§
'After section 17 of the 1980 Act there shall be inserted the following section:—
17B.—(1) Every body which lets dwelling-houses under secure tenant tenancies shall, within one year of the commencement of this section and thereafter from time to time, provide information in such form as it considers best suited to explain in simple terms:
§ (2) Every such body shall ensure that, so far as is reasonably practicable, the information provided by it under subsection (1) above is kept up to date.
§ (3) The landlord under a secure tenancy shall supply the tenant with a copy of the information provided by it under subsection (1) above as soon as practicable during the period of one year following the commencement of this section and after the expiry of that period—
- (a) when the tenancy is created; and
- (b) when information is revised in accordance with subsection (2) above.".
§ Mr. CraigenThe purpose of the right to be consulted is to create more opportunities whereby public landlords may properly and adequately consult their tenants. The tenant participation advisory service has, for some time, pointed to the disparity which exists north and south of the Tweed in respect of such rights, because the Housing Act 1980 introduced consultative arrangements in respect of England and Wales. I understand that there are still some teething problems in respect of that legislation, but we feel that it is important that similar rights should be extended to Scottish tenants. There was a move to do so, which was rebutted by the Government during the course of the original tenants' rights legislation.
In Committee, it was suggested that the report of the Scottish Consumer Council entitled, "Tenants Associated—a Survey of Tenants Groups in Scotland" had shown that there was not a great deal of interest in tenants becoming more involved in the management of their properties. The director of the Scottish Consumer Council, Peter Gibson, wrote to me recently pointing out that that had misconstrued the reality, and that only a small minority of tenants were not disposed to becoming involved in arrangements for greater consultation. The great majority of tenants would appreciate being more directly involved in the decisions taken by public landlords, which would ultimately and directly affect them.
There was a debate, as the Minister knows, in the Scottish Grand Committee on 1 February last year dealing with tenant participation. His predecessor, the present Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, was then charged with responsibility for Scotland's housing. The Minister's hon. Friend is something of a movable tenant because his responsibilities at the Scottish Office have changed constantly since his arrival. During that debate, he extolled the virtues of tenant management schemes and moves towards greater consultation.
The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland spoke at a conference that I chaired in the Mitchell library, Glasgow, in September 1982, which dealt with the issue of tenant management schemes in Scotland. I recall that he chastised the Scottish local authorities at that time for falling behind their English counterparts in extending the development of housing co-operatives.
5.30 pm
It is timely to have the debate this afternoon, because the Minister may have had time to read a copy of the report by the review committee on housing co-operatives in Scotland, which was published recently. The review committee was set up following discussions at the conference seminar held in Glasgow. It examined closely all aspects of housing management co-operatives in Scotland, and some of the reasons why there has been reluctance, if not difficulty, in extending housing cooperatives there.
The review committee was chaired by Anja Amsell, the director of the Scottish council of the YWCA Housing Society Ltd. Maryhill was well represented on the review committee and brought a measure of good sense to its proceedings, arising from our experience gained on the tenant management schemes operating now in the Summerston area. Indeed, the Summerston housing cooperative was the first to be established in Scotland, arising largely from the initiatives taken by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Provan (Mr. Brown), when he 349 was in charge of housing in Scotland. Those initiatives were followed quickly by schemes in Invershiel, and Caulderquilt, and we have high hopes of other tenant management co-operatives in the area.
It is important for the Government to address themselves to the review committee's report, because it makes some practical suggestions about the way to extend tenant participation and tenant management co-operatives in Scotland. The report was studied jointly by the tenant participation advisory service and the Co-operative Union education service. I hope that the Minister will at least give a hint today about how he sees the future role of TPAS, the Government funding of which is up for auction in 1986.
Tenant management co-operatives should be the subject of a "sleeves-rolled-up" exercise. The newly founded bodies invariably need practical assistance rather than a lot of extra paperwork or interesting leaflets and publications. It is felt that the TPAS might be able to develop its practical support. It is usually up to local authorities, the Scottish Special Housing Association, which operates two tenant management co-operative schemes, the new towns and the housing corporations, as public agencies in receipt of public funds, to give practical support. I hope that the Minister will comment usefully on some of those matters.
As an aside, a paper was sent to me recently about tenant owners' repair co-operatives, which was produced by ASSIST Architects Ltd. That organisation seeks to promote the concept of owner-occupiers in tenement blocks being able to join others to repair their properties effectively on a co-operative basis, rather than entrust the work to the sometimes unsatisfactory services of factors. The Minister should consider that matter and decide whether that approach can be extended to become the principle and practice of good housing management in Scotland. There is no doubt that there are peculiarities about the problems in tenements, which require a specific and practical approach, not only by the public landlords but by the Scottish Office.
New clause 2, dealing with the provision of tenant information, is designed to ensure that some of the misunderstandings about tenants' rights and obligations are cleared away. Sometimes the people who work in the busy offices at New St. Andrew's House do not appreciate that their work does not always reach individual tenants and their households. In the new clause we are seeking to create greater awareness of rights and obligations. Shelter in Scotland has highlighted the need for bodies to provide information that is more easily digested in the average household. Sometimes we tend to use language which, even for the experts, is a wee bit cumbersome and tiresome to read. The purpose of the new clause is to ensure that there will be greater dissemination of information. It will be information that is provided rather than information that is simply published, which is more likely to be read by people who know their way about.
If the Government's approach on the consultation paper on the right to repair is any guide, there is a need to ensure that the information is adequately disseminated. The Minister can screw up his face, but the fact is that many organisations did not know that that consultation paper had been issued. As the Minister knows, I took it upon myself to make sure that all the community councils and tenant 350 organisations in my area got a copy of it. Some of those people were very indignant in the returns that I have seen. They must have been quite indigestible for Mr. J. Irvine in room 404 of New St. Andrew's House, when he received them.
I hope that the new clause will meet the approval of the Minister and the House.
§ Mr. Gordon Wilson (Dundee. East)I support the commendable new clause proposed by the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mr. Craigen). I was surprised at how enlightened the Labour party has become. Too often in the past it has treated council tenants in a paternalistic way, especially at local level. The provisions for consultation suggest that new standards are being sought. Whether the lower echelons at council level will be willing to accept some of the provisions in the new clause that the hon. Gentleman generously brought to the attention of the House remains to be seen.
There is no doubt that there has been a change in recent years in the attitude of public landlords to their tenants. Some of them were provoked by demonstrations of annoyance by tenants over lack of consultation, particularly about modernisation schemes, when people found that cherished fitments that they put into their houses at their own expense were torn out as part of a modernisation deal that had to be complete in every respect, according to bureaucratic ideals. Housing divisions began to find that they could not get away with that. Gradually the processes of consultation improved. An example is the work by the Scottish Special Housing Association which has been good about some modernisation schemes that have been brought to my attention.
A study of the administration of the public housing stock over the years will show that there are things that the local authorities have done in their wisdom to attempt to improve conditions, such as removal of private garden space and the installation of open-plan, common ground. This was done against a welter of opposition from tenants. There was no doubt that the maintenance of garden ground by the public authority improved the environment and outlook of the neighbourhood somewhat. It also led to something that could have been avoided if there had been consultation. In certain sectors there were natural pathways where members of the public or neighbours of certain tenants could move from their houses to the shops or from bus stops to their houses, pathways which took them past the living rooms and windows of council houses. This caused unsightly, muddy paths where there should have been nice, cleanly cut grass. Because of a lack of prior consultation, I suspect that many members of this House began to receive requests from affected tenants for fences to be put up in order to protect the immediate environment of the houses.
It is sometimes very difficult to know where to draw the line but it is easier and can prevent trouble if the people who live in the area are consulted first. They will not lightly get rid of something that may be to their advantage. Imposition, however, is a bad thing. Many tenants tend to feel that they are pawns on a vast and impersonal board, to be moved about as the housing authorities direct. This attitude is sometimes reinforced when they go to offices, talk to different clerks on different days and are given different information. It is, therefore, very important that 351 the proposals for consultation and provision of information be rationalised and for there to be a positive duty on the part of the landlords to provide for this.
These are very useful clauses. I hope that the Government will take them on board. I do not consider the clauses very radical—more's the pity; some tenant management schemes go well beyond what is set down in the new clauses. If the Government will not accept them, in the interests of the principle, I hope that the Labour party will press the matter to a vote, but I cannot see any reason for the Government to turn down the excellent suggestions which are before the House.
§ Mr. Hugh BrownI have reservations about these clauses, although, to be diplomatic—never one of my noted characteristics—I would avoid the temptation to cause the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. Wilson) to remind the House that he once accused me of being a "white settler" in some of these matters. I do not take exception to that, because to some extent it is quite true.
Unlike the present Government, I have always firmly believed in the right of local authorities to do as much as possible without interference from Government or from anyone else. Holding these views casued me a lot of difficulty because many members of my party, not just in the House but outside, wanted to dictate to local authorities, especially Labour-controlled authorities.
I therefore approach this matter with an open and fair mind about the desire and intention behind the new clauses to provide the maximum information to tenants or to anybody else who will be affected by the decisions of a housing authority and I am 100 per cent. in favour of encouraging, cajoling and even threatening colleagues in local authorities who are sometimes not the best communicators in the business.
5.45 pm
I do not think that the Government will accept the clauses. I do not know that the Minister is going to give any indication to me before I put my foot in it, but I imagine that he is not going to accept them, because it would mean writing them into the Bill, and, apart from possible drafting errors in them, they do not form a commitment that I am particularly keen to see in the Bill. My purpose in supporting the new clauses is to gain a recognition from the Minister that there is still a need to encourage participation and consultation between housing authorities and their tenants. I hope that in the light of my comments the Minister will respond in a fairly objective and not too partisan manner.
One matter which I would like clarified and which I do not think was raised in Committee is the present position of the tenants' rights charter. We are dealing here, after all, with an extension of the tenants' rights in the 1980 Act. Can I ask if all the new leases have now been agreed? We have all received correspondence from the Scottish Consumer Council about difficulties that were being exprienced. If my memory serves me right, in both Hamilton district council and Renfrew district council there was some legal tangle because some authorities—not, I think, these two in particular—were trying to write into their leases conditions that went far beyond what this House expected of them. In other words, instead of having a tenants' charter containing their rights, some Scottish housing authorities were trying to put into leases conditions that tenants would do repairs which were really 352 the responsibility of the landlord. I am not making a party point on this becuase I am sure that it applied to different housing authorities, whether Labour-controlled or not.
It was against that background, which I am sure the Minister will appreciate, that there was unanimous support for the general principles of the so-called "tenants' charter". The previous Government were involved and had been holding discussions and it was the 1980 Act that was thought to be the first opportunity that the new Government had of putting these in. It was an entirely separate thing from the sale of council houses. We are really at one, therefore, on the need to have some kind of tenants' charter. As I understand it, there was a requirement on housing authorities to prepare leases and to clarify the position regarding repairs in the first place. Can I ask the Minister if that has all been completed? I understand that, certainly in Glasgow, there are difficulties in keeping to that timetable.
It follows from this that there is a real need for information. There is the argument that, when we are not very certain or dogmatic about exactly what needs to be done, we can always ask for more research and information because it means that we have more time before we must make up our minds. This is concerned to some extent with the sale of council houses too. I am genuinely worried about the sort of ghetto mentality that might develop because of the policy on the sale of council houses. I am not trying to be controversial. The Minister knows what I am talking about, because in Edinburgh, with a Conservative council, just as in Glasgow there are areas where, no matter what sort of solutions are being tried in Edinburgh, the housing authorities have a great responsibility for the state of some of the major housing schemes. This applies not just to Glasgow and Edinburgh but to other authorities.
I am, therefore, not making a party point when I say that I am worried that in these areas it is not just a question of giving tenants rights but of trying to encourage people to believe that the housing authorities care about the quality of the environment in which people live. This is why I feel concern. I do not want to write in provisions which are all right in nice, quiet middle-class areas such as Milngavie and Bearsden where there are very few council houses and where it is easy to believe in the principles of consultation and discussion and all the rest of it. That is not nearly enough to begin to tackle some of the problems with which I am concerned.
Obviously, I cannot speak for my Front Bench, but the principle of giving information is a means of stimulating greater public interest in the problems faced by some of these communities. In my opinion those problems will get worse rather than better because of the housing policies that the Government are pursuing.
§ Mr. AncramIn a sense we have had a useful debate on tenant participation as well as on the subject matter off the two new clauses. As always, I listened carefully to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Provan (Mr. Brown). He is right that not all leases have yet been completed. I understand that about half have been, but the rest are satisfactorily on their way to completion. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman agrees that within the tenants' charter those leases provide a useful source of information on tenants' rights.
I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's concern about certain areas. I have always taken the view that information and 353 discussion are important to deal with some of the problem housing areas. The attempt to involve tenants is important, and I certainly do not object to the principle.
However, I was surprised to hear the hon. Gentleman say that he would support the new clauses. I recall that in Committee that he talked about statutory consultations. Indeed, he said:
I must confess that I am not a statutory Member of Parliament. I have always objected to people in the Labour movement—and we seem to have more now than ever before in outside bodies that are legion—saying that we must have a statutory right to do this, to do that and to do the next thing.He then made an important point that struck a chord with me and, I suspect, with other members of the Committee. He said:As a Labour councillor I would resent Parliament telling me that I should consult my constituents."—[Official Report, First Scottish Standing Committee, 6 December 1983; c. 373.]In a sense, that seems to be the principle behind the new clauses. They create a statutory duty to consult. Therefore, in the light of what the hon. Gentleman said in Committee, I was somewhat surprised to hear that he would support them.I also listened carefully to the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. Wilson). Most Conservative Members would agree that one of the problems on many Scottish council house estates is that for too long tenants have been moved about like pawns and have been treated in a statistical rather than personal way. There has been an element of depersonalisation, and that has motivated my support for the tenants' charter and an increase in tenants' rights. That has certainly motivated the Government's intention to pursue that course. It is an extension of that to look at tenant participation and consultation. As I have said, I have no opposition to the principle of that form of consultation.
We have heard that new clause 1 would require landlords to prepare a scheme for consultation with tenants on housing management matters. As the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mr. Craigen) would concede, that proposal is borrowed from the Housing Act 1980. Elsewhere in that Act—this is perhaps a technical point—there is also a definition of what constitutes
a matter of housing management".Whatever my view on the generality of the new clauses, without such a statutory definition it would be extremely difficult to establish which matters should be placed before tenants and which should not.Even were the new clause not defective in that way, I could not recommend its acceptance. From some of the comments made in Committee I understand that the hon. Member for Provan was not the only hon. Member who feared statutory consultation. As a constituency Member of Parliament, and from what I have been able to ascertain from my Department, I believe that there is very little evidence of any demand from tenants for the introduction of formal arrangements for consultation. Indeed, to impose a statutory duty on councils to consult their tenants would add a heavy burden in terms of manpower and resources. That is another element of which we must be conscious. Given the concern that Labour Members have previously expressed that the Bill should not add to local bureaucracy and administration, I was somewhat surprised when the hon. Member for Maryhill tabled the new clauses.
354 I do not oppose the principle of consultation where the demand for such consultation exists. I believe, however, that such consultation will be more effective if it is based on arrangements entered into voluntarily. That is why my Department funds the tenant participation advisory service, a principal aim of which is to promote tenant consultation.
The hon. Member for Maryhill talked as though the TPAS was funded only up to 1986, but a three-year funding is beginning at this precise moment. I would not like it to be thought otherwise.
§ Mr. HendersonI am carefully following my hon. Friend. He seems to have put his finger on the nub of this matter, that consultation and good relations between a local authority and its tenants have more to do with the spirit, intention and attitude—my hon. Friend used the word "depersonalisation" which is the other side of the coin—rather than with rules, regulations and mandatory procedures.
§ Mr. AncramI am grateful to my hon. Friend. That is an important aspect of this problem. The hon. Member for Maryhill, who takes a great interest in these matters, will know that voluntary consultations such as he has held, with housing associations and council estate tenants are more likely to be successful than something which is imposed.
New clause 2 would require authorities to provide tenants with more and clearer information about their tenancies. I have some sympathy with the aims of the new clause, but I cannot accept that the administrative and financial burden for local authorities which would result would be justified. The 1980 Act already requires authorities to provide tenants with a written lease, which must contain the terms of their tenancy. The additional information on leases which new clause 2 would require authorities to issue to their tenants would solve no problems but would, I suggest, be little used by the tenants and would impose additional burdens on housing management staff, who, I am sure, have many more pressing problems to deal with.
There is little between us on the principle of the need to consult and inform, but that can best be done informally. The Government have shown their support for that in their support of the TPAS. I therefore ask the hon. Member for Maryhill to ask leave to withdraw the new clauses. If he does not, I must urge the House to reject them.
§ 6 pm
§ Mr. Hugh BrownWith the leave of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I should like to make a few comments. The Minister knows that it is not my intention to delay progress.
Several parts of new clause 2 are worthy of comment, although I do not necessarily speak in their support. I understand that some difficulty has been experienced in the interpretation of the Matrimonial Homes (Family Protection) (Scotland) Act 1981. I am not a lawyer and I have always thought that to be a big help in the House because it has prevented me from becoming too technical. I apologise for raising this matter. I know that the Minister has some knowledge of the matrimonial homes legislation. Concern has been expressed and there has been 355 misunderstanding about rights in that respect because some authorities play off that legislation against the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977.
New clause 2 is sponsored by Shelter, as are most of the others. It would be less than generous not to recognise that some of the voluntary bodies working in the housing sphere have come across difficulties associated with the interpretation of the 1981 Act and the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977. Will the Minister assure us that he is aware of the problem with which clause 2 deals and which might help us out of our difficulty?
§ Mr. AncramI am not aware, and as far as I know neither is my Department of any specific problem relating to the Matrimonial Homes (Family Protection) (Scotland) Act 1981. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to enlarge on the issue, perhaps he will write to me and I shall, of course, reply.
The purpose of new clause 2 is to provide information. It does not seek to solve any specific problem. I hope that my hon. Friends will have heard what I said earlier, and that the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mr. Craigen) will withdraw the motion.
§ Mr. CraigenI note what the Minister said. I am impressed by the new-found sympathy for housing authorities and their manpower and resources as that sympathy is not usually shown when we seek it elsewhere. Perhaps I gave the impression when I spoke earlier that I regarded this issue as entirely a management exercise.
I extolled to the Minister the virtues of the review committee report on housing co-operatives, although I see it as being the ultimate in tenant involvement. The two new clauses are designed to trigger off consultation and the right to information which we regard as important. The clauses are intended to be the primary stage in good housing management policy.
I thank the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. Wilson) for his remarks. I have always considered it important for tenants to think that they can get close to the bodies that are responsible for their tenancies. We should narrow the gap between the bureaucrats and the tenants. From what I have seen in my constituency, I believe that it is important to involve tenants in the management of housing schemes. At one time one could say that tenants were concerned primarily with their houses, but I believe that they have become increasingly concerned, and rightly so, with their immediate environment. Housing management co-operatives have provided the opportunity for tenants to involve themselves collectively in their immediate environment.
I am aware of the reservations of my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Provan (Mr. Brown) in certain matters, but his diplomacy is not a matter on which I would criticise him. He was right to touch on the issue of written leases, with which we shall be dealing later. The Opposition think that it is important to put down a marker on the right to consultation and more information. We must press the new clauses if only to show the earnestness of our intent.
§ Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 139, Noes 213.
358| Division No. 126] | [6.05 pm |
| AYES | |
| Alton, David | Atkinson, N. (Tottenham) |
| Ashdown, Paddy | Bagier, Gordon A. T. |
| Barron, Kevin | Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) |
| Beckett, Mrs Margaret | Lewis, Terence (Worsley) |
| Beith, A. J. | Litherland, Robert |
| Bell, Stuart | Lloyd, Tony (Stretford) |
| Bennett, A. (Dent'n & Red'sh) | Loyden, Edward |
| Bermingham, Gerald | McCartney, Hugh |
| Boothroyd, Miss Betty | McDonald, Dr Oonagh |
| Brown, Gordon (D'f'mline E) | McGuire, Michael |
| Brown, Hugh D. (Provan) | McKay, Allen (Penistone) |
| Brown, Ron (E'burgh, Leith) | McKelvey, William |
| Bruce, Malcolm | Mackenzie, Rt Hon Gregor |
| Buchan, Norman | Maclennan, Robert |
| Callaghan, Rt Hon J. | McNamara, Kevin |
| Callaghan, Jim (Heyw'd & M) | McTaggart, Robert |
| Campbell-Savours, Dale | McWilliam, John |
| Carlile, Alexander (Montg'y) | Madden, Max |
| Clark, Dr David (S Shields) | Marek, Dr John |
| Clay, Robert | Marshall, David (Shettleston) |
| Cocks, Rt Hon M. (Bristol S.) | Martin, Michael |
| Cohen, Harry | Mason, Rt Hon Roy |
| Cook, Robin F. (Livingston) | Maxton, John |
| Corbett, Robin | Maynard, Miss Joan |
| Corbyn, Jeremy | Meacher, Michael |
| Cowans, Harry | Meadowcroft, Michael |
| Cox, Thomas (Tooting) | Michie, William |
| Craigen, J. M. | Mikardo, Ian |
| Crowther, Stan | Millan, Rt Hon Bruce |
| Dalyell, Tam | Miller, Dr M. S. (E Kilbride) |
| Davies, Ronald (Caerphilly) | Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe) |
| Davis, Terry (B'ham, H'ge H'l) | O'Brien, William |
| Deakins, Eric | O'Neill, Martin |
| Dewar, Donald | Parry, Robert |
| Dormand, Jack | Patchett, Terry |
| Douglas, Dick | Pavitt, Laurie |
| Dubs, Alfred | Penhaligon, David |
| Dunwoody, Hon Mrs G. | Powell, Raymond (Ogmore) |
| Eadie, Alex | Prescott, John |
| Ellis, Raymond | Randall, Stuart |
| Evans, John (St. Helens N) | Richardson, Ms Jo |
| Ewing, Harry | Roberts, Allan (Bootle) |
| Faulds, Andrew | Roberts, Ernest (Hackney N) |
| Field, Frank (Birkenhead) | Robertson, George |
| Fields, T. (L'pool Broad Gn) | Ross, Ernest (Dundee W) |
| Flannery, Martin | Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight) |
| Forrester, John | Sheerman, Barry |
| Foster, Derek | Shore, Rt Hon Peter |
| Freud, Clement | Short, Mrs R.(W'hampt'n NE) |
| Garrett, W. E. | Skinner, Dennis |
| George, Bruce | Smith, Rt Hon J. (M'kl'ds E) |
| Gourlay, Harry | Snape, Peter |
| Hamilton, W. W. (Central Fife) | Steel, Rt Hon David |
| Harman, Ms Harriet | Stewart, Rt Hon D. (W Isles) |
| Harrison, Rt Hon Walter | Stott, Roger |
| Haynes, Frank | Strang, Gavin |
| Healey, Rt Hon Denis | Thomas, Dr R. (Carmarthen) |
| Heffer, Eric S. | Thompson, J. (Wansbeck) |
| Hogg, N. (C'nauld & Kilsyth) | Tinn, James |
| Holland, Stuart (Vauxhall) | Wainwright, R. |
| Howells, Geraint | Wallace, James |
| Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N) | Wareing, Robert |
| Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S) | White, James |
| Hughes, Simon (Southwark) | Wigley, Dafydd |
| Jenkins, Rt Hon Roy (Hillh'd) | Williams, Rt Hon A. |
| Johnston, Russell | Wilson, Gordon |
| Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald | Wrigglesworth, Ian |
| Kennedy, Charles | |
| Kilroy-Silk, Robert | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Kinnock, Rt Hon Neil | Mr. James Hamilton and |
| Kirkwood, Archibald | Mr. John Home Robertson. |
| Lambie, David |
| NOES | |
| Alexander, Richard | Batiste, Spencer |
| Amess, David | Beaumont-Dark, Anthony |
| Ancram, Michael | Bellingham, Henry |
| Ashby, David | Benyon, William |
| Aspinwall, Jack | Berry, Sir Anthony |
| Atkins, Rt Hon Sir H. | Bevan, David Gilroy |
| Atkins, Robert (South Ribble) | Biggs-Davison, Sir John |
| Baker, Nicholas (N Dorset) | Body, Richard |
| Bonsor, Sir Nicholas | Holland, Sir Philip (Gedling) |
| Boscawen, Hon Robert | Holt, Richard |
| Bottomley, Peter | Hooson, Tom |
| Braine, Sir Bernard | Howarth, Alan (Stratf'd-on-A) |
| Brandon-Bravo, Martin | Howarth, Gerald (Cannock) |
| Bright, Graham | Hubbard-Miles, Peter |
| Brinton, Tim | Hunt, David (Wirral) |
| Brooke, Hon Peter | Hunt, John (Ravensbourne) |
| Bruinvels, Peter | Hunter, Andrew |
| Bryan, Sir Paul | Jessel, Toby |
| Buchanan-Smith, Rt Hon A. | Johnson-Smith, Sir Geoffrey |
| Budgen, Nick | Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N) |
| Bulmer, Esmond | Jones, Robert (W Herts) |
| Burt, Alistair | Key, Robert |
| Butcher, John | King, Roger (B'ham N'field) |
| Butterfill, John | Knight, Gregory (Derby N) |
| Carlisle, John (N Luton) | Knight, Mrs Jill (Edgbaston) |
| Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln) | Knowles, Michael |
| Carttiss, Michael | Knox, David |
| Chapman, Sydney | Latham, Michael |
| Churchill, W. S. | Lawler, Geoffrey |
| Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford) | Lee, John (Pendle) |
| Clarke Kenneth (Rushcliffe) | Leigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh) |
| Cockeram, Eric | Lewis, Sir Kenneth (Stamf'd) |
| Colvin, Michael | Lightbown, David |
| Conway, Derek | Lilley, Peter |
| Coombs, Simon | Lloyd, Peter, (Fareham) |
| Cope, John | Lord, Michael |
| Couchman, James | Luce, Richard |
| Cranborne, Viscount | Lyell, Nicholas |
| Crouch, David | McCurley, Mrs Anna |
| Currie, Mrs Edwina | Macfarlane, Neil |
| Dickens, Geoffrey | MacGregor, John |
| Dicks, T. | MacKay, Andrew (Berkshire) |
| Dorrell, Stephen | MacKay, John (Argyll & Bute) |
| Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J. | Maclean, David John. |
| Dover, Denshore | Macmillan, Rt Hon M. |
| Dunn, Robert | McQuarrie, Albert |
| Dykes, Hugh | Madel, David |
| Evennett, David | Major, John |
| Eyre, Reginald | Malins, Humfrey |
| Fenner, Mrs Peggy | Malone, Gerald |
| Finsberg, Geoffrey | Maples, John |
| Fookes, Miss Janet | Marlow, Antony |
| Forman, Nigel | Maude, Francis |
| Forsyth, Michael (Stirling) | Mawhinney, Dr Brian |
| Fraser, Peter (Angus East) | Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin |
| Freeman, Roger | Mayhew, Sir Patrick |
| Gale, Roger | Mellor, David |
| Galley, Roy | Merchant, Piers |
| Gardiner, George (Reigate) | Meyer, Sir Anthony |
| Garel-Jones, Tristan | Miller, Hal (B'grove) |
| Glyn, Dr Alan | Mills, Iain (Meriden) |
| Goodhart, Sir Philip | Mills, Sir Peter (West Devon) |
| Goodlad, Alastair | Moate, Roger |
| Gow, Ian | Monro, Sir Hector |
| Greenway, Harry | Morrison, Hon C. (Devizes) |
| Gregory, Conal | Morrison, Hon P. (Chester) |
| Griffiths, Peter (Portsm'th N) | Moynihan, Hon C. |
| Grist, Ian | Murphy, Christopher |
| Ground, Patrick | Needham, Richard |
| Gummer, John Selwyn | Nelson, Anthony |
| Hamilton, Hon A. (Epsom) | Neubert, Michael |
| Hamilton, Neil (Tatton) | Newton, Tony |
| Hanley, Jeremy | Nicholls, Patrick |
| Hannam, John | Onslow, Cranley |
| Hargreaves, Kenneth | Oppenheim, Philip |
| Harvey, Robert | Osborn, Sir John |
| Hawkins, C. (High Peak) | Ottaway, Richard |
| Hawkins, Sir Paul (SW N'folk) | Page, John (Harrow W) |
| Hawksley, Warren | Page, Richard (Herts SW) |
| Hayes, J. | Parris, Matthew |
| Hayhoe, Barney | Patten, Christopher (Bath) |
| Hayward, Robert | Percival, Rt Hon Sir Ian |
| Heathcoat-Amory, David | Pollock, Alexander |
| Henderson, Barry | Porter, Barry |
| Hickmet, Richard | Powell, William (Corby) |
| Hicks, Robert | Powley, John |
| Hind, Kenneth | Prentice, Rt Hon Reg |
| Hirst, Michael | Proctor, K. Harvey |
| Pym, Rt Hon Francis | Thompson, Donald (Calder V) |
| Raffan, Keith | Thompson, Patrick (N'ich N) |
| Rathbone, Tim | Tracey, Richard |
| Renton, Tim | Twinn, Dr Ian |
| Rhodes James, Robert | Wakeham, Rt Hon John |
| Rifkind, Malcolm | Walden, George |
| Rippon, Rt Hon Geoffrey | Walker, Bill (T'side N) |
| Roberts, Wyn (Conwy) | Wardle, C. (Bexhill) |
| Rost, Peter | Warren, Kenneth |
| Shaw, Giles (Pudsey) | Watson, John |
| Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge) | Watts, John |
| Silvester, Fred | Wheeler, John |
| Skeet, T. H. H. | Wiggin, Jerry |
| Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield) | Winterton, Mrs Ann |
| Spence, John | Winterton, Nicholas |
| Spencer, D. | Wood, Timothy |
| Spicer, Michael (S Worcs) | |
| Stanbrook, Ivor | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Stevens, Lewis (Nuneaton) | Mr. Ian Lang and |
| Stewart, Allan (Eastwood) | Mr. Douglas Hogg. |
| Temple-Morris, Peter |
§ Question accordingly negatived.