Lords division · 8 Feb 2005 · No. 1

Disability Discrimination Bill [HL]

It was moved by the Lord Skelmersdale in Clause 17, page 42, line 32, at end to insert: “( ) In paragraph 2, after sub-paragraph (2) there is inserted— “( ) Without prejudice to the operation of sub-paragraph (2), the mental impairment consisting of or resulting from depression that has ceased to have a substantial adverse effect on a person’s ability to carry out normal day to day activities shall always be treated as if that effect is likely to recur if the person has had within the last 5 years a previous episode of such impairment which had a substantial adverse effect on the person’s ability to carry out normal day to day activities for a period of 6 months or more.””; which being objected to, the question was put thereupon, and the House divided:

The Contents have it

Majority 7

Contents: 138 Not Contents: 131

At a glance The Contents won by a margin of 7 votes. The Government's position was Not Content, and it lost.

How the parties voted

Contents

Conservative 80
Liberal Democrat 33
Crossbench 18
Non-affiliated 4
Independent Socialist 1
Green Party 1
Independent Labour 1

Not Contents

Labour 109
Crossbench 13
Non-affiliated 9

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 (136)

Not Contents (129)

Tellers (4)

Source: the official Lords division record.