Immigration Bill — Requirement to Appoint Child Trafficking Guardian to Apply to England and Wales Only — 7 May 2014 at 17:53

The majority of MPs voted to require a child trafficking guardian to be appointed to represent the best interests of potential child victims of trafficking in human beings everywhere in the UK, not just in England and Wales.

MPs were considering the Immigration Bill[1]. The motion accepted in this vote was:

  • That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 24.

Amendment 24 stated[2]:

  • Page 53, line 7, after “54” insert “, section (Child trafficking guardians for all potential child victims of trafficking in human beings)

Had it not been rejected this would have added the above text to clause 69[4] of the Bill; subsection 3 of clause 69 originally stated:

  • (3) Section 54 and Schedule 6 extend to England and Wales only.

Had the Lords' amendment been accepted it would have added the section on Child trafficking guardians for all potential child victims of trafficking in human beings, that was introduced later[5] to the list of provisions only applying to England and Wales.

During the debate David Hanson MP suggested a system of appointing child trafficking guardians already existed in Scotland

  • Trafficked children who arrive in Scotland value the care and support that they receive from their appointed guardians.

As it was the clause on Child Trafficking Guardians was rejected in another vote held at the same time.


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 (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Con267 (+1 tell) 0088.2%
DUP0 5062.5%
Green0 10100.0%
Lab0 223 (+2 tell)087.2%
LDem37 (+1 tell) 0067.9%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 2066.7%
SNP0 60100.0%
Total:304 240085.8%

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

no rebellions

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