Skills and Post-16 Education Bill [HL] — Report (1st Day) — Amendment 11 — 12 Oct 2021 at 18:00

Moved by Lord Watson of Invergowrie

11: Clause 1, page 2, line 21, leave out subsection (6) and insert-“(6) A “local skills improvement plan”, in relation to a specified area, means a plan which-(a) is developed by an employer representative body in partnership with local authorities, including the Mayoral Combined Authorities and further education providers for the specified area, (b) draws on the views of-(i) employers operating within the specified area,(ii) regional and local authorities , including the Mayoral Combined Authorities, within the specified area with specific reference to published plans and strategies which have been developed by these authorities to inform the distribution of funding and prioritisation of resources,(iii) post-16 education providers active in the specified area, including schools, further education institutions, community learning providers, specialist designated institutions and universities,such sources of information on long-term national skills needs as the Secretary of State may specify, and any other evidence, to summarise the skills, capabilities or expertise that are, or may in the future be, required by people resident in the specified area, and(c) identifies actions that relevant providers and other local bodies can take regarding any post-16 technical education or training that they provide so as to address the requirements mentioned in paragraph (b).”Member’s explanatory statementThis amendment would provide for employer representative boards to develop local skills improvement plans in partnership with local authorities, including the Mayoral Combined Authorities, and local further education providers to ensure that they reflect the needs of learners, residents and employers. LSIPs must also consider social and economic development strategies in the local area and long-term national needs which may not apply to local employers.

Ayes 193, Noes 186.

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
Bishop1 03.8%
Con1 16963.2%
Crossbench20 614.3%
DUP0 480.0%
Green1 050.0%
Independent Labour1 0100.0%
Judge1 09.1%
Lab100 055.6%
LDem61 070.9%
Non-affiliated7 521.1%
UUP0 2100.0%
Total:193 18646.2%

Rebel Voters - sorted by name

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
Baroness Falkner of MargravineCrossbenchno
Lord Faulks Non-affiliated (front bench)no
Baroness Finlay of LlandaffCrossbench (front bench)no
Lord Gadhia Non-affiliatedno
Baroness Hoey Non-affiliatedno
Lord Kakkar Crossbench (front bench)no
The Earl of KinnoullNon-affiliated (front bench)no
Lord Lucas Con (front bench)aye
Lord Stirrup Crossbench (front bench)no
Baroness Stowell of BeestonNon-affiliated (front bench)no
Lord Vaux of HarrowdenCrossbench (front bench)no
Baroness Wheatcroft Crossbenchno

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