 30 January 2007
- [2] Hilary Benn, House of Commons, 30 January 2007
Vote (b) (unedited): Identity Cards Bill — Clause 24 — Appointment of National Identity Scheme Commissioner - 13 Feb 2006 at 22:17 - Division No. 162
Question accordingly agreed to.
Lords amendment disagreed to.
Lords amendments Nos. 48, 50 and 51 disagreed to.
Lords amendment: No. 3.
Motion made, and Question put, That this House disagrees with the Lords in the said amendment.-[Joan Ryan.]
The House divided: Ayes 316, Noes 257.
Difference in Votes - sorted by constituency
MPs for which their vote on Motion (a) differed from their inverted vote on Motion (b). You can also see just opposite votes between these two divisions, or simply all the votes.
Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote (a) | Vote (b)
Division Similarity Ratio
The measure of similarity between these two divisions is a calculation based on a comparison of their votes.
There were 646 MPs who could have voted in both of these divisions, and 0 voted the same way, with 469 voting in opposite ways. There were 26 MPs who didn't vote in either division, and 151 who voted in only one of them.
We invert the vote on the second division if it makes the distance closer (since the meaning of 'Aye' and 'No' are often interchangeable depending on how the question was put). In this case, they line up on opposite sides. An 's vote in in only one of the divisions contributes a factor of 0.2 to the distance. The calculation runs as follows:
([same-votes] + [differing-votes] + 0.2x[abstain-in-one])
(469 + 0 + 0.2x151)
499.2