§ As amended (in the Standing Committee), again considered.
§ Question again proposed, That the clause be read a Second time.
§ Mr. Sackville
The time when the broadcasting media get loose on the families and start interviewing the weeping daughters and the mother and relations of the accused man and when people start focusing on the physical method of execution is the moment when opinion needs to be tested.
I remind the House that a large proportion of the present adult population have been brought up since abolition and their attitude is different from that of people who were brought up when the death penalty was in force. To carry out such a drastic and uncivilised act as marching one of our fellow citizens to the end of a passage, putting a rope round his neck and dropping him through a trapdoor to break his neck, a democratic Government in peace time would need at least 90 per cent. of public opinion behind them. We would be lucky to get 50 per cent. If the House votes in favour of the new clause and in the more unlikely event of its being passed in another place, the legislation would not work and hanging would not have the effect that people want. I do not 808 underestimate the public concern about crime and violence, but this is the wrong way to go and I urge the House resoundingly to reject the new clause.
§ Mr. Edward Leigh (Gainsborough and Horncastle)
It is said, and I accept, that Parliament cannot characterise capital murder. We cannot say that only terrorists should hang, because of the difficulties of determining whether a bank robbery is committed in the course of terrorism. It is said that we cannot hang those who kill warders because the man who kills a warder in escaping from prison and then kills a young woman outside could not be executed for one murder and not for the other. It is said that we cannot have a referendum on these matters because the issues are too complex to put to the people. It is said that we cannot impose life sentences that mean life because we could not control people who were serving perhaps 30 years in prison. If we accept all those things we are left with the new clause.
We cannot return to the days of the automatic death penalty for all murders, because about 75 per cent. of murders fall within a tightly knit group. I do not deny for an instant the awesome responsibility that would be placed on a jury by the new clause. It is not a perfect solution, but I suspect that for modern conditions it is the only solution that makes any sense. It is said that the state should never commit judicial execution, but where does that leave the concept of the just war? It is said that the state should never take life judicially and legally, but where does that leave the concept of abortion? It is said that judicial execution is not a deterrent. but why is it that before the abolition of the death penalty professional criminals took great care not to go armed when committing a robbery?
The arguments are evenly balanced, but in the end this is a moral issue. In moral issues the judgments of our constituents, inexpert as many of them may be, are as valid as ours. We in the House have a duty to respect and to honour the judgment of our constituents. If we do not honour those judgments, an increasing number of people may become alienated from the parliamentary process because they feel that Parliament is not prepared to take the ultimate step to defend their freedom and their liberty under the law. For those reasons, I shall vote for the new clause.
§ Mr. David Wilshire (Spelthorne)
Five hours ago, when my hon. Friend the Member for Thanet, North (Mr. Gale) introduced the new clause, he said that he wanted this debate so that new Members would have a chance to say what they thought and to cast their votes. Not many new Conservative Members have had the chance to speak. I am one of those 53 new Members. Like the other 52, tonight I have to move from a personal belief to a public opinion. Like the other 52, I have been subjected to a fair amount of persuasion to vote yes. But, unlike most of the other 52, I am a long-standing opponent of capital punishment. Earlier this evening my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton, South (Mr. Devlin), who joined the House last June at the same time as I did, said that he had decided, after pressure, to change his mind from voting no to voting yes. I, too, have thought along those lines.
§ Mr. Devlin
It is not pressure to consult one's constituents; it is not pressure to consult representatives from every part of one's constituency—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. Devlin
I would contend that this is a moral issue and the moral opinion of the highest in the land is as good as that of the lowest in the land; therefore we in the House should reflect the majority of the moral opinions in the country. Does my hon. Friend agree?
§ Mr. Wilshire
I shall come to that point in a moment. I want to explain why the train of thought which we have just heard is wrong.
I have not found the past few weeks easy. I have come to realise that it is much easier to have personal views than it is to have public opinions and a public vote. I have come to understand very clearly the force of a widely held public opinion. I accept that the majority of people in this country want us to vote yes tonight. I have also come to appreciate the great advantage of trying to please my electorate and my party supporters. I freely admit that I have been tempted to go down that track.
In the past few weeks, I have been doing a number of things. I have been thinking, I have been reading everything that has been sent to me, and I have been listening. I have contacted all my local Church leaders and I have looked for new facts and evidence. I have concluded that there is no new information and there is no consensus from the Churches. I have had very little direct input from my constituents saying one thing or the other. But in the past few days I have come to appreciate something else. If I may paraphrase the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley), I have been looking for a pragmatic way out of an instinctive tight corner.
I have to admit that some of my motives were to try to please my electorate and to protect my future. I have ended up not very proud of myself. However, despite all my wriggling, I still believe that judicial killing is wrong. I still hold the view that vengeance has no place in the law of the land. I still know that I could not pull that lever. Yet it is predictable that I will be criticised by quite a lot of people for taking this view. In my defence, I would say that Members of Parliament are often criticised for having no principles. They are often criticised for trying to curry favour at any price and for not standing up for their beliefs. What price a Member of Parliament who has lost his self-respect?
I end by telling my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton, South and anybody else who is thinking of switching their vote from no to yes that we should stand by the principles that we all had before we came here. Remember the need to like what one sees when next looking in the mirror and, above all, hang on to a vision of a future that is caring and compassionate, a future that will override vengeance and will not return to judicial killing.
§ Dame Elaine Kellett-Bowman (Lancaster)
We have heard a lot today about terrorism. Many of the worst terrorist attacks are conducted during hijack. Most hijacks are carried out in order to free imprisoned terrorists. In the hijacks, innocent lives are lost. In the recent Kuwaiti hijack, if there had been no terrorists in prison in Kuwait, there would have been no hijack.
Most terrorist crimes are carefully planned and entail work and organisation by many people. One need only deter a single person in that chain of terror, and the act is never committed.
810 Sands and his friends believed that the Home Secretary would succumb to blackmail. To his great credit, he did not do so, and no one afterwards starved himself to death.
Since the abolition of the death penalty, figures for murder have been misleading. Once the death penalty had been abolished, the prosecution was more ready to accept a plea of diminished responsibility. Therefore, the figures are completely distorted. Hon. Members have argued that the death penalty is not a deterrent. If that is so, as my hon. Friend the Member for Batley and Spen (Mrs. Peacock) pointed out, it is strange that people condemned to death always appeal.
What frightens me about the present position is that there is a premium on wiping out witnesses. Twenty years ago the noble Lord—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. Speaker
Order. We are coming to the end of an important debate and I ask the House to give the hon. Lady a fair hearing.
§ Dame Elaine Kellett-Bowman
Twenty years ago the noble lord who until recently was the Lord Chancellor pointed out that if criminals receive no higher penalty for killing than for robbery they would simply eliminate witnesses to reduce the probability of detection. How much more is that the case now that we have introduced the concept of criminal bankruptcy? That means that criminals lose not only their liberty but their loot. They can no longer serve their sentences contemplating living a life of luxury on their ill-gotten gains. That will be even more the case when the Criminal Justice Bill becomes law and drug dealers will also be deprived of their loot.
The crucial point is that, whatever one does in law, in practice one can never abolish the death penalty. One takes it from the calm atmosphere of the court and places it on the streets. If criminals carry guns, which are now standard items of criminal equipment, the police must be armed when they face death on our behalf in apprehending armed criminals. In the shoot-out that follows, innocent bystanders receive the death sentence, while the criminals, when they are apprehended, receive a custodial sentence. As with abortion, the innocent are killed. That cannot be right, so I shall have no hesitation in voting for the restoration of the death penalty.
§ Mr. Geoffrey Dickens (Littleborough and Saddleworth)
The House is always restless at this time because it wishes to vote. If I am given a fair hearing, I shall be brief.
I should like to remind hon. Members of the sort of country in which we live. Women cannot pass freely without fear of being molested, raped or murdered. The elderly do not feel safe if they are out after dark and even do not feel safe in their own homes. Children cannot play safely without fear of being abused or perhaps murdered. That is the society by which hon. Members stand to be judged.
Every hon. Member has a duty to protect the citizens of this country by every means possible.
§ Mr. Hugh Dykes (Harrow, East)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I beg to move, That the Question be now put.
§ Mr. Speaker
I cannot accept that motion. We are coming to the last speech, and we have not had the winding-up speech yet.
§ Mr. Dickens
It would be quicker if I were to be allowed to finish; it will save a vote.
That is the sort of country that we have produced, and the state has a duty to protect its citizens. Members of Parliament, whatever sentencing powers we are giving our judges, are not getting it right to the satisfaction of the public. If we get the highest tariff right—for murder, to restore the death penalty—I am sure that it will be reflected throughout sentencing provisions and the attitudes of judges.
If the police, who are at the sharp end of the job, feel that it is a sanction and deterrent that they would wish to have, who are we to deny them it when we expect so much from them to protect everyone?
I hope that every hon. Member, even those weak-willed hon. Members who do not reflect public opinion, will realise that many hon. Members treat this place as a glorified club. They are here to carry out the will of the people, not for the glory of being Members of Parliament. I hope and pray that we shall go through the Lobby and once again lower the majority. There will be a bigger vote than ever in favour of restoring capital punishment, which will show the way for the future. This matter will not go away, so let us show the way forward in the Lobby.
§ Mr. Rees
The hon. Member for Littleborough and Saddleworth (Mr. Dickens) is right: there is concern among our people about the crime rate. It has steadily become worse under every Government, and it is a good deal worse than it was in 1979. Perhaps we would do better to investigate why that has happened and why I am concerned because I made arrangements to collect a lady at 10 o'clock who was worried about walking near the House in the centre of our capital city. Perhaps we should be considering that rather than pretending that there is a simple answer that will sweep all the problems away.
I have spoken in many debates on capital punishment, but tonight we are voting on new clause 1, not on the principle of capital punishment. Many hon. Members have sat and listened to the debate as it has gone backwards and forwards, and a very good debate it has been. However, the hon. Member for Littleborough and Saddleworth is mistaken if he thinks that we have been talking about the principle of capital punishment. He has to decide whether the new clause would work. My argument is that it would not, and it is that argument that I wish to pursue.
There is anger and anxiety in our inner cities. People are asking what can be done, and some think that if we only had capital punishment all would be solved. They forget that when the crime rate was last at the height it is—in the words of the Home Secretary—in the 1880s, there was capital punishment. It was not long since people had been hanged in public. There was no shortage of punishment by hanging, and in other ways, but still the crime rate was high. Perhaps we should figure out why matters improved just after the first world war. It could not have been because of the death penalty, because that had existed before.
Political manifestos at the time of elections say, "We shall solve the problem of law and order." Such claims bring us into disrepute with the electorate because they know it is not true. We know that it is not true. I was in the United States last week, in mid-town New York with its guns and drugs. If America leads the way, God help us. 812 That cannot possibly be due to the lack of capital punishment. The new clause certainly could not repair the situation.
New clause 1 is nonsense. The Lord Chief Justice has given his views on it, not on the principle. It is not his duty to give us his views on capital punishment in principle. It is his job to tell the Home Secretary whether he thinks the new clause would work, and lie has said that he does not think that it would. It gives duties to jurors and the courts that they were not designed to have. It also gives powers to the Court of Appeal, which I had not realised until that was referred to today. In his reasonably good opening speech, the hon. Member for Thanet, North (Mr. Gale) said that the new clause was not a return to 1957 and categorisation. Nevertheless, the new clause brings random categorisation which would make life for the courts, and certainly for the appeal courts, so difficult that they could not carry out their job.
Our job is to pass legislation that can be interpreted by the courts and will work. Whatever the views of right hon. and hon. Members, the new clause cannot go to the other place to be corrected. It would be turned aside straight away. It is not worth voting for. Those who are concerned about capital punishment—I understand their concern—can do better than this. However, it is on this that we are voting today.
I shall vote against the new clause. If this were put before the Home Secretary by someone from the drafting department, the Treasury solicitors or wherever, he would not have to consider it. As the Home Secretary knows, the best Home Secretaries are not lawyers. The motive for the new clause is misconceived. It is a return to the 1880s. Suffice it to say that capital punishment would not deter. It certainly would not have prevented the two burglaries that I have had in the past year. One of the young men involved was sentenced to two years' imprisonment and another to one year. They would not have been deterred by capital punishment. [Interruption.] They would not have been affected in any way. The reason for the rise in the crime rate has nothing to do with the absence of capital punishment.
I do not find the statistics neutral. I feel strongly about the moral aspect, but if I felt for one moment that the statistics showed that captial punishment deterred, I should have to take note of that—perhaps not as a Back Bencher but certainly as a Home Secretary. I do not believe that that is what the statistics show. They do not show that the number of homicides, however classified, would be reduced.
I am conscious of the time and I shall keep to the limits that we agreed—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] The hon. Members who are cheering are those who have not been here for the debate. In view of the interest outside, and before we go into the Lobbies to vote, it might be as well to consider all the aspects of this matter. If it is so important, we should surely do so. It is certainly important to our colleagues from Northern Ireland who live with death and who have expressed themselves in such terms this afternoon. I warrant that those cheering do not fall into the same category as Northern Ireland Members, on both sides of the fence.
Hon. Members have referred to terrorism. I understand their feelings and the bestiality of it. One could not think of Arab terrorism and what the Arabs have done to people without feeling ashamed of humanity. However, I reflect that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. 813 I do not believe that that is true in Northern Ireland; that is why I ended political or special category status in Northern Ireland. In Northern Ireland everybody over the age of 18 has a vote. They can express themselves at the hustings. If the terrorists on both sides of the divide stood for election and could win a majority, it would put us in a different position, but they do not. It is hon. Members on both sides of the House who represent the people of Northern Ireland, just as Mr. Haughey represents the people in the south of Ireland. The ballot box is there.
§ Mr. Rees
My hon. Friend says "a fixed ballot box", but there is a ballot box in Northern Ireland, which is not the case elsewhere. There is sometimes a certain weariness when the Irish speak because it is felt that the Irish never forget. As I consider the new clause, I sometimes think that the English never remember. They forget what happened in 1916. They ignore the question of martyrs on both sides of the divide.
As there are no juries in Northern Ireland it is impossible to implement the new clause. It could not possibly be applied in Northern Ireland. It would be nonsense to vote for the proposal and expect it to apply in Northern Ireland.
Like the Home Secretary, I do not believe that capital punishment for murder in general and terrorism in particular is the answer to our problems. As I said, I do not call in aid a moral judgment. In any event, the principle of capital punishment is not the issue tonight; it is the new clause on which we are to vote. It is not fit to be passed, and it should be voted down this evening.
§ Sir Rhodes Boyson (Brent, North)
I speak for my right hon. and hon. Friends who would like to see the return of capital punishment, and in support of my hon. Friend the Member for Thanet, North, (Mr. Gale) who tabled the new clause. I must take issue with the right hon. Member for Morley and Leeds, South (Mr. Rees), for whom I have great respect. This is the second time that we have met across the Chamber on this subject.
To most hon. Members attending the debate the issue is capital punishment. Three new clauses and an amendment have been selected and we are debating the question whether the House feels that capital punishment should return. If we decide that it should return, we shall consider the whole situation again—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh, no."] We can change the new clause in another place—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh, no."] Just let us have it and we will show hon. Members; give us the chance and we will deliver. I have not the slightest doubt about that. Let us try it and we will not disappoint. [HON. MEMBERS: "Let us vote"] We shall have a vote, but there must be a summing up on this side, as there was on the other. That is what democracy is about.
For most of the time during civilised life, there has been capital punishment. We have only to look at the Scriptures. The hon. Member for Antrim, East (Mr. Beggs) referred to them in his speech. There has been much talk of morality but little of the Scriptures in this debate. There is reference to the death penalty in both the Old and the New Testaments. It is referred to in the 37th article of the Church of England and in St. Augustine's writings. It 814 was only about 40 years ago in this country that the movement to abolish capital punishment began. It coincided with the beginning of the permissive society. The abolition of the death penalty has been the flagstaff of the permissive society. We know what that has meant for the people of this country.
Local newspapers are full of articles about robbery, murder, rape and, literally, pillage. These are bad times for the weak, the handicapped, the old and the young.
Capital punishment could be used to deter terrorism. Six airliners have been hijacked, the last one in the middle east. If hijackings continue, nobody will want to fly in aeroplanes. What will happen to the Channel tunnel then? Political terrorists believe that they will be released, their friends will continue to take hostages and there will be more deaths.
Some of my hon. Friends have said that unless capital punishment is restored the police will have to be armed and there will be shooting in the streets. There is already shooting in the streets. I find it very strange that—[Interruption.]
§ Sir Rhodes Boyson
It is very odd that hon. Members on both sides of the Chamber have said that the state has no right to take life. If that is the case, they should all be conscientous objectors when there is a war. The right hon. Member for Morley and Leeds, South and I both served in the last war, he for much longer than I, and we were given the right by the state to take life.
There must be something wrong with the conscience of those who vote for the abortion of a conceived but unborn child yet vote against capital punishment for evil murder. Quite a few of my hon. Friends have referred to the fact that most people want the return of capital punishment because they believe that it will act as a deterrent. They want a return of capital punishment not because they are more evil than hon. Members of other opinions on both sides of the Chamber but because they believe that it will be a deterrent.
Good government means that the Government and the people must not draw too far apart. If we stroke the cat one way it purrs; if we stroke it the other way it hisses. Human nature and democracy react in the same way. Most of the people in this country disagree with Parliament on this big issue. We should pay careful heed to what they say. As has been said time and time again, when conscience is involved the conscience of the man in the public bar is as good as the conscience of the man in the saloon bar or the conscience of hon. Members in the bars of the House of Commons.
I ask my right hon. and hon. Friends and Opposition hon. Members to support the new clause. If they do, I believe that a cheer will go up throughout this country that Parliament has listened to the people on an issue that causes them serious concern.
§ Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 218, Noes 341.818
|Division No. 342]||[10.33 pm|
|Adley, Robert||Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)|
|Amess, David||Arnold, Tom (Hazel Grove)|
|Arbuthnot, James||Aspinwall, Jack|
|Atkins, Robert||Hargreaves, A. (B'ham H'II Gr')|
|Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)||Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndbum)|
|Batiste, Spencer||Hayward, Robert|
|Beaumont-Dark, Anthony||Hicks, Mrs Maureen (Wolv' NE)|
|Beggs, Roy||Hicks, Robert (Cornwall SE)|
|Bellingham, Henry||Hind, Kenneth|
|Bendall, Vivian||Holt, Richard|
|Bevan, David Gilroy||Hordern, Sir Peter|
|Biggs-Davison, Sir John||Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd)|
|Blackburn, Dr John G.||Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)|
|Blaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter||Howell, Ralph (North Norfolk)|
|Bonsor, Sir Nicholas||Hunter, Andrew|
|Boscawen, Hon Robert||Jackson, Robert|
|Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)||Janman, Tim|
|Boyson, Rt Hon Dr Sir Rhodes||Jones, Robert B (Herts W)|
|Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard||Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine|
|Brandon-Bravo, Martin||Key, Robert|
|Brazier, Julian||King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield)|
|Bright, Graham||Kirkhope, Timothy|
|Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)||Knapman, Roger|
|Browne, John (Winchester)||Knight, Greg (Derby North)|
|Burns, Simon||Knight, Dame Jill (Edgbaston)|
|Butcher, John||Knowles, Michael|
|Butler, Chris||Lang, Ian|
|Carlisle, John, (Luton N)||Lawrence, Ivan|
|Carrington, Matthew||Lee, John (Pendle)|
|Carttiss, Michael||Leigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh)|
|Cash, William||Lightbown, David|
|Chalker, Rt Hon Mrs Lynda||Lord, Michael|
|Chapman, Sydney||McCrea, Rev William|
|Chope, Christopher||McCrindle, Robert|
|Churchill, Mr||McCusker, Harold|
|Clark, Hon Alan (Plym'th S'n)||Macfarlane, Sir Neil|
|Colvin, Michael||MacKay, Andrew (E Berkshire)|
|Conway, Derek||Maclean, David|
|Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)||McLoughlin, Patrick|
|Coombs, Simon (Swindon)||McNair-Wilson, P. (New Forest)|
|Cran, James||Malins, Humfrey|
|Currie, Mrs Edwina||Mans, Keith|
|Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)||Marlow, Tony|
|Davis, David (Boothferry)||Marshall, John (Hendon S)|
|Day, Stephen||Martin, David (Portsmouth S)|
|Devlin, Tim||Mates, Michael|
|Dickens, Geoffrey||Maude, Hon Francis|
|Dicks, Terry||Mawhinney, Dr Brian|
|Dover, Den||Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin|
|Dunn, Bob||Miller, Hal|
|Durant, Tony||Mills, Iain|
|Eggar, Tim||Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)|
|Emery, Sir Peter||Mitchell, David (Hants NW)|
|Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)||Molyneaux, Rt Hon James|
|Evennett, David||Monro, Sir Hector|
|Fallon, Michael||Montgomery, Sir Fergus|
|Farr, Sir John||Moore, Rt Hon John|
|Favell, Tony||Morrison, Hon P (Chester)|
|Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)||Moss, Malcolm|
|Fookes, Miss Janet||Mudd, David|
|Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)||Neale, Gerrard|
|Forsythe, Clifford (Antrim S)||Neubert, Michael|
|Forth, Eric||Nicholls, Patrick|
|Fowler, Rt Hon Norman||Nicholson, David (Taunton)|
|Fox, Sir Marcus||Oppenheim, Phillip|
|French, Douglas||Paice, James|
|Fry, Peter||Paisley, Rev Ian|
|Gale, Roger||Patnick, Irvine|
|Gardiner, George||Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey|
|Gill, Christopher||Pawsey, James|
|Goodhart, Sir Philip||Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth|
|Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles||Porter, Barry (Wirral S)|
|Gorman, Mrs Teresa||Porter, David (Waveney)|
|Grant, Sir Anthony (CambsSW)||Portillo, Michael|
|Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)||Price, Sir David|
|Gregory, Conal||Redwood, John|
|Griffiths, Sir Eldon (Bury St E')||Riddick, Graham|
|Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)||Ridley, Rt Hon Nicholas|
|Grylls, Michael||Ridsdale, Sir Julian|
|Hamilton, Hon Archie (Epsom)||Robinson, Peter (Belfast E)|
|Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)||Ross, William (Londonderry E)|
|Hanley, Jeremy||Rost, Peter|
|Hannam, John||Rowe, Andrew|
|Rumbold, Mrs Angela||Tredinnick, David|
|Shaw, David (Dover)||Trippier, David|
|Shephard, Mrs G. (Norfolk SW)||Trotter, Neville|
|Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)||Twinn, Dr Ian|
|Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)||Vaughan, Sir Gerard|
|Shersby, Michael||Viggers, Peter|
|Sims, Roger||Waddington, Rt Hon David|
|Skeet, Sir Trevor||Walker, A. Cecil (Belfast N)|
|Smith, Cyril (Rochdale)||Walker, Bill (T'side North)|
|Smyth, Rev Martin (Belfast S)||Ward, John|
|Speller, Tony||Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)|
|Spicer, Sir Jim (Dorset W)||Warren, Kenneth|
|Stanbrook, Ivor||Watts, John|
|Steen, Anthony||Wells, Bowen|
|Stevens, Lewis||Welsh, Andrew (Angus E)|
|Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)||Widdecombe, Ann|
|Stewart, Ian (Hertfordshire N)||Wiggin, Jerry|
|Stokes, John||Winterton, Mrs Ann|
|Sumberg, David||Winterton, Nicholas|
|Summerson, Hugo||Wolfson, Mark|
|Taylor, John M (Solihull)||Wood, Timothy|
|Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)||Woodcock, Mike|
|Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman||Yeo, Tim|
|Thatcher, Rt Hon Margaret||Younger, Rt Hon George|
|Thompson, D. (Calder Valley)|
|Thorne, Neil||Tellers for the Ayes:|
|Thornton, Malcolm||Mr. John Greenway and Mr. Ian Bruce.|
|Townend, John (Bridlington)|
|Abbott, Ms Diane||Budgen, Nicholas|
|Adams, Allen (Paisley N)||Butterfill, John|
|Alison, Rt Hon Michael||Caborn, Richard|
|Allen, Graham||Callaghan, Jim|
|Alton, David||Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)|
|Amery, Rt Hon Julian||Campbell, Ron (Blyth Valley)|
|Amos, Alan||Campbell-Savours, D. N.|
|Anderson, Donald||Canavan, Dennis|
|Archer, Rt Hon Peter||Carlile, Alex (Mont'g)|
|Armstrong, Hilary||Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)|
|Ashdown, Paddy||Cartwright, John|
|Ashton, Joe||Channon, Rt Hon Paul|
|Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)||Clark, Dr David (S Shields)|
|Baldry, Tony||Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)|
|Banks, Robert (Harrogate)||Clarke, Tom (Monklands W)|
|Banks, Tony (Newham NW)||Clay, Bob|
|Barnes, Harry (Derbyshire NE)||Clelland, David|
|Barnes, Mrs Rosie (Greenwich)||Clwyd, Mrs Ann|
|Barron, Kevin||Cohen, Harry|
|Battle, John||Cook, Frank (Stockton N)|
|Beckett, Margaret||Cook, Robin (Livingston)|
|Beith, A. J.||Cope, John|
|Bell, Stuart||Corbett, Robin|
|Benn, Rt Hon Tony||Corbyn, Jeremy|
|Bennett, A. F. (D'nt'n & R'dish)||Couchman, James|
|Bermingham, Gerald||Cousins, Jim|
|Bidwell, Sydney||Cox, Tom|
|Biffen, Rt Hon John||Critchley, Julian|
|Blair, Tony||Cryer, Bob|
|Blunkett, David||Cummings, John|
|Boateng, Paul||Cunliffe, Lawrence|
|Body, Sir Richard||Cunningham, Dr John|
|Boswell, Tim||Curry, David|
|Bottomley, Peter||Dalyell, Tarn|
|Bottomley, Mrs Virginia||Darling, Alistair|
|Bowis, John||Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (Llanelli)|
|Boyes, Roland||Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)|
|Bradley, Keith||Davis, Terry (B'ham Hodge H'l)|
|Bray, Dr Jeremy||Dewar, Donald|
|Brittan, Rt Hon Leon||Dixon, Don|
|Brooke, Rt Hon Peter||Dobson, Frank|
|Brown, Gordon (D'mline E)||Doran, Frank|
|Brown, Nicholas (Newcastle E)||Dorrell, Stephen|
|Brown, Ron (Edinburgh Leith)||Douglas, Dick|
|Bruce, Malcolm (Gordon)||Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James|
|Buchan, Norman||Duffy, A. E. P.|
|Buchanan-Smith, Rt Hon Alick||Dunnachie, Jimmy|
|Buck, Sir Antony||Dykes, Hugh|
|Buckley, George J.||Eastham, Ken|
|Evans, John (St Helens N)||Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S)|
|Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray)||Hughes, Simon (Southwark)|
|Fatchett, Derek||Hunt, David (Wirral W)|
|Fearn, Ronald||Hurd, Rt Hon Douglas|
|Field, Frank (Birkenhead)||Illsley, Eric|
|Fields, Terry (L'pool B G'n)||Ingram, Adam|
|Fisher, Mark||Irvine, Michael|
|Flynn, Paul||Irving, Charles|
|Foot, Rt Hon Michael||Janner, Greville|
|Forman, Nigel||John, Brynmor|
|Foster, Derek||Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey|
|Foulkes, George||Jones, Barry (Alyn & Deeside)|
|Franks, Cecil||Jones, leuan (Ynys Môn)|
|Fraser, John||Jones, Martyn (Clwyd S W)|
|Freeman, Roger||Jopling, Rt Hon Michael|
|Fyfe, Maria||Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald|
|Galbraith, Sam||Kennedy, Charles|
|Galloway, George||King, Rt Hon Tom (Bridgwater)|
|Garel-Jones, Tristan||Kinnock, Rt Hon Neil|
|Garrett, John (Norwich South)||Kirkwood, Archy|
|Garrett, Ted (Wallsend)||Knox, David|
|George, Bruce||Lamont, Rt Hon Norman|
|Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian||Lawson, Rt Hon Nigel|
|Godman, Dr Norman A.||Leadbitter, Ted|
|Golding, Mrs Llin||Leighton, Ron|
|Goodlad, Alastair||Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark|
|Gordon, Mildred||Lester, Jim (Broxtowe)|
|Gould, Bryan||Lestor, Joan (Eccles)|
|Gow, Ian||Lewis, Terry|
|Graham, Thomas||Lilley, Peter|
|Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)||Livingstone, Ken|
|Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)||Lloyd, Sir Ian (Havant)|
|Grist, Ian||Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)|
|Ground, Patrick||Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)|
|Gummer, Rt Hon John Selwyn||Lofthouse, Geoffrey|
|Hampson, Dr Keith||Loyden, Eddie|
|Harman, Ms Harriet||McAllion, John|
|Harris, David||McAvoy, Thomas|
|Haselhurst, Alan||McCartney, Ian|
|Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy||McFall, John|
|Hawkins, Christopher||McGrady, Eddie|
|Hayes, Jerry||MacGregor, Rt Hon John|
|Haynes, Frank||McKay, Allen (Barnsley West)|
|Healey, Rt Hon Denis||McKelvey, William|
|Heathcoat-Amory, David||McLeish, Henry|
|Heffer, Eric S.||Maclennan, Robert|
|Henderson, Doug||McNair-Wilson, M. (Newbury)|
|Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael||McNamara, Kevin|
|Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.||Madden, Max|
|Hinchliffe, David||Madel, David|
|Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm)||Mahon, Mrs Alice|
|Hogg, N. (C'nauld & Kilsyth)||Major, Rt Hon John|
|Holland, Stuart||Mallon, Seamus|
|Home Robertson, John||Maples, John|
|Hood, Jimmy||Marek, Dr John|
|Howard, Michael||Marshall, David (Shettleston)|
|Howarth, Alan (Strat'd-on-A)||Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)|
|Howarth, George (Knowsley N)||Marshall, Michael (Arundel)|
|Howell, Rt Hon D. (S'heath)||Martin, Michael J. (Springburn)|
|Howells, Geraint||Martlew, Eric|
|Hoyle, Doug||Maxton, John|
|Hughes, John (Coventry NE)||Mayhew, Rt Hon Sir Patrick|
|Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)||Meacher, Michael|
|Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)||Meale, Alan|
|Hughes, Roy (Newport E)||Mellor, David|
|Meyer, Sir Anthony||Scott, Nicholas|
|Michael, Alun||Sedgemore, Brian|
|Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley)||Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey)|
|Michie, Mrs Ray (Arg'l & Bute)||Sheerman, Barry|
|Millan, Rt Hon Bruce||Shore, Rt Hon Peter|
|Miscampbell, Norman||Short, Clare|
|Mitchell, Austin (G't Grimsby)||Skinner, Dennis|
|Moate, Roger||Smith, Andrew (Oxford E)|
|Moonie, Dr Lewis||Smith, C. (Isl'ton & F'bury)|
|Morgan, Rhodri||Smith, Rt Hon J. (Monk'ds E)|
|Morley, Elliott||Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)|
|Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)||Snape, Peter|
|Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon)||Soames, Hon Nicholas|
|Morrison, Hon Sir Charles||Soley, Clive|
|Mowlam, Marjorie||Spearing, Nigel|
|Mullin, Chris||Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)|
|Needham, Richard||Squire, Robin|
|Nellist, Dave||Stanley, Rt Hon John|
|Nelson, Anthony||Steel, Rt Hon David|
|Newton, Rt Hon Tony||Steinberg, Gerry|
|Nicholson, Emma (Devon West)||Stern, Michael|
|Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon||Stradling Thomas, Sir John|
|O'Brien, William||Strang, Gavin|
|O'Neill, Martin||Straw, Jack|
|Onslow, Rt Hon Cranley||Tapsell, Sir Peter|
|Orme, Rt Hon Stanley||Taylor, Mrs Ann (Dewsbury)|
|Owen, Rt Hon Dr David||Taylor, Ian (Esher)|
|Patchett, Terry||Taylor, Matthew (Truro)|
|Patten, John (Oxford W)||Temple-Morris, Peter|
|Pendry, Tom||Thomas, Dr Dafydd Elis|
|Pike, Peter L.||Townsend, Cyril D. (B'heath)|
|Powell, Ray (Ogmore)||Turner, Dennis|
|Powell, William (Corby)||Vaz, Keith|
|Prescott, John||Wakeham, Rt Hon John|
|Primarolo, Dawn||Waldegrave, Hon William|
|Quin, Ms Joyce||Walden, George|
|Radice, Giles||Wall, Pat|
|Raison, Rt Hon Timothy||Wallace, James|
|Randall, Stuart||Waller, Gary|
|Redmond, Martin||Walley, Joan|
|Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn||Walters, Dennis|
|Reid, Dr John||Wareing, Robert N.|
|Renton, Tim||Welsh, Michael (Doncaster N)|
|Rhodes James, Robert||Wheeler, John|
|Richardson, Jo||Wigley, Dafydd|
|Rifkind, Rt Hon Malcolm||Williams, Rt Hon Alan|
|Roberts, Allan (Bootle)||Williams, Alan W. (Carm'then)|
|Robertson, George||Wilshire, David|
|Robinson, Geoffrey||Wilson, Brian|
|Rogers, Allan||Winnick, David|
|Rooker, Jeff||Wise, Mrs Audrey|
|Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)||Worthington, Tony|
|Rowe, Andrew||Wray, Jimmy|
|Rowlands, Ted||Young, Sir George (Acton)|
|Ryder, Richard||Tellers for the Noes:|
|Sackville, Hon Tom||Mr. David Ashby and Mr. Bruce Grocott.|
|Sainsbury, Hon Tim|
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§ Further consideration of the Bill adjourned.—[Mr. Kenneth Carlisle.]
§ Bill, as amended (in the standing Committee), to be further considered tomorrow.