Lords division · 30 Jun 2003 · No. 2

Food Supplements (England) Regulations 2003

It was moved by the Earl Howe to resolve, That this House regrets the limited nature of the lists of permitted nutrients contained in the Food Supplements Directive and calls upon Her Majesty’s Government to revoke the Regulations (S.I. 2003/1387), and (1) to negotiate with the European Union Commission an amendment to the Directive permitting individual member states to allow food supplements to be marketed which are recognised by the competent authority as safe and appropriately labelled; (2) to secure simplified requirements for the submission of dossiers to the Scientific Committee for Foods in respect of ingredients which have been omitted from the positive lists and which can demonstrate a long history of safe use; and (3) to ensure that maximum permitted levels of vitamins and minerals are based on sound science; which being objected to, the question was put thereupon, and the House divided:

The Contents have it

Majority 53

Contents: 132 Not Contents: 79

At a glance The Contents won by a margin of 53 votes. The Government's position was Not Content, and it lost.

How the parties voted

Contents

Conservative 92
Crossbench 17
Liberal Democrat 15
Non-affiliated 3
Conservative Independent 1
Independent Labour 1
Green Party 1
Labour 1
Bishops 1

Not Contents

Labour 70
Crossbench 6
Non-affiliated 3

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 Davies of Oldham (Not Content), Lord Grocott (Not Content).

Every vote

Contents (130)

Not Contents (77)

Tellers (4)

Source: the official Lords division record.