§ '.—(1) It shall be the duty of every local authority to adopt and maintain a scheme for maintaining a series of sites in their area (in this section referred to as "local sites"), to ensure the conservation, restoration and enhancement of species, habitat, geological and geomorphological features of substantive nature conservation value.
§ (2) The Secretary of State and the National Assembly for Wales shall from time to time give guidance with respect to the exercise of the duty of a local authority under subsection (1), and a local authority shall, in adopting and maintaining such a scheme, have regard to that guidance.
§ (3) Such guidance shall—
- (a) specify standards for the identification of sites, notification of owners, occupiers and others and the provision of adequate information and advice as to the management of local sites;
- (b) provide for the involvement of voluntary organisations, landowners and others in the adoption and maintenance of the scheme.
§ (4) It shall be the duty of the Nature Conservancy Council for England and the Countryside Council for Wales periodically to report on the operation and effectiveness of each scheme.
§ (5) In the formulation and exercise of their functions relating to land under any enactment every Minister, government department, local authority and public body shall further the conservation, restoration and enhancement of local sites.'.—[Miss McIntosh.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
§ Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York)I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this it will be convenient to discuss new clause 6—Species Action Plans and Habitat Action Plans—
'.—(1) It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State and the National Assembly for Wales to ensure the preparation, maintenance and revision of lists of species and habitats in respect of which special measures shall be taken to monitor their population status in view of their vulnerability or international importance, and to determine—
(2) It shall be the duty of every Minister, government department, local authority and public body, so far as it is consistent with their primary functions, to further the objectives of Species Action Plans and Habitat Action Plans.'.
- (a) which species listed are priority species and require the development of Species Action Plans; and
- (b) which habitats listed require the development of Habitat Action Plans.
§ Miss McIntoshNew clause 4 would give local authorities a duty to adopt and maintain a scheme for maintaining a series of sites in their areas. The corollary of the duty is that they would be provided with the means and resources to do so.
Sites of special scientific interest are covered at some length in this Bill and other legislation, but areas of outstanding natural beauty and other wildlife sites are not. The new clause would promote the better protection and management of wildlife sites outside the SSSI network.
1047 In managing, maintaining and resourcing such sites, local authorities should have regard to striking a balance between visitors' enjoyment of the sites, the interests of members of the farming community, and those of others on whose land those sites are situated. The interests of the farming community need to be recognised, given the depths of the crisis in which its members still find themselves.
Is it not surprising that at present there is no statutory provision covering such sites, not even in the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981? The Minister may be surprised to hear that until now there has been no legal definition of what constitutes a wildlife site. I can see that the Minister shares my amazement and is hearing that fact for the first time. There is currently no legal definition of what constitutes a wildlife site, and that is a serious omission from the Bill and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
The aim of the new clause is to oblige all local authorities to ensure that they maintain a wildlife site system that follows common standards. The processes are in place in most of England and Wales already, but they need to respect commonly laid down standards. Wildlife sites would not create the equivalent of more SSSIs, because they would not have the same legal status.
Although I welcome the fact that the Bill makes improvements to rights of way legislation and wildlife protection, it fails adequately to protect those local wildlife sites. Such a scheme would not be too onerous for local authorities, or for the owners of the land on which the wildlife sites are situated. Local authorities could include policies to protect wildlife sites in all local plans, and advise on the effective implementation of the policies. Adverse development proposals would not be allowed or approved if they would damage or destroy the wildlife sites. Advice and support should be made available to the owner or manager of every wildlife site, and incentives should be offered to owners of such sites to maintain and enhance their value.
When common standards for wildlife site systems are recognised, sites should be identified using locally determined criteria, developed within a national framework. All wildlife site systems should be operated to common standards, and sites should be selected on the basis of sound adequate information. The owners and managers of sites should also be kept well informed of all stages of the process of identifying and protecting sites.
The common standards should be agreed by statutory environmental organisations, local authority bodies, relevant Government Departments and voluntary bodies. The conservation of local sites is crucial if declining wildlife trends are to be reversed and national biodiversity action plan targets are to be achieved.
The creation of a framework in law under which a local system of conservation is implemented will help to alleviate regional differences that currently exist. A legal framework should also reflect adequate resourcing for the system and provision of information and advice to landowners and the public.
Late last year the Government established the local site review group, which reported to Ministers in March this year. The new clause would directly enact the recommendations of that group and would deliver a concrete conservation gain for endangered species and habitats on the ground.
1048 In moving new clause 4, I recognise that my constituency has only six SSSIs, because so many special sites have already been lost to agriculture, which is the most important industry in Vale of York. Areas of outstanding natural beauty, such as the Howardian hills, are also not adequately covered by the Bill. Therefore the best places for wildlife in Vale of York are local sites, which need better protection. A system such as I have outlined in new clause 4 needs to be developed, with common standards for local authorities. It should be backed by the Government so that local authorities know where the sites are and have a presumption against developments that would destroy their interest.
The Government recognised the issue by referring to the importance of local sites in its consultation paper on SSSIs, which led to the Bill, and by setting up the local sites review group. Will the Minister agree this evening that the issue will be rigorously pursued by the Government so that we will see action to protect wildlife sites properly in the future, and will he accept the new clause?
§ Mr. BrakeI speak in support of new clause 6, in my name. The Minister will know that the proposal to place biodiversity action plans on a statutory footing is a much debated subject. It has been one of the key topics of debate during the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee inquiry into biodiversity. I am sure that when he appears in front of the Select Committee, he will already have prepared and rehearsed his answer to the question whether BAPs should be put on a statutory footing.
So far, the view of the non-governmental organisations that have given evidence to the Committee is that BAPs should be provided for in legislation. The Government, however, continue to believe that they should not be. The Government's principal argument against doing so is that it would destroy existing partnerships and voluntary agreements. I do not, however, understand why legislation should necessarily have that effect.
The NGOs' argument—that biodiversity action plans are not always implemented—is more convincing. In Northumberland, for example, although the county council is pushing ahead with work on biodiversity action plans, district councils do not think that they are a priority. Across Yorkshire, progress on BAPs has been slow because no public body has taken a lead on them.
Another reason why BAPs should be provided for in legislation is that the Government are relying very heavily on them not so much to feed the world as to save it. In Committee, in replying to the debate on an amendment moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath), the Under-Secretary of State said:
the best route for dealing with the issue is to use the current biodiversity action planning process.—[Official Report, Standing Committee B, 18 May 2000: c. 720.]In response to another amendment moved in Standing Committee, the Minister reaffirmed that the best route is through the biodiversity action planning process.The Government are therefore relying heavily on BAPs. However, I think that they may have some unrealistic expectations about what BAPs can achieve without being provided for in legislation. There is no point in heaping responsibilities for the environment on to BAPs when, as we have heard, they are not being implemented in places such as Northumberland and Yorkshire.
1049 I urge the Minister to grasp the opportunity provided by the new clauses.
§ Mr. KidneyI recognise the wording of new clause 4, because in Committee, I moved an amendment containing the self-same wording. On that occasion, the Minister, having listened to the arguments, gave a most encouraging reply—saying not only that there should be action, but that the Government, with some time to reflect, would act. I therefore did not seek to table an amendment similar to new clause 4 or to support the hon. Member for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh) in tabling it.
§ Mr. GreenI am delighted that the hon. Gentleman has made that clear. May I therefore assume that he will be supporting new clause 4 in the Lobby?
§ Mr. KidneyThe hon. Gentleman would have had to wait only another 30 seconds to hear me say that—for the reasons that I have given, and such is my faith in the Minister to deliver on his word—I shall not vote for new clause 4.
A great network of systems of local wildlife sites has been established in the United Kingdom. As the hon. Member for Vale of York said, that network has developed entirely in the absence of supporting legislation. Great thanks are owed to landowners, the Wildlife Trust, local authorities and others who, through their own efforts, have created the network.
I am indebted to the Wildlife Trust for providing me with some information on a survey that it is conducting, before it has completed or published the full results. The emerging results of that nationwide survey show that the Wildlife Trust is the lead partner in more than half the current systems of wildlife sites. The system is so extensive that throughout the whole country only about 10 local authority areas are not already covered by some kind of system. In total, there are more than 100 systems of wildlife sites, incorporating an astonishing 40,000 or so sites.
9.15 pm
That would not have been possible without the dedication and application of people of good will, especially among local authorities, the Wildlife Trust and landowners. Great thanks are due to landowners who co-operate and become involved in the selection, assessment and management of sites.
I am sure that all those people would agree that the protection of biodiversity outside protected areas—sites of special scientific interest, for example—is essential. Wildlife sites need to be identified and maintained at local level. They host some internationally and nationally important species and habitats, and contribute to biodiversity action plan targets.
The development of the systems that I have described has depended on voluntary effort. It is all going in the right direction—advisory services are being developed, links to agri-environmental and grant schemes are being developed, and some limited monitoring has taken place. It is exciting that so much has already been done through 1050 voluntary partnerships. I hope that the Government keep their word and give the support necessary to ensure that that commendable effort is sustained in the long term.
§ Mr. PaiceI rise to speak briefly to the new clause moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh), to which I have added my name. As the hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney) said, he put forward a similar proposal in Committee. We want to give the Government another opportunity to tell us what they are planning to do.
The Minister said in Committee:
the Government are prepared seriously to consider placing biodiversity action plans on a statutory footing.—[Official Report, Standing Committee B, 23 May 2000; c. 820.]He went on to say that he gave no commitment, but on that basis he wanted the new clause withdrawn, which it duly was.How long do the Government need to consider a number of matters? It is true that they were generous in Committee in agreeing to consider a whole range of issues that we proposed. I am the first to accept that yesterday and earlier today, the Government have moved a small number of amendments that met some of our concerns. We will cover some of the other areas on Third Reading.
This is a big issue. Local wildlife sites and the habitat action plans proposed by the Liberal Democrat party in new clause 6 are very important, and the Government should know by now what they intend to do. It is not as if they have had the opportunity to consider the matter only since the Bill's Committee stage—it came up in their documents published last year. They have been thinking about it for a long time.
It may be argued that it is unusual for my party to recommend a statutory basis instead of a voluntary approach. I am sure that the Minister would normally have pointed that out, as he did occasionally in Committee. However, this is an important pair of new clauses. As the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Mr. Brake) said, there is no doubt that many local councils are not doing the work that we wish them to do. Not all of it is their fault; they simply do not have the resources. That is why we believe that a statutory basis would mean not only that they had an obligation to do it but that they had a far better argument when asking the Government for the extra money.
I was astonished to read that only one person in this country has any legal responsibility for ensuring that biodiversity action plans are drawn up for the long-term survival of threatened or vulnerable species. That person—God help us—is the Mayor of London.
§ Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire)Newts, newts
§ Mr. PaiceIndeed, that will probably ensure the survival of newts, although I was not aware that they were a threatened or vulnerable species.
§ Mr. David HeathWhat about the great crested newt?
§ Mr. PaiceThe great crested newt is certainly a threatened and vulnerable species—it holds up many planning developments.
1051 More seriously, if it is right for the Mayor of London to be given that statutory obligation—the Government included it in legislation—why should it not be given to every local authority?
My final point is about credibility. The Government and their supporters have tried to portray my party as looking after only the interests of landowners. However, both the Country Landowners Association and the National Farmers Union oppose the new clauses. I make that point not because I agree with them, but to emphasise the fact that we do not always agree with them. We support the new clauses because of out real commitment to try to improve wildlife conservation both in local sites and under our national treaty obligations.
§ Mr. BrookeI strike my second London note in our proceedings by speaking to the new clause so admirably moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh). My hon. Friend the Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) reminded the House of the role of the Mayor of London. In an admirable Adjournment debate two nights ago, the hon. Member for Croydon, Central (Mr. Davies) provided a harbinger for the Mayor's role.
I claim dual, if vicarious, credit for that development. First, I served last year on the Standing Committee dealing with the Greater London Authority Bill, whose section 352 confers that unique power on the Mayor of London. That development was encouraging, not only to members of the Committee but to people outside, because I had seen minutes by members of Wildlife and Countryside Link that indicated concern that environmental considerations were fairly low in the priorities of the regional development agencies. That is a little surprising given the fact that the RDAs and this Bill emerge from the same Department.
Secondly, I am the parliamentary vice-president of the London Wildlife Trust, and played a reasonably significant role in securing the first tranche of £125,000 from the Bridge House Estates trust fund, in the City of London in my constituency, to launch the London Wildlife Trust's own biodiversity action plan. I am delighted to say that the same City of London source provided more than £200,000 in each of the following two years, making a total of more than £500,000.
That made a significant contribution. The transition from the biological recording project to local records centres is the next stage in the creation of a sustainable, long-term picture of London's natural heritage. Work is going on to ensure that a partnership approach is pursued, involving all organisations and individuals who generate data, and who need co-ordinated information on London's wildlife. Indeed, the trust has commissioned an independent study of the issues relating to a local records centre for London. That will be vital if the Mayor of London is to fulfil the statutory duty that has been bestowed on him.
I warmly support the new clause. More than 100 plants that had never been seen before in London appeared as a result of the second world war—frequently on bomb sites—which had a broadly beneficial effect on London's habitats. However, other global forces have the potential to cause an adverse effect. That is why statutory responsibilities—not least those in the new clause proposed by my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of York—should be enshrined, to ensure that a notable cause is further advanced.
§ Mr. Simon ThomasI shall speak mainly in support of new clause 6, but in doing so I shall mention many of the virtues of new clause 4, which was moved by the hon. Member for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh). On biodiversity action plans, from the Welsh perspective I cannot paint a picture as optimistic as that painted by the hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney). As I understand it, the plans are the Government's main method of delivering conservation measures for endangered species and habitats outside sites of special scientific interest.
Unfortunately, in Wales there is a clear example of things not going right, and in that respect new clause 6 has a lot of virtue in it. We have 222 species and habitat action plan areas that are relevant to Wales; in other words, there are about 222 species and habitats in Wales that could be considered rare or endangered, and they are in need of urgent conservation action. The implementation of the action plans for these areas and these species would be the main contribution of the Countryside Council for Wales—the leading body in Wales on this—to the United Kingdom biodiversity action plan.
However, the Countryside Council for Wales, like other publicly funded bodies, has—or claims that it has—a chronic shortage of money. In a council meeting last December, setting the budget for this financial year, it made a commitment only to work on 120 of the 222 action plan areas. Therefore, hon. Members will understand why I do not take as optimistic a view as does the hon. Member for Stafford.
For the foreseeable future, all work on the 102 remaining biodiversity action plan areas is suspended. Although the staff of the Countryside Council for Wales obviously recognise the importance of those plans to Welsh biodiversity, resources are scarce and they prioritise their statutory duties, so what is discretionary goes by the board. I feel that that reveals a certain lack of joined-up thinking on biodiversity by the Government, when so much emphasis is placed on the voluntary side of things and so little is therefore placed on the Bill. New clause 6 provides an excellent opportunity to insert that legal underpinning into the Bill.
The result is that Welsh wildlife and habitats remain in danger, and that little or no action is being taken to conserve at least the majority of them. The individual species and habitat action plans will implement the UK's commitment under the United Kingdom biodiversity action plan and under the convention on biological diversity—the overall convention which, I believe, the Government are ratifying. The current approach to that ratification is based on voluntary and participatory methods, both of which are very welcome—they build partnerships, and I can concur with other hon. Members' views that such partnerships often work. However, in the long term they cannot sustain the whole process, especially in the light of the experience of the Countryside Council for Wales.
We must have a legislative foundation for biodiversity action plans. I understand that the Government want to preserve the voluntary approach and I believe that new clause 4 retains some of that approach, but it is important that the process has a legal underpinning.
1053 I hope that the Government will consider new clause 6 and how it might be implemented, so that we may improve both the UK's and the Welsh aspect of implementing biodiversity action plans.
§ Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West)I support new clause 4, which was so ably moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh). If we take recent history in the New forest in, let us say, the last 30 years, in every issue of development versus conservation, one or other of the local authorities—the county council, the district council or its predecessors—has been on the side of development, and conservation has been championed by the commoners of the New forest, especially the Court of Verderers. I do not necessarily criticise the local authorities for that; after all, local authorities do have priorities with respect to housing, traffic management, tourism management, jobs, development and so on, but this new clause strikes me as a powerful corrective to that, so that a new responsibility is laid upon them that might have changed the history of the last 30 years in the New forest.
9.30 pm
Equally, the Minister's intention is to turn the New forest into a national park shortly and he will know that the proposal has not been universally welcomed. In particular, it has not been welcomed by existing local authorities, which are not keen to see yet another precepting and planning authority created on their doorstep. Has the Minister considered that, with a little creative thought, he could use the provisions in new clause 4 to develop all the responsibilities that he seeks to lay on a new national park authority without creating yet another administrative authority? The new clause seems to be the solution to the problem. I hope that he will consider it.
§ Mr. MullinLet me make the position on new clause 4 clear. The Government are firmly committed to action on local sites, whether we decide to use legislative means or not. The Government's framework for action on sites of special scientific interest emphasised the commitment to developing proposals on locally important sites in consultation with local authorities and other parties. We set up the local sites review group and the group agreed on the need for action, but views differed on the means of delivering the recommendations.
There is enormous scope for action. Local authorities are already incorporating local wildlife sites into their biodiversity action plans and I believe that this is the best way of delivering them in a coherent way.
I can give the House a firm commitment that we will take forward work on local wildlife sites, seeking to progress the general thrust of the group's recommendations and drawing in other interests to the extent that that is necessary. The issue to be resolved is whether delivery is more appropriate through legislative or other non-statutory mechanisms. As I said, however, the local sites review group was not unanimous on that point.
On new clause 6, the Government are sympathetic to the intention to provide a firm statutory basis for the UK biodiversity action plan. The new clause would require all 1054 public bodies to further the objectives of the action plans for individual species and habitats in carrying out their functions. We understand fully that the aim is to ensure that the biodiversity process continues with a firm basis into the future.
It is very important for action on biodiversity to be taken at the local level through local action plans. It is important, however, that action is not seen as something separate from the day-to-day work of local councils. The Government want the work to be fully integrated into councils' wider responsibilities. The importance of biodiversity, including local wildlife sites, should inform the full range of a council's activity. However, that may not happen if we treat biodiversity as a discrete and separate function. There are many examples of service and specific local plans which, although they look good on paper, lead to little action on the ground or which remain at the periphery of what the council does.
§ Mr. SwayneWill the Minister give way?
§ Mr. MullinI hope that the hon. Gentleman will forgive me, but I think that everyone is anxious to make progress and to move to Third Reading. He has not been with us much this evening, although I welcome his attendance now. Those Members who have been with us will confirm that my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment and I have been generous in giving way, but I detect that the mood of the House is to make progress. That is what I propose to do.
The Government propose that local biodiversity action plans, incorporating local councils' work on wildlife sites, should be integrated within the wider strategies that are being put in place in the current Local Government Bill. Part I of that Bill will require local authorities to prepare community strategies that contribute to sustainable development by promoting the economic, social and environmental well-being of their areas.
Draft statutory guidance published last week makes clear the Government's view that the strategies should become the overarching framework for other service or theme-specific plans, and that the priorities and activities in the community strategy should influence the range of actions of the council and its private, voluntary and community sector partners.
The strategies should bring coherence to service and specific plans, establish the links between them and the rest of local activity and, as far as possible, rationalise the number of plans, processes and partnerships that exist locally. There are already many of those, so the burden on local authorities is already considerable. We will make it clear in further statutory guidance that biodiversity should be an important element in community strategies, in delivering local authorities' new obligations on sustainable development and in improving local quality of life.
The conservation of biodiversity in the wider countryside is very important. We agreed in Committee seriously to consider whether any statutory underpinning would be appropriate. The Government's main objective is to ensure that the biodiversity process continues and effectively delivers the protection of our threatened habitats and species, using locally protected sites and other means. However, we have reached the conclusion that the commitments that we have given to take forward 1055 the agreed recommendations of the local sites review group and the statutorily based community strategies give a strong basis for securing that objective at local level.
By making biodiversity an explicit factor in the new strategies, we will be giving substantial new impetus to the good progress that many local authorities have already made in protecting and enhancing local wildlife. We are firmly committed to implementing the biodiversity action plan at national level, and we have a solid and effective policy process in place which would not benefit from legislation. I hope that hon. Members will not press the new clause.
§ Miss McIntoshMy right hon. and hon. Friends and I are disappointed. I am grateful to the colleagues who supported the new clause, including my right hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. Brooke) and my hon. Friends the Members for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) and for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne). The Government will not extend to authorities throughout the country the statutory duty imposed on the Mayor of London, although I specifically said that no onerous burdens will be placed on local authorities. I therefore urge hon. Members to support the new clause.
§ Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 153, Noes 288.
1058| Division No. 233] | [9.37 pm |
| AYES | |
| Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey) | Day, Stephen |
| Allan, Richard | Donaldson, Jeffrey |
| Amess, David | Dorrell, Rt Hon Stephen |
| Arbuthnot, Rt Hon James | Duncan Smith, Iain |
| Ashdown, Rt Hon Paddy | Evans, Nigel |
| Atkinson, David (Bour'mth E) | Faber, David |
| Atkinson, Peter (Hexham) | Fabricant, Michael |
| Baker, Norman | Fallon, Michael |
| Baldry, Tony | Forth, Rt Hon Eric |
| Bell, Martin (Tatton) | Foster, Don (Bath) |
| Bercow, John | Fowler, Rt Hon Sir Norman |
| Beresford, Sir Paul | Fox, Dr Liam |
| Blunt, Crispin | Fraser, Christopher |
| Body, Sir Richard | Garnier, Edward |
| Boswell, Tim | George, Andrew (St Ives) |
| Bottomley, Peter (Worthing W) | Gibb, Nick |
| Bottomley, Rt Hon Mrs Virginia | Gidley, Sandra |
| Brady, Graham | Gill, Christopher |
| Brake, Tom | Gillan, Mrs Cheryl |
| Brand, Dr Peter | Gorman, Mrs Teresa |
| Brooke, Rt Hon Peter | Gray, James |
| Browning, Mrs Angela | Green, Damian |
| Bruce, Ian (S Dorset) | Greenway, John |
| Burnett, John | Grieve, Dominic |
| Bums, Simon | Gummer, Rt Hon John |
| Burstow, Paul | Hamilton, Rt Hon Sir Archie |
| Campbell, Rt Hon Menzies (NE Fife) | Hammond, Philip |
| Harvey, Nick | |
| Cash, William | Heald, Oliver |
| Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping Barnet) | Heath, David (Somerton & Frome) |
| Heathcoat—Amory, Rt Hon David | |
| Clappison, James | Hogg, Rt Hon Douglas |
| Clark, Dr Michael (Rayleigh) | Horam, John |
| Collins, Tim | Howard, Rt Hon Michael |
| Cormack, Sir Patrick | Hunter, Andrew |
| Cotter, Brian | Jack, Rt Hon Michael |
| Cran, James | Jackson, Robert (Wantage) |
| Curry, Rt Hon David | Key, Robert |
| Davey, Edward (Kingston) | King, Rt Hon Tom (Bridgwater) |
| Davis, Rt Hon David (Haltemprice) | Kirkbride, Miss Julie |
| Kirkwood, Archy | St Aubyn, Nick |
| Lait, Mrs Jacqui | Sanders, Adrian |
| Lansley, Andrew | Sayeed, Jonathan |
| Leigh, Edward | Shephard, Rt Hon Mrs Gillian |
| Letwin, Oliver | Shepherd, Richard |
| Lidington, David | Simpson, Keith (Mid—Norfolk) |
| Lloyd, Rt Hon Sir Peter (Fareham) | Smith, Sir Robert (W Ab'd'ns) |
| Loughton, Tim | Soames, Nicholas |
| Luff, Peter | Spelman, Mrs Caroline |
| Lyell, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas | Spring, Richard |
| McIntosh, Miss Anne | Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John |
| MacKay, Rt Hon Andrew | Stunell, Andrew |
| Maclean, Rt Hon David | Swayne, Desmond |
| Maclennan, Rt Hon Robert | Syms, Robert |
| McLoughlin, Patrick | Tapsell, Sir Peter |
| Madel Sir David | Talyor, Ian (Esher & Walton) |
| Major, Rt Hon John | Taylor, John M (Solihull) |
| Maples, John | Taylor, Matthew (Truro) |
| Maude, Rt Hon Francis | Thomas, Simon (Ceredigion) |
| Mawhinney, Rt Hon Sir Brian | Tonge, Dr Jenny |
| May, Mrs Theresa | Townend, John |
| Moore, Michael | Tredinnick, David |
| Moss, Malcolm | Trend Michael |
| Nicholls, Patrick | Tyler, Paul |
| Norman, Archie | Tyrie, Andrew |
| O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury) | Waterson, Nigel |
| ÖOpik, Lembit | Wells, Bowen |
| Paice, James | Whitney, Sir Raymond |
| Paterson, Owen | Whittingdale, John |
| Pickles, Eric | Widdecombe, Rt Hon Miss Ann |
| Portillo, Rt Hon Michael | Willetts David |
| Prior, David | Willis, Phil |
| Randall, John | Winterton, Mrs Ann (Congleton) |
| Rendel, David | Winterton, Nicholas (Macclesfield) |
| Robertson, Laurence | Young, Rt Hon Sir George |
| Roe, Mrs Marion (Broxbourne) | |
| Rowe, Andrew (Faversham) | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Ruffley, David | Mrs. Eleanor Laing and |
| Russell, Bob (Colchester) | Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown. |
| NOES | |
| Adams, Mrs Irene (Paisley N) | Campbell—Savours, Dale |
| Ainger, Nick | Casale, Roger |
| Allen, Graham | Caton, Martin |
| Anderson, Donald (Swansea E) | Cawsey, Ian |
| Armstrong, Rt Hon Ms Hilary | Chapman, Ben (Wirral S) |
| Atkins, Charlotte | Chaytor, David |
| Austin, John | Clapham, Michael |
| Barron, Kevin | Clark, Rt Hon Dr David (S Shields) |
| Battle, John | Clark, Dr Lynda (Edinburgh Pentlands) |
| Bayley, Hugh | |
| Beard, Nigel | Clark, Paul (Gillingham) |
| Beckett, Rt Hon Mrs Margaret | Clarke, Eric (Midlothian) |
| Begg, Miss Anne | Clarke, Rt Hon Tom (Coatbridge) |
| Bell, Stuart (Middlesbrough) | Clarke, Tony (Northampton S) |
| Benn, Hilary (Leeds C) | Clelland, David |
| Bennett, Andrew F | Coaker, Vernon |
| Benton, Joe | Coffey, Ms Ann |
| Bermingham, Gerald | Coleman, Iain |
| Best, Harold | Colman, Tony |
| Betts, Clive | Connarty, Michael |
| Blackman, Liz | Cook, Frank (Stockton N) |
| Blizzard, Bob | Cooper, Yvette |
| Borrow, David | Corbett, Robin |
| Bradley, Keith (Withington) | Corbyn, Jeremy |
| Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin) | Corston, Jean |
| Bradshaw, Ben | Cousins, Jim |
| Brinton, Mrs Helen | Cox, Tom |
| Brown, Rt Hon Nick (Newcastle E) | Cranston, Ross |
| Brown, Russell (Dumfries) | Crausby, David |
| Browne, Desmond | Cryer, John (Hornchurch) |
| Buck, Ms Karen | Cunningham, Rt Hon Dr Jack (Copeland) |
| Burden, Richard | |
| Caborn, Rt Hon Richard | Cunningham, Jim (Cov'try S) |
| Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V) | Darvill, Keith |
| Davey, Valerie (Bristol W) | Jones, Dr Lynne (Selly Oak) |
| Davidson, Ian | Kemp, Fraser |
| Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (Llanelli) | Kennedy, Jane (Wavertree) |
| Davies, Geraint (Croydon C) | Khabra, Piara S |
| Davis, Rt Hon Terry (B'ham Hodge H) | Kidney, David |
| Kilfoyle, Peter | |
| Dawson, Hilton | Kumar, Dr Ashok |
| Dean, Mrs Janet | Ladyman, Dr Stephen |
| Denham, John | Lawrence, Mrs Jackie |
| Dobbin, Jim | Lepper, David |
| Dobson, Rt Hon Frank | Leslie, Christopher |
| Doran, Frank | Levitt, Tom |
| Drew, David | Lewis, Ivan (Bury S) |
| Eagle, Angela (Wallasey) | Lewis, Terry (Worsley) |
| Eagle, Maria (L'pool Garston) | Liddell, Rt Hon Mrs Helen |
| Efford, Clive | Linton, Martin |
| Ellman, Mrs Louise | Lloyd, Tony (Manchester C) |
| Ennis, Jeff | Lock, David |
| Etherington, Bill | McAvoy, Thomas |
| Field, Rt Hon Frank | McCabe, Steve |
| Fisher, Mark | McDonagh, Siobhain |
| Fitzpatrick, Jim | McDonnell, John |
| Fitzsimons, Mrs Lorna | McGuire, Mrs Anne |
| Flint, Caroline | McIsaac, Shona |
| Flynn, Paul | McKenna, Mrs Rosemary |
| Foster, Rt Hon Derek | Mackinlay, Andrew |
| Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings) | McNulty Tony |
| Foster, Michael J (Worcester) | McWalter, Tony |
| Foulkes, George | Mahon, Mrs Alice |
| Fyfe, Maria | Marsden, Paul (Shrewsbury) |
| Gerrard, Neil | Marshall, David (Shettleston) |
| Gibson, Dr Ian | Marshall, Jim (Leicester S) |
| Godman, Dr Norman A | Marshall—Andrews, Robert |
| Goggins, Paul | Martlew, Eric |
| Golding, Mrs Llin | Maxton, John |
| Gordon, Mrs Eileen | Meacher, Rt Hon Michael |
| Griffiths, Jane (Reading E) | Meale, Alan |
| Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S) | Merron, Gillian |
| Griffiths, Win (Bridgend) | Michael, Rt Hon Alun |
| Grocott, Bruce | Michie, Bill (Shef'ld Heeley) |
| Grogan, John | Milburn, Rt Hon Alan |
| Gunnell, John | Miller, Andrew |
| Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale) | Mitchell, Austin |
| Hall, Patrick (Bedford) | Moonie, Dr Lewis |
| Hamilton, Fabian (Leeds NE) | Moran, Ms Margaret |
| Hanson, David | Morley, Elliot |
| Heal, Mrs Sylvia | Morris, Rt Hon Sir John (Aberavon) |
| Healey, John | |
| Henderson, Doug (Newcastle N) | Mountford, Kali |
| Henderson, Ivan (Harwich) | Mowlam, Rt Hon Marjorie |
| Heppell, John | Mudie, George |
| Hesford, Stephen | Mullin, Chris |
| Hill, Keith | Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck) |
| Hinchliffe, David | Murphy, Jim (Eastwood) |
| Hoey, Kate | Murphy, Rt Hon Paul (Torfaen) |
| Hoon, Rt Hon Geoffrey | Naysmith, Dr Doug |
| Hope, Phil | Norris, Dan |
| Hopkins, Kelvin | O'Brien, Bill (Normanton) |
| Howarth, George (Knowsley N) | O'Brien, Mike (N Warks) |
| Howells, Dr Kim | O'Hara, Eddie |
| Hughes, Ms Beverley (Stretford) | Olner, Bill |
| Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N) | Organ, Mrs Diana |
| Humble, Mrs Joan | Osborne, Ms Sandra |
| Hurst, Alan | Palmer, Dr Nick |
| Hutton, John | Pearson, Ian |
| Iddon, Dr Brian | Pendry, Tom |
| Illsley, Eric | Pike, Peter L |
| Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough) | Plaskitt, James |
| Jamieson, David | Pollard, Kerry |
| Jenkins, Brian | Pond, Chris |
| Johnson, Miss Melanie (Welwyn Hatfield) | Pope, Greg |
| Pound, Stephen | |
| Jones, Rt Hon Barry (Alyn) | Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham E) |
| Jones, Helen (Warrington N) | Prentice, Gordon (Pendle) |
| Jones, Ms Jenny (Wolverh'ton SW) | Primarolo, Dawn |
| Prosser, Gwyn |
| Purchase, Ken | Taylor, David (NW Leics) |
| Quinn, Lawrie | Temple—Morris, Peter |
| Rammell, Bill | Thomas, Gareth (Clwyd W) |
| Rapson, Syd | Thomas, Gareth R (Harrow W) |
| Reid, Rt Hon Dr John (Hamilton N) | Timms, Stephen |
| Roche, Mrs Barbara | Tipping, Paddy |
| Rooker, Rt Hon Jeff | Todd, Mark |
| Rooney, Terry | Touhig, Don |
| Ross, Ernie (Dundee W) | Trickett, Jon |
| Rowlands, Ted | Truswell, Paul |
| Roy Frank | Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE) |
| Ruddock Joan | Turner, Dr Desmond (Kemptown) |
| Russell, Ms Christine (Chester) | Turner, Dr George (NW Norfolk) |
| Ryan Ms Joan | Turner, Neill (Wigan) |
| Salter, Martin | Twigg, Derek (Halton) |
| Sarwar, Mohammad | Tynan, Bill |
| Savidge, Malcolm | Vaz, keith |
| Sheerman, Barry | Vis, Dr Rudi |
| Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert | Walley, Ms Joan |
| Shipley, Ms Debra | Ward Ms Claire |
| Short, Rt Hon Clare | Wareing, Robert N |
| Skinner, Dennis | White Brian |
| Smith, Angela (Basildon) | Whitehead, Dr Alan |
| Smith, Miss Geraldine (Morecambe & Lunesdale) | Williams, Rt Hon Alan (Swansea W) |
| Smith, Jacqui (Redditch) | Williams, Alan W (E Carmarthen) |
| Smith, Llew (Blaenau Gwent) | Wills, Michael |
| Snape, Peter | Winnick, David |
| Starkey, Dr Phyllis | Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster C) |
| Steinberg, Gerry | Wood, Mike |
| Stewart, Ian (Eccles) | Woodward, Shaun |
| Stoate, Dr Howard | Worthington, Tony |
| Strang, Rt Hon Dr Gavin | Wray, James |
| Stringer, Graham | Wright, Anthony D (Gt Yarmouth) |
| Stuart, Ms Gisela | Wright, Dr Tony (Cannock) |
| Sutcliffe, Gerry | |
| Taylor, Rt Hon Mrs Ann (Dewsbury) | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Mr. Robert Ainsworth and | |
| Taylor, Ms Dari (Stockton S) | Mr. Jim Dowd. |
§ Question accordingly negatived.