Trade Bill — Report (3rd Day) — Amendment 23 — 6 Jan 2021 at 17:00

Moved by Baroness Kidron

23: After Clause 2, insert the following new Clause-“Protection of children online(1) The United Kingdom may only become a signatory to an international trade agreement if the conditions in subsection (2) are satisfied.(2) International trade agreements must be consistent with-(a) other international treaties to which the United Kingdom is a party, and the domestic law of England and Wales (including any changes to the law after the trade agreement is signed), regarding the protection of children and other vulnerable user groups using the internet;(b) the provisions on data protection for children, as set out in the age appropriate design code under section 123 of the Data Protection Act 2018 (age-appropriate design code) and other provisions of that Act which impact children; and(c) online protections provided for children in the United Kingdom that the Secretary of State considers necessary.(3) In this section a “child” means any person under the age of 18.”

Ayes 340, Noes 248.

Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

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 is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Content)Minority (Not-Content)Turnout
Bishop10 038.5%
Con1 22084.0%
Crossbench78 1553.1%
DUP4 080.0%
Green2 0100.0%
Independent Labour1 0100.0%
Judge5 041.7%
Lab144 079.6%
LDem79 090.8%
Non-affiliated15 1144.1%
PC1 0100.0%
UUP0 2100.0%
Total:340 24872.2%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

Lords 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 lord who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Party | Vote

NamePartyVote
Lord Holmes of RichmondCon (front bench)aye
Lord Anderson of IpswichCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Botham Crossbenchno
Lord Carey of CliftonCrossbenchno
Lord Carrington Crossbenchno
Baroness Cavendish of Little VeniceCrossbenchno
Baroness Deech Crossbenchno
Lord Greenway Crossbenchno
Lord Hogan-Howe Crossbench (front bench)no
Baroness Hogg Crossbenchno
Lord Houghton of RichmondCrossbenchno
Lord Powell of BayswaterCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Stirrup Crossbench (front bench)no
Lord Thurlow Crossbench (front bench)no
Lord Trevethin and Oaksey Crossbenchno
Viscount Waverley Crossbenchno
Lord Bhatia Non-affiliatedno
Lord Faulks Non-affiliated (front bench)no
Lord Gadhia Non-affiliatedno
Lord Green of HurstpierpointNon-affiliatedno
Baroness Hoey Non-affiliatedno
Lord Kalms Non-affiliatedno
Lord Lupton Non-affiliatedno
Lord Moore of EtchinghamNon-affiliatedno
Lord Pearson of RannochNon-affiliatedno
Baroness Stuart of EdgbastonNon-affiliatedno
Lord Taylor of WarwickNon-affiliatedno

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.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive