European Union (Referendum) Bill — Clause 1 — Parliamentary Approval of Referendum Date — 29 Nov 2013 at 09:30

The majority of MPs voted to reject a proposed technical restriction on the role of Parliament in setting the date for the referendum. It appears the effect of the proposal would have been to explicitly limit Parliament to approving, or not, a day proposed via a ministerial order, rather than proposing a new date.

The rejected amendment[1] was, according to Hansard moved by Chris Williamson MP. The amendment sheet[2] records it was proposed by William Bain MP. The effect of the proposed change was to leave out subsection (6) from clause (1) of the European Union (Referendum) Bill and insert —

  • "(6) An order under this section shall be made by statutory instrument.
  • "(7) An order under subsection (3) may not be made unless each House of Parliament has passed a resolution that the referendum shall take place on a day specified in the resolution and the day specified in the resolution is the same as in the order.
  • "(8) An order under subsection (5) may not be made unless a draft of the order has been laid before, and approved by, a resolution of each House of Parliament.’.

Subsection 3 relates to the date of the referendum and subsection 5 relates to the wording of the question in Welsh.

The original subsection (6) stated[3]:

  • "An order under this section shall be made by statutory instrument and may not be made unless a draft of the order has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament."

A point of order was raised by MP Nicholas Dakin, one of the tellers in the Aye lobby, relating to this division[4] :

"On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am afraid that I must report an error in the number reported as having voted in the Aye Lobby in the Division on amendment 71, which took place at 9.52 this morning. The Ayes were seven, not eight as reported. (Laughter.)"

It appears neither William Bain MP or Chris Williamson MP explained the intent of this amendment during the debate which preceded the vote.

Debate in Parliament | Source |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

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.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con240 (+2 tell) 0079.3%
Lab1 6 (+2 tell)03.5%
LDem0 101.8%
Total:241 7040.7%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

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

Kevan JonesNorth DurhamLab (minister)no

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive