High Speed Rail (London — West Midlands) Bill — Decline Second Reading — 28 Apr 2014 at 22:49
David Ruffley MP, Bury St Edmunds did not vote.
The majority of MPs voted for a High Speed Rail link between London and the West Midlands.
MPs were considering the High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands) Bill and in particular were debating the motion:
- That the Bill be now read a Second time.
The amendment rejected in this vote was:
- leave out from “That” to the end of the Question and add:
- this House, while accepting the need to increase overall railway capacity,
- declines to give a second reading to the Bill
- because there has been inadequate opportunity for Members and those affected by the Bill to consider and respond to the report of the Assessor appointed under Standing Order 224A, which was not published until shortly 5 before the Easter recess;
- because assessments of the relative costs and benefits of works envisaged by the Bill have been repeatedly unconvincing and still fail to demonstrate a sound economic case for the proposed works, particularly in relation to other options;
- because the Secretary of State has declined to publish the Major Projects Authority report on High Speed 2, with the result that Members have been denied access to highly 10 significant evidence on the viability of the project;
- because the case for starting further high-speed rail construction in this country with a line from London to the West Midlands rather than in the north of England has not been convincingly made out;
- because the Bill will cause widespread environmental disruption to many areas of the country including areas of outstanding natural beauty;
and because the Bill should be 15 preceded by proper consideration of and a strategy for integrating high-speed rail with other transport modes including the UK’s international airport hubs.”
The effective element of the amendment was the section stating declines to give a second reading to the Bill; had the amendment been accepted the Bill's passage towards becoming law would have been halted.
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 (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||221 (+1 tell)||32 (+1 tell)||0||83.6%|
|Lab||186||13 (+1 tell)||0||77.5%|
|LDem||38 (+1 tell)||0||0||69.6%|