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 · 25 Feb 2003 · No. 3

Crime (International Co-operation) Bill [HL]

It was moved by the Baroness Anelay of St Johns, in Clause 30, page 17, line 21, at end to insert: “( ) A request under subsection (1) must specify— (a) the reason why it is not desirable or possible for the witness or expert to attend in person; and (b) the name of the judicial authority and the names of the persons who will be conducting the hearing.”; which being objected to, the question was put thereupon, and the House divided:

The Not Contents have it

Majority 17

Contents: 83 Not Contents: 100

At a glance The Not Contents won by a margin of 17 votes. The Government's position was Not Content, and it won.

How the parties voted

Contents

Conservative 44
Liberal Democrat 25
Crossbench 10
Non-affiliated 2
Bishops 1
Independent Labour 1

Not Contents

Labour 91
Non-affiliated 5
Crossbench 4

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 Cope of Berkeley (Content), Baroness Seccombe (Content), Lord Grocott (Not Content), The Lord McIntosh of Haringey (Not Content).

Every vote

Contents (81)

Not Contents (98)

Tellers (4)

Source: the official Lords division record.