Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill — Committee to Decide on Form of AV to Put to Referendum — 30 Nov 2010 at 17:34
Lord Shipley voted against establishing a committee to recommend which form of "alternative vote" system ought be the subject of a referendum.
The majority of members of the House of Lords voting, voted against establishing a committee to recommend which form of "alternative vote" system ought be the subject of a referendum.
The House of Lords was considering the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill. The amendment rejected in this vote was:
- Amendment 1: Clause 1, page 1, line 5, at beginning insert "Subject to subsections (2A), (2B) and (6),"
Subsections 2A and 2B would, had the amendment have been accepted, been introduced by amendment 14 which stated:
- Page 1, line 6, at end insert—
- “(2A) The Secretary of State shall by order establish a Committee of Inquiry to make recommendations to Parliament on the form of “alternative vote” system to be the subject of the referendum.
- (2B) Following receipt of the recommendations of the Committee of Inquiry, and taking account of any resolutions of either House of Parliament in respect of those recommendations, the Secretary of State shall decide on the form of “alternative vote” to be used, and shall lay before Parliament for approval by affirmative resolution an order making provision about the referendum
new subsection (6) would have been introduced by amendment 33 which stated:
- Page 2, line 5, at end insert—
- “(6) The order under subsection (2B) shall make provision about—
- (a) the conduct of the referendum,
- (b) combination of polls,
- (c) referendum expenses,
- (d) control of loans etc to permitted participants,
- (e) amendment of the law relating to elections.”
These, rejected, additional subclauses would have been added to clause 1 of the Bill.
-  Parliament's webpage on the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill
-  Amendment sheet for the consideration of the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill on 30 November 2010
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 is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (Not-Content)||Minority (Content)||Turnout|
|Con||131 (+1 tell)||3||67.8%|
|Lab||0||142 (+2 tell)||61.0%|
|LDem||68 (+1 tell)||0||84.1%|
|Lord Hamilton of Epsom||Con (front bench)||aye|
|Lord Howard of Rising||Con||aye|
|Lord Alton of Liverpool||Crossbench||aye|
|Lord Craig of Radley||Crossbench (front bench)||aye|
|Lord Harries of Pentregarth||Crossbench (front bench)||aye|
|Lord Haskins||Crossbench (front bench)||aye|
|Baroness O'Loan||Crossbench (front bench)||aye|
|Lord Palmer||Crossbench (front bench)||aye|
|Lord Patel of Bradford||Crossbench (front bench)||aye|
|Baroness Prashar||Crossbench (front bench)||aye|
|The Earl of Sandwich||Crossbench (front bench)||aye|
|Lord Turnbull||Crossbench (front bench)||aye|