Sign in
☰
People MPsHouse of LordsGovernmentOppositionPartiesCommittees Votes Commons votesLords votesVotes by issueTopicsStats & rankingsParliament in numbers Legislation BillsEarly day motionsPetitions Elections Election resultsConstituenciesWho is my MP? Scotland OverviewMSPsScottish GovernmentVotesBillsMotionsCommitteesConstituencies & regionsElections Search Sign in

Lords division · 14 Dec 2010 · No. 2

Higher Education (Basic Amount) (England) Regulations 2010

Lord Triesman moved, as an amendment to the motion to approve the draft Regulations, to leave out from “that” to the end and insert “this House regrets that the Government has failed to consult adequately with parents, students, higher education bodies, employers and local authorities on raising student tuition fees and to convince many people of the fairness and sustainability of its proposals for funding higher education; urges the Government to undertake more public consultation on the issue, including consultation with future graduates and their families who did not contribute to the consultation over the Browne review; further considers that there should be an independent impact assessment on (a) the financial consequences of the proposed fees on students from both lower and middle income families, and (b) the financial consequences of the proposed fees on women, including a full assessment of the impact of the fees on equalities and fairness, and further calls on Her Majesty’s Government to commission new research to analyse the probable impact on demand for university courses of fees being increased to the range of £6,000 to £9,000 per annum from students from lower and middle income families and women; and further considers that, prior to contemplating any increase to the basic amount specified in section 24 of the Education Act 2004, the Government should publish a White Paper on reform of higher education funding, allowing for consultation and for consideration of alternative proposals.” The House divided:

The Not Contents have it

Majority 68

Contents: 215 Not Contents: 283

At a glance The Not Contents won by a margin of 68 votes. The Government's position was Not Content, and it won.

How the parties voted

Contents

Labour 163
Crossbench 33
Non-affiliated 10
Liberal Democrat 3
Democratic Unionist Party 2
Bishops 2
Ulster Unionist Party 1
Independent Labour 1

Not Contents

Conservative 160
Crossbench 57
Liberal Democrat 52
Non-affiliated 12
Independent Ulster Unionist 1
Lord Speaker 1

The party breakdowns are our own analysis of the official voting records (recorded votes only; they do not describe the formal whip). How we work this out.

Peers attend divisions ad hoc, so there is no did-not-vote list. Tellers are counted in the Content and Not Content totals, unlike in the Commons.

Tellers: Lord Bassam of Brighton (Content), Lord Tunnicliffe (Content), Baroness Anelay of St Johns (Not Content), Lord Shutt of Greetland (Not Content).

Every vote

Contents (213)

Not Contents (281)

Tellers (4)

Source: the official Lords division record.