Previous Section Index Home Page

3.45 pm

Mr. Gummer: I support the view that there should be at least a year before changes of this kind could be implemented. I do so first and foremost in defence of the democratic principle that the arrangements for elections should be as distant from the parties that take part in them as is humanly possible. It is crucial that we get it right, not only for this country but to set a gold standard for others. We are the country that pioneered many of the rules and regulations that ensure fair elections.

We have an Electoral Commission, which was established in order to distance such decisions about electoral procedure from this House and the political parties within it. I ask the Minister to think seriously before he decides that he will not accept a recommendation by the Electoral Commission. There are occasions when the practical experience of this House may lead us to suggest that something that the commission recommends is not appropriate, but we must be able to argue the case very strongly, with genuine reasons for achieving the end in view. In all other cases, the House would do well to accept as a matter of course that which the Electoral Commission has recommended, not least because the public out there properly see it as an independent proposal and would quite likely judge a change proposed by us to be a mechanism to avoid the consequences of that proposal. I do not think that that is the case, but the Minister needs to explain very clearly why a six-month notice period is so superior to 12 months that it should be preferred against the independent advice.

I happen to agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Mr. Syms) about putting elections together. I have always thought that administrative convenience and neatness are never proper defences for actions when those actions may well be seen by the public as encouraging a different result from that which might occur were there to be separate elections. I personally feel very strongly about the offensive nature of the list system, which does not enable me to choose between candidates. We are sometimes faced with lists where
24 Oct 2007 : Column 342
our attraction to all the candidates standing even for the party which we support is, shall we say, somewhat limited. In those circumstances—it happens on all sides of the fence—people make a different decision when they go into the polling booth. It is pretty dangerous for us to say that it is better that they should not do that, because that decision is not up to politicians to make. If people wish to be volatile in their choice—if they wish to vote differently in different elections—our job is to convince them, if we wish to, that they should not. However, that decision is their electoral and democratic right.

I have strong objections to the bulking together of elections in any case, but what must be true is that such a decision must be made at a distance whereby no one could think it to be party political. In that respect, not only the Electoral Commission matters but the ordinary punter. I think that most people would feel perfectly happy were the Government to make such a decision now about 2009, even if they did not really approve of the bulking together of elections.

I think that the public would be perfectly happy with a notice period of about 12 months. I am a bit worried, however, that many people think that some shenanigans are going on. The Minister has to accept that they have pretty good reason to think that, given the events of the past four weeks. My hon. Friend the Member for North-East Bedfordshire (Alistair Burt) made the case moderately and carefully, without casting aspersions in any way. However, it looks to most people out there as if there has been some pretty peculiar behaviour regarding electoral dates in recent months. It is reasonable to say that we do not want people to lose confidence in the electoral system, so I support the proposal that we accept the continued desire for the period in question to be a full year.

I come to the amendment relating to names—I am sorry that the Minister has not taken the opportunity to deal with another problem which I hope he agrees to reconsider. I am proud to represent the constituency of Suffolk, Coastal. It is the only constituency in Britain that has an ungrammatical title—a problem that I have always had with it. The boundaries of my constituency have changed every 10 years, and whereas it once was contiguous with the Suffolk Coastal district council area, now it is not. I take in a significant part of the Waveney district council, but not a significant part of the Suffolk Coastal district council. That is a confusing element for perfectly reasonable constituents who might have had no reason to write to their Member of Parliament, but now wish to. They see the name Suffolk, Coastal, they happen to live in Framlingham, which is within the area of Suffolk Coastal district council, and so they write to me, because I sit for Suffolk, Coastal. I do not, however, represent Framlingham. The issue is particularly difficult because I used to do so.

Similarly, the hon. Member for Waveney (Mr. Blizzard) used to have a seat that included Southwold, Halesworth and the villages round about. People with no political connections living in the Waveney district council area tend to write to the Member of Parliament for Waveney. The situation confuses them, and there ought to be a willingness to have names for constituencies that are not confusing. My worry about the amendment is that it may put people off some of the changes that should have been
24 Oct 2007 : Column 343
made automatically. A constituency should not have the same nomenclature as a district council unless the two are coterminous.

The problem arises when tiny alterations take place. We get used to this. At the next election I shall be fighting for a seat that does not include Wisset. It is very sad for me, but I shall lose Wisset. I shall, however, gain Shadingfield and three small villages nearby. Another group of people are liable to be confused. We politicians think the matter very obvious, but most people do not have access to or an interest in the political structure, except from time to time. Sometimes, it is a long time between arrangements. People write to a Member of Parliament who they thought was the right one, and who was the right one when they last wrote, only to find that the situation has changed.

I put a plea to the Minister to do something about that, even if it means going back to some of the old names. I would not mind being the Member of Parliament for Dunwich, which was a rotten borough. I started off as the Member of Parliament for Eye, which was also a rotten borough—it is not now. At least that would mean that the people of Halesworth do not feel that they are looked after by Felixstowe or Woodbridge.

There is a problem for constituencies—particularly one by the coast that is 74 miles long, as mine is—because different places do not want to see others given pre-eminence. We may need names that are not well-known, but which make a distinction between the constituency and the district council. It worries me that the amendment has not considered that fact. Although this is not the place to do it, I hope that the Minister accepts that there are a number of examples of this problem throughout the country. Every time there is a boundary commission report, there are more such examples. The matter really needs to be taken into account.

Mr. Beith: It is comforting that my constituency has been called Berwick-upon-Tweed for approximately 500 years and that, despite boundary changes, it has retained that title.

I want to refer to some matters covered by the complex group of amendments and the clauses to which they relate and make, the Minister will be pleased to know, two relatively uncontroversial points. First, the timing of elections for new authorities is important. There is a principle at stake: the arrangements for a new authority should be agreed by those who have democratic accountability for it. That means that elections should take place—in the way in which they have usually happened in local government reorganisation—for a shadow authority. That happened when I served on a shadow local authority in 1973-4. It enabled us to plan the new authority in the knowledge that our actions would fulfil the wishes of the council that would run the authority in 12 months. We have been holding discussions in Northumberland because of reorganisation about when elections should happen and there is general agreement that we want them to take place in 2008. That is the view of not only all the districts and Members of Parliament but that of the county council and all parties on it.

24 Oct 2007 : Column 344

Mr. Gummer: And the chief constable?

Mr. Beith: I have not consulted the chief constable. I do not believe that he has a locus in the matter, except perhaps in providing police officers to ensure that the election is conducted safely. However, that has not been a problem in recent years in our part of the world.

I hope to talk to the Minister outside the Chamber at some point about the matter. It is especially important because there is no agreement about the temporary body that is provisionally trying to make decisions. Indeed, there is a dispute between the county, the districts and almost everybody else because the county has put all its executive members on the transitional committee. It has also included the leaders of the two opposition parties, but ensured that they do not have a vote—they are non-voting members. The districts, the opposition parties and the rural areas are all outnumbered on the transitional body, so it has no validity. The dissenting members can claim that the decisions are not valid and that, when the council is elected, they cannot be expected to stand by them.

However, despite disagreement about the transitional arrangement, there is agreement across the board that we want elections in 2008 and do not want to wait until 2009. I hope that the Whip has not distracted the Minister from that important point.

Mr. Syms: The right hon. Gentleman is right that the changes that we have considered for a new authority would begin in April 2009. The first election would be in May and we have already debated altering that to June. He therefore makes a good point that we should get elections to the new authorities out of the way earlier.

Mr. Beith: The hon. Gentleman makes a good point and provides me with a compelling initial argument, which appears irresistible. I therefore hope that the Minister will assist all the parties in Northumberland. Elections in 2008 would help us get the new authority off the ground successfully.

Secondly, I want to consider the interaction that the clauses and amendments mention between parliamentary and local government boundaries. Hon. Members know that this House and the other place agreed parliamentary boundary changes earlier this year. Those of us who are affected have been trying to explain the new parliamentary boundaries to people. However, out of the blue, the boundary commission decided to take a handful of constituencies and conduct a further review. They include my constituency and neighbouring constituencies—only six or seven are involved. The purpose is to align the parliamentary boundaries with the ward boundaries of the district councils. The Minister knows that those district councils will be abolished by his decision and the Bill. There is therefore no point in trying to align the boundaries. I have no particular view on the merits of the proposal—I would gain a few hundred people at one end and lose a few hundred at the other—but it is simply stupid. Again, I do not want the Minister to be distracted by the Whip. Doubtless, an important point is being made to him, but I shall not continue until he can give me his attention.

There is absolutely no point in trying to align parliamentary boundaries to ward boundaries that are
24 Oct 2007 : Column 345
about to be abolished. I would hope that liaison between the Department for Communities and Local Government and the parliamentary boundary commission would be sufficient to put a stop to this ludicrous exercise. I have written to the Speaker in his capacity as Chairman of the boundary commission pointing out that difficulty. I hope that the Minister can also take it up. Going ahead is not just a waste of time and money—the processes are quite expensive—but makes it really difficult to explain to people now what their boundaries are likely to be at the next election, because it is fairly unlikely that any subsequent changes will even be introduced before the next general election, although perhaps the Prime Minister will wait long enough for that to be the case.

4 pm

I ask the Minister, first, to ensure that we can have our elections for the new authority in 2008 and, secondly, to ensure that there is proper liaison with the parliamentary boundary commission, so that it does not start running round trying to align parliamentary boundaries to ward boundaries that he is about to abolish.

John Healey: I have a lot of sympathy for the right hon. Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer) and the problem with his constituency name. I represent a constituency called Wentworth. It has a proud mining, steel-making and industrial heritage; yet the constituency, which is part of what should be Rotherham, North, is named not after any of those proud elements of our history, but after a small feudal village in one corner of the area, many of whose houses are still tied to its main estate. That is an extraordinarily English approach. I argued in the boundary commission’s recent review that a name change was appropriate, but there was much resistance to it. I therefore have a lot of sympathy with the right hon. Gentleman’s point, but the name of his constituency is a matter for the boundary commission. The amendments under discussion deal with the names of district wards or county divisions, so the issue is unfortunately not relevant.

I should point out to the hon. Member for Poole (Mr. Syms) that we are not debating whether to combine the dates of local and European elections in 2009. However, in 2004, when the local and European elections were last combined, the turnout increased in the European elections from 24 to 38.5 per cent. It increased not because the elections were held together to the convenience of the election administrators, but because they were convenient to the electors. The hon. Gentleman should perhaps not underestimate the intelligence of the electors, who can distinguish issues that may matter on a European front from those that matter locally, and who in some ways may be more interested in voting on both when they have a combined opportunity to do so.

Andrew Stunell: I appreciate the Minister giving way. He has given a clear hint of the Government’s preference for June 2009. Will he therefore just accept that the 12-month rule rather than the six-month rule would be entirely appropriate?

24 Oct 2007 : Column 346

John Healey: Whatever the hon. Gentleman says, I have given no hint of anything. I am dealing with the facts of what happened in 2004 and the details of the amendments before us, as I am sure you would wish me to do, Madam Deputy Speaker, although I will come to the hon. Gentleman’s point about 12 months in a moment.

The right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) asked me two things. Elections for the shadow authority, under proposals for a move towards a unitary authority as part of the reorganisation, will be a matter for orders made under the Bill once it receives Royal Assent. Such elections are not dealt with in the amendments before us. He and I have already discussed a suitable date for elections in Northumberland, and I am grateful to him for putting his points on record in the House this afternoon. I was not aware of the particular local circumstances of the parliamentary boundary review in his area. I will ensure that I draw his points to the commission’s attention.

Let me deal with the amendments that the hon. Member for North-East Bedfordshire (Alistair Burt) has tabled. He conjured up images of political advantage in the decision, which I believe are baseless for two reasons. First, the proposal in the amendment from the other place that I am urging the House to accept will distance the decision to combine the election dates from the arrangements for the elections, as the right hon. Member for Suffolk, Coastal urged us to do. That provision would be on the face of the Bill.

Secondly, there are safeguards in the process to ensure that there should be no question of perceived political advantage. Were a decision to be taken to combine the elections, there would have to be consultation with the Electoral Commission and others. Furthermore, any order would have to be approved by the affirmative resolution procedure in the House. If there were any question of perceived political advantage, I submit that it would become a serious issue and a matter of strong debate. I therefore do not accept the concerns that have been set out.

The six-month period refers not to the decision but to the order to be made. The amendment proposes a 12-month period for the order to be made. The hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Andrew Stunell) wanted to align the elections for 2009 and said that we could make such an announcement this week. If there were a requirement for the order to be made 12 months in advance, we would probably have had to have made such a decision already. It would not simply be a question of 12 months from when the order was made. In order to make an order, there would have to be a period of consultation of three months, if we were to follow the Cabinet Office guidelines. There would then have to be a period in which we considered the responses to the consultation, drafted the order, and found the time for it to be properly debated in the House. So we can see immediately that we are not talking about six months from when an order is made. The decision has to be made, and the notice given, substantially before that.

Requiring an order to be made 12 months in advance would get ourselves into the situation that we have at the moment under the Representation of the People Act 1983, which provides, in effect, for a 15-month notice period. That has resulted in that provision being
24 Oct 2007 : Column 347
used only once in almost 25 years, because the period is too long, and the arrangements are too inflexible and do not serve the purpose that hon. Members would wish them to serve.

I say to the hon. Member for North-East Bedfordshire that placing in the Bill the provision for a six-month period between an order being made and an election being held will provide the necessary certainty and safeguards, give the necessary notice, and strike the balance that we are all striving for. I hope that he will not press his amendment to a vote, but if he does, I shall have to ask my hon. Friends to resist it.

Lords amendment agreed to.

Lords amendments Nos. 25 to 47 agreed to.

Clause 60

Election dates

Lords amendment: No. 48, in page 31, leave out lines 23 and 24 and insert—

Amendment proposed to the Lords amendment: (a), leave out ‘six’ and insert ‘twelve’.— [ Alistair Burt.]

Question put, That the amendment to the Lords amendment be made:—

The House divided: Ayes 205, Noes 283.
Division No. 218]
[4.8 pm


Afriyie, Adam
Ainsworth, Mr. Peter
Alexander, Danny
Amess, Mr. David
Ancram, rh Mr. Michael
Arbuthnot, rh Mr. James
Bacon, Mr. Richard
Baldry, Tony
Barker, Gregory
Baron, Mr. John
Barrett, John
Beith, rh Mr. Alan
Bellingham, Mr. Henry
Bercow, John
Beresford, Sir Paul
Binley, Mr. Brian
Bone, Mr. Peter
Boswell, Mr. Tim
Brady, Mr. Graham
Brake, Tom
Brazier, Mr. Julian
Breed, Mr. Colin
Brokenshire, James
Browne, Mr. Jeremy
Browning, Angela
Burns, Mr. Simon
Burrowes, Mr. David
Burstow, Mr. Paul
Burt, Alistair
Burt, Lorely
Butterfill, Sir John
Cable, Dr. Vincent
Carmichael, Mr. Alistair
Carswell, Mr. Douglas
Cash, Mr. William
Chope, Mr. Christopher
Clappison, Mr. James
Clifton-Brown, Mr. Geoffrey
Cormack, Sir Patrick
Davey, Mr. Edward
Davies, David T.C. (Monmouth)
Davies, Philip
Davis, rh David (Haltemprice and Howden)
Djanogly, Mr. Jonathan
Dodds, Mr. Nigel
Donaldson, rh Mr. Jeffrey M.
Duncan, Alan
Duncan Smith, rh Mr. Iain

Dunne, Mr. Philip
Ellwood, Mr. Tobias
Evans, Mr. Nigel
Evennett, Mr. David
Fallon, Mr. Michael
Farron, Tim
Featherstone, Lynne
Field, Mr. Mark
Foster, Mr. Don
Francois, Mr. Mark
Gale, Mr. Roger
Garnier, Mr. Edward
Gauke, Mr. David
George, Andrew
Gidley, Sandra
Gillan, Mrs. Cheryl
Goldsworthy, Julia
Goodman, Mr. Paul
Goodwill, Mr. Robert
Gove, Michael
Gray, Mr. James
Grayling, Chris
Green, Damian
Greening, Justine
Grieve, Mr. Dominic
Gummer, rh Mr. John
Hague, rh Mr. William
Hammond, Mr. Philip
Hammond, Stephen
Hancock, Mr. Mike
Hands, Mr. Greg
Harper, Mr. Mark
Harris, Dr. Evan
Harvey, Nick
Hayes, Mr. John
Heald, Mr. Oliver
Heath, Mr. David
Heathcoat-Amory, rh Mr. David
Hemming, John
Hendry, Charles
Herbert, Nick
Hermon, Lady
Hollobone, Mr. Philip
Holmes, Paul
Horam, Mr. John
Horwood, Martin
Howard, rh Mr. Michael
Howarth, David
Howarth, Mr. Gerald
Hughes, Simon
Huhne, Chris
Hunter, Mark
Hurd, Mr. Nick
Jack, rh Mr. Michael
Jackson, Mr. Stewart
Jenkin, Mr. Bernard
Johnson, Mr. Boris
Kawczynski, Daniel
Kennedy, rh Mr. Charles
Key, Robert
Kramer, Susan
Laing, Mrs. Eleanor
Lait, Mrs. Jacqui
Lamb, Norman
Lancaster, Mr. Mark
Lansley, Mr. Andrew
Laws, Mr. David
Leech, Mr. John
Leigh, Mr. Edward
Letwin, rh Mr. Oliver
Lewis, Dr. Julian
Llwyd, Mr. Elfyn
Loughton, Tim
Luff, Peter
Mackay, rh Mr. Andrew
Maclean, rh David
Main, Anne
Malins, Mr. Humfrey
Mates, rh Mr. Michael
Maude, rh Mr. Francis
McCrea, Dr. William
McIntosh, Miss Anne
McLoughlin, rh Mr. Patrick
Miller, Mrs. Maria
Milton, Anne
Mitchell, Mr. Andrew
Moore, Mr. Michael
Moss, Mr. Malcolm
Mulholland, Greg
Murrison, Dr. Andrew
Neill, Robert
Newmark, Mr. Brooks
O'Brien, Mr. Stephen
Oaten, Mr. Mark
Öpik, Lembit
Osborne, Mr. George
Ottaway, Richard
Paice, Mr. James
Paterson, Mr. Owen
Penning, Mike
Penrose, John
Pickles, Mr. Eric
Price, Adam
Pugh, Dr. John
Randall, Mr. John
Reid, Mr. Alan
Rifkind, rh Sir Malcolm
Robertson, Mr. Laurence
Rogerson, Dan
Rowen, Paul
Russell, Bob
Sanders, Mr. Adrian
Scott, Mr. Lee
Selous, Andrew
Shapps, Grant
Shepherd, Mr. Richard
Simmonds, Mark
Smith, Sir Robert
Soames, Mr. Nicholas
Spicer, Sir Michael
Spink, Bob
Spring, Mr. Richard
Stanley, rh Sir John
Steen, Mr. Anthony
Streeter, Mr. Gary
Stunell, Andrew
Swayne, Mr. Desmond
Swinson, Jo
Swire, Mr. Hugo
Syms, Mr. Robert
Tapsell, Sir Peter
Taylor, Matthew
Taylor, Dr. Richard
Teather, Sarah
Thurso, John
Turner, Mr. Andrew
Tyrie, Mr. Andrew
Walker, Mr. Charles
Wallace, Mr. Ben
Walter, Mr. Robert
Waterson, Mr. Nigel
Watkinson, Angela
Webb, Steve

Whittingdale, Mr. John
Widdecombe, rh Miss Ann
Wiggin, Bill
Williams, Mark
Williams, Mr. Roger
Willott, Jenny
Wilshire, Mr. David
Wilson, Mr. Rob
Wilson, Sammy
Winterton, Ann
Winterton, Sir Nicholas
Wright, Jeremy
Young, rh Sir George
Younger-Ross, Richard
Tellers for the Ayes:

Mr. Richard Benyon and
Michael Fabricant

Abbott, Ms Diane
Ainger, Nick
Ainsworth, rh Mr. Bob
Allen, Mr. Graham
Anderson, Mr. David
Anderson, Janet
Armstrong, rh Hilary
Austin, Mr. Ian
Austin, John
Bailey, Mr. Adrian
Baird, Vera
Balls, rh Ed
Banks, Gordon
Barron, rh Mr. Kevin
Bayley, Hugh
Beckett, rh Margaret
Begg, Miss Anne
Benn, rh Hilary
Berry, Roger
Blackman, Liz
Blackman-Woods, Dr. Roberta
Blizzard, Mr. Bob
Borrow, Mr. David S.
Bradshaw, Mr. Ben
Brennan, Kevin
Brown, Lyn
Brown, Mr. Russell
Bryant, Chris
Buck, Ms Karen
Burden, Richard
Burgon, Colin
Burnham, rh Andy
Butler, Ms Dawn
Byers, rh Mr. Stephen
Byrne, Mr. Liam
Cairns, David
Campbell, Mr. Alan
Campbell, Mr. Ronnie
Caton, Mr. Martin
Cawsey, Mr. Ian
Chapman, Ben
Clark, Ms Katy
Clark, Paul
Clarke, rh Mr. Charles
Clarke, rh Mr. Tom
Clelland, Mr. David
Coaker, Mr. Vernon
Coffey, Ann
Cohen, Harry
Connarty, Michael
Cooper, Rosie
Cooper, rh Yvette
Crausby, Mr. David
Cryer, Mrs. Ann
Cummings, John
Cunningham, Mr. Jim
Cunningham, Tony
Curtis-Thomas, Mrs. Claire
David, Mr. Wayne
Davies, Mr. Dai
Dean, Mrs. Janet
Devine, Mr. Jim
Dhanda, Mr. Parmjit
Dobbin, Jim
Dobson, rh Frank
Donohoe, Mr. Brian H.
Doran, Mr. Frank
Dowd, Jim
Drew, Mr. David
Dunwoody, Mrs. Gwyneth
Eagle, Angela
Eagle, Maria
Efford, Clive
Ellman, Mrs. Louise
Engel, Natascha
Ennis, Jeff
Etherington, Bill
Farrelly, Paul
Field, rh Mr. Frank
Fisher, Mark
Fitzpatrick, Jim
Flello, Mr. Robert
Flint, Caroline
Flynn, Paul
Follett, Barbara
Foster, Mr. Michael (Worcester)
Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings and Rye)
Gapes, Mike
Gardiner, Barry
Gibson, Dr. Ian
Gilroy, Linda
Godsiff, Mr. Roger
Goggins, Paul
Goodman, Helen
Griffiths, Nigel
Gwynne, Andrew
Hall, Mr. Mike
Hall, Patrick
Hamilton, Mr. David
Hamilton, Mr. Fabian
Hanson, rh Mr. David
Havard, Mr. Dai
Healey, John
Hendrick, Mr. Mark
Hepburn, Mr. Stephen
Heppell, Mr. John
Hesford, Stephen
Heyes, David
Hill, rh Keith
Hillier, Meg
Hodge, rh Margaret
Hodgson, Mrs. Sharon
Hoey, Kate
Hood, Mr. Jim
Hoon, rh Mr. Geoffrey
Hope, Phil
Hopkins, Kelvin
Howarth, rh Mr. George

Hoyle, Mr. Lindsay
Hughes, rh Beverley
Humble, Mrs. Joan
Iddon, Dr. Brian
Illsley, Mr. Eric
Irranca-Davies, Huw
Jackson, Glenda
James, Mrs. Siân C.
Jenkins, Mr. Brian
Johnson, rh Alan
Johnson, Ms Diana R.
Jones, Helen
Jones, Mr. Kevan
Jones, Lynne
Jones, Mr. Martyn
Jowell, rh Tessa
Joyce, Mr. Eric
Kaufman, rh Sir Gerald
Keeble, Ms Sally
Keeley, Barbara
Keen, Alan
Keen, Ann
Kelly, rh Ruth
Kemp, Mr. Fraser
Kennedy, rh Jane
Kidney, Mr. David
Kilfoyle, Mr. Peter
Knight, Jim
Kumar, Dr. Ashok
Ladyman, Dr. Stephen
Lammy, Mr. David
Lazarowicz, Mark
Levitt, Tom
Lewis, Mr. Ivan
Linton, Martin
Lloyd, Tony
Love, Mr. Andrew
Lucas, Ian
Mackinlay, Andrew
MacShane, rh Mr. Denis
Mactaggart, Fiona
Mahmood, Mr. Khalid
Malik, Mr. Shahid
Mallaber, Judy
Mann, John
Marris, Rob
Marsden, Mr. Gordon
Marshall, Mr. David
Marshall-Andrews, Mr. Robert
Martlew, Mr. Eric
McAvoy, rh Mr. Thomas
McCabe, Steve
McCafferty, Chris
McCarthy, Kerry
McCarthy-Fry, Sarah
McCartney, rh Mr. Ian
McDonnell, Dr. Alasdair
McDonnell, John
McFadden, Mr. Pat
McFall, rh John
McGovern, Mr. Jim
McGuire, Mrs. Anne
McIsaac, Shona
McKechin, Ann
McNulty, rh Mr. Tony
Meacher, rh Mr. Michael
Merron, Gillian
Michael, rh Alun
Miliband, rh Edward
Miller, Andrew
Mitchell, Mr. Austin
Moffat, Anne
Moffatt, Laura
Mole, Chris
Moran, Margaret
Morden, Jessica
Morgan, Julie
Mudie, Mr. George
Munn, Meg
Murphy, Mr. Denis
Murphy, Mr. Jim
Naysmith, Dr. Doug
Norris, Dan
O'Brien, Mr. Mike
O'Hara, Mr. Edward
Olner, Mr. Bill
Osborne, Sandra
Palmer, Dr. Nick
Pearson, Ian
Plaskitt, Mr. James
Pope, Mr. Greg
Pound, Stephen
Prentice, Bridget
Prentice, Mr. Gordon
Prescott, rh Mr. John
Primarolo, rh Dawn
Prosser, Gwyn
Purchase, Mr. Ken
Purnell, rh James
Rammell, Bill
Raynsford, rh Mr. Nick
Reed, Mr. Andy
Reed, Mr. Jamie
Riordan, Mrs. Linda
Robertson, John
Robinson, Mr. Geoffrey
Rooney, Mr. Terry
Roy, Mr. Frank
Ruddock, Joan
Russell, Christine
Ryan, rh Joan
Salter, Martin
Sarwar, Mr. Mohammad
Seabeck, Alison
Shaw, Jonathan
Sheerman, Mr. Barry
Sheridan, Jim
Simon, Mr. Siôn
Simpson, Alan
Skinner, Mr. Dennis
Slaughter, Mr. Andy
Smith, rh Mr. Andrew
Smith, Ms Angela C. (Sheffield, Hillsborough)
Smith, Angela E. (Basildon)
Smith, rh Jacqui
Smith, John
Snelgrove, Anne
Soulsby, Sir Peter
Southworth, Helen
Spellar, rh Mr. John
Starkey, Dr. Phyllis
Stewart, Ian
Stoate, Dr. Howard
Strang, rh Dr. Gavin
Straw, rh Mr. Jack
Stringer, Graham
Stuart, Ms Gisela
Taylor, David
Thomas, Mr. Gareth
Thornberry, Emily
Tipping, Paddy
Todd, Mr. Mark
Trickett, Jon

Turner, Mr. Neil
Twigg, Derek
Vis, Dr. Rudi
Walley, Joan
Waltho, Lynda
Ward, Claire
Watson, Mr. Tom
Watts, Mr. Dave
Whitehead, Dr. Alan
Wicks, Malcolm
Williams, rh Mr. Alan
Williams, Mrs. Betty
Wills, Mr. Michael
Wilson, Phil
Winnick, Mr. David
Winterton, rh Ms Rosie
Wood, Mike
Wright, Mr. Anthony
Wright, David
Wright, Mr. Iain
Wright, Dr. Tony
Wyatt, Derek
Tellers for the Noes:

Siobhain McDonagh and
Mr. Sadiq Khan
Question accordingly negatived.
Next Section Index Home Page