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 · 5 Jul 2000 · No. 3

Utilities Bill

It was moved by the Baroness Buscombe, in Clause 59, page 62, line 5, at end to insert:(“Review of conditions giving rise to penalties. (a) is expressed in insufficiently specific terms, or (b) may otherwise be interpreted ambiguously or without legal certainty, the Authority shall take appropriate steps to amend or revoke that condition in accordance with the procedures laid down in sections 23 to 26A.””); which being objected to, the question was put thereupon, and the House divided:

The Not Contents have it

Majority 69

Contents: 64 Not Contents: 133

At a glance The Not Contents won by a margin of 69 votes. The Government's position was Not Content, and it won.

How the parties voted

Contents

Conservative 57
Crossbench 5
Non-affiliated 2

Not Contents

Labour 103
Liberal Democrat 18
Non-affiliated 7
Crossbench 4
Independent Labour 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 Burnham (Content), Baroness Seccombe (Content), Lord Carter (Not Content), The Lord McIntosh of Haringey (Not Content).

Every vote

Contents (62)

Not Contents (131)

Tellers (4)

Source: the official Lords division record.