§ Mr. Malcolm Bruce (Gordon)I beg to move amendment No. 116, in page 16, line 22, leave out subsection (4) and insert—
'(4) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a) above, reasonable and sufficient security shall be deemed given
- (a) (i) where the person giving security is prepared to take supply of electricity through a pre-payment meter; and
- (ii) it is reasonably practical in all the circumstances (including in particular the risk of loss or damage) for the supplier to provide such a meter; or
- (b) where a direct payment is made to the supplier under regulation 35 of the Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987 (deductions from income support and other benefits and direct payments to thrid parties); or
- (c) the person requiring the supply is repared to enter an agreement to pay the estimated costs by means of a weekly or monthly instalment plan, the payment to be adjusted on an annual basis to reflect actual consumption.
(5) In sub-section 1(a) above, "security" means any arrangement in consequence of which a public electricity supplier may be assured of payment of money due to him and shall include a deposit given to such supplier or guarantee or charge (whether legal or equitable) in favour of such supplier.(6) Any dispute arising under sub-paragraphs (4) and (5) above between a public electricity supplier and a person giving or wishing to give security shall be determined by the Director as though it were a dispute falling to be determined under section 21 below.'.
Mr.SpeakerWith this it will be convenient to take the following amendments: No. 115, in schedule 6, page 89, line 38, at end, insert—
'(2A) For the purposes of paragraph 2, (2) (a) above, a person shall be regarded as having made good the default—
- (a) where the person giving security is prepared to take supply of electricity through a pre-payment meter—
- (i) which is calibrated to recover over a reasonable period any money in respect of which he is in default; and
- (ii) it is reasonably practical in all the circumstances (including in particular the risk of loss or damage) for the supplier to provide such a meter; or
- (b) Where a direct payment is made to the supplier under regulation 35 of the Social security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987 (deductions from income support and other benefits and direct payments to third parties).
§
No. 152, in schedule 6, page 91, line 6, at end add—
'5A. If a tariff customer has not, after the expiry of 28 working days from the making of a demand in writing by a public electricity supplier for payment thereof, paid all money due from him in respect of the supply of electricity by the supplier to any premises at the provision by the supplier of any electric line or electric plant, the supplier may—
- (a) apply to a court for an order granting permission to cut off the supply to the premises, or to any other premises occupied by the customer, by such means as he thinks fit;
- (b) recover any expenses incurred in so doing from the customer and
- (c) an application to court under this schedule shall be by way of summary procedure.'.
§ Mr. BruceAmendment No. 116 is designed to reduce the incidence of disconnection of electricity customers, and amendment No. 115 is designed to speed up and facilitate reconnection for those who have had the misfortune to be disconnected. Hon. Members who served on the Standing Committee will recollect our considerable debate on disconnections and the wider linked issue of fuel poverty. Somewhat to our surprise, and to the surprise of Conservative Back Benchers, we got an assurance from the Secretary of State that the Government intended to support a revised code of practice similar to that nearing completion of negotiation for the gas industry. The right hon. Gentleman accepted that it was absurd that the code of practice for disconnection in the electricity industry should be less advantageous to the consumer than that which applied in the gas industry.
When pressed, the Secretary of State amplified the position somewhat. I hope that the Minister can give us a little more detail. The Secretary of State finally said:
Because of the consultations that must take place, the final form may not be settled before the Bill leaves its Committee stage, but it will be settled well before the Bill leaves the Commons. There is a three-month cycle of consultations which may not end before the Committee stage. We expect the licence to be modified by Report stage."— [Official Report, Standing Committee E, 31 January 1989; c. 614.]I raised this matter during Question Time and the Minister gave the impression that a final agreement was not yet to hand. I hope that he will accept that it is appropriate and legitimate at this point to press him for some clarification about the terms of the code of practice— to the extent that he is able to reveal them— about the timetable for when the code of practice will be agreed and about how and when it will be incorporated into the licence. It is not wholly satisfactory to be told that the code of practice may be available to us before the Bill finally leaves this House.If the Bill is unamended in the other place, it will not come back to this House. However, when it goes to the other place, we shall seek to press this amendment. Whatever happens, it will be helpful if the Minister can give us some clarification.
I am sure that the Minister will accept that many people are interested in this matter and want to know what will happen. For the record, it may be worth pointing out that, as the Bill is drafted, there is a significant distinction between the gas code of practice and the electricity code of practice proposed under the draft licence. It is proposed that the electricity consumer should be given only 15 days' notice of disconnection, whereas the gas consumer receives 28 days' notice.
The issue of disconnection ebbs and flows and arguments about the figures in themselves are not especially constructive. The annual rate of disconnections is still about 80,000 which I hope all hon. Members will regard as far too many. There has been some dispute about whether the figure is coming down throughout the country. Some of the figures suggest that the disconnection rate is going up in at least one or two areas, which is a matter for concern. We cannot be absolutely sure that, even to the extent that figures suggest that disconnections are decreasing, it is entirely to do with modified practices as opposed to the good fortune of having had a mild winter, which inevitably reduces the likelihood of disconnection.
It is all very well for the Government to say that the trend is downward and that there is no need to worry 583 because they will ensure that that trend will continue after privatisation. The experience with the privatisation of British Gas was the reverse: as soon as privatisation came into effect, the number of disconnections increased. That is why a new code of practice for disconnections is being introduced for gas consumers. I am sure that the Minister does not want a repeat of that in the privatisation of electricity because it would be politically embarrassing for him and, of course, far worse for those who suffer disconnection.
§ Mr. Eric S. Heffer (Liverpool, Walton)Will the hon. Gentleman take note of the fact that there are just two hon. Members on the Government Benches? We are discussing disconnections and people who will suffer considerably as a result. Yet Conservative Members are so interested in the matter that they will simply come in to vote against the amendment. The general public should take note of that.
§ Mr. BruceI am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's intervention. Whey I saw the number of Members on the Conservative Benches I thought that I had come lucky in an unexpected raffle for an extra Adjournment debate.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy (Mr. Michael Spicer)Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that only three Back-Bench Labour Members are present? The hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr Heller) should not cast stones when he is sitting in a glasshouse himself.
§ Mr. BruceI think that I had better let that pass. I shall say simply that it would be helpful for the debate if more hon. Members were present. We are debating a serious and important issue which affects many people and causes them considerable concern.
We must avoid a situation in which new companies come into effect under the licensing procedures proposed in the Bill, but are not required to adopt a process of disconnection that automatically gives a better deal to the consumer than exists or has existed hitherto. The amendments seek to include specific measures in the Bill to ensure that whoever receives a licence is required to operate a code of practice that will minimise the incidence of disconnection.
4 pm
In that context the obvious factor to be considered is the extent to which lower income groups and poorer people are disadvantaged because they spend proportionately more of their income on electricity. Low-income pensioner households spend, on average, 30 per cent. more on electricity than average-income pensioner households. That makes electricity like an old-fashioned Giffen good. The 19th century example is the potato. As the price of potatoes went up, people bought more, because the potato was their staple diet. They had to ensure that they had an adequate supply, and it was other things such as bread and the luxury of meat that went by the board.
The same applies to electricity. People on low incomes facing increased electricity costs are forced to cut back on other commodities. They sometimes economise on heating, ca using great danger to their health and safety, and, regrettably, many of them die of hypothermia as a direct result. Some economise on food, which also 584 undermines their health, or on other near-essential commodities which are nevertheless not quite as necessary as heat and light.
§ Mr. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan)Does the hon. Gentleman agree that his arguments are particularly relevant to the north-east of Scotland— the area that he and I represent— where charges for heating are about 30 per cent. higher than they are in the south-east of England?
§ Mr. BruceThe hon. Gentleman has anticipated a point that I proposed to raise. He is absolutely right that, in areas such as the north of Scotland where winter temperatures are generally lower, although we have been luckier than usual this winter, people have to spend even more on heating than people in the milder south.
The problem is further aggravated by a number of measures introduced by the Government that squeeze people on low incomes. A direct consequence of the switch from the community programme to employment training has been a significant reduction in the number of home insulation schemes carried out by organisations under the neighbourhood energy action umbrella. SCARF—Save Cost and Reduce Fuel— an organisation in Aberdeen, which covers part of my constituency, is concerned about its ability to maintain a programme that is of benefit to people on low incomes and helps them to be warmer at lower cost. The reduction in such provision increases the burden.
The second factor that has to be taken into account is the introduction of the poll tax or community charge in Scotland this year. The poll tax falls proportionately more heavily on low-income families and will reduce their ability to pay for other essential services such as electricity. People on low incomes tend to depend more on electricity for their heating. Their houses tend to be less well insulated and they tend to be unable to take appropriate action to deal with the problem.
It is interesting, too, that the Government are about to launch a promotion campaign because of the relatively low take-up of family credit, which was designed to help low-income families. Many people have not taken up their entitlement, perhaps because of a lack of information and perhaps because of a reasonable feeling that if a household has wages coming in— particularly if there are two wage earners— it ought to be able to meet the essential bills. People do not like the idea of having to seek additional support and feel that wages ought to be paid at an economic level rather than being subsidised by the taxpayer. The very title "family credit" gives the impression that repayment is required, and that may deter people from taking up the benefit. Perhaps they are unable to service their existing debts and wisely do not wish to go further into debt. All those measures have increased the squeeze on low-income families at a time when they face rising costs.
An additional factor, touched on by the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond), is that in certain parts of the country heating costs are higher. Yet the heating allowances scheme has been abolished in favour of the much less generous incorporation into the normal benefit process and a severe weather payment which has not been invoked since its introduction because we have had a mild winter. No one has benefited from those arrangements.
585 The situation is serious. We must introduce measures that give people a fairer deal in relation to disconnection. The Government say, "We resent the implication that we are responsible for inflicting disconnections." Yet in a variety of ways the Government's policies are hitting low-income groups and making it harder for them to pay electricity bills. That makes it more likely that they will get into difficulty and, under the existing code of practice, increases the likelihood that they will be disconnected. We must make a stand and prevent that happening.
The final factor to be taken into account is that privatisation will result in higher electricity prices for the whole population, and especially for those on low incomes. Even the Government acknowledge that that will happen in the short run, and many of us believe that it will happen in the long run as well. Electricity prices have already been increased unnecessarily and unjustifiably. Again, the situation is worse in Scotland than in England and Wales. In Scotland, the increase in electricity prices has been higher than the average rate of inflation, with no justification, other than that the companies— now the boards— are preparing for the privatisation requirement. That will force up electricity prices in Scotland— from the lowest in the United Kingdom to the highest in the United Kingdom. Such burdens on lower income families will mean an increase in the risk of disconnection and the hardship associated with it.
The amendments represent essential improvements to the Bill to ensure a specific agreed workable means of preventing disconnection wherever possible. I have not suggested a more radical measure, such as that in operation in Wisconsin, where all electricity supplies are reconnected on 1 October regardless of the customer's outstanding debt because of the importance of giving people heat and light throughout the winter. There should be no disconnections during the winter. I have refrained from making such a suggestion because I felt that the Government might be inclined to resist it. Instead, I have tabled practical and reasonable amendments which propose a code of practice within the law to prevent disconnections.
Obviously, the best solution is the use of prepayment meters. They enable people to pay as they go and remove the uncertainty of credit. People can see how fast they are using electricity. Meters can be adjusted by agreement to take account of any previous debt. For many, meters represent the best way to pay, particularly now that new meters have been introduced to reduce the risk of people breaking in, forcing the mechanism and running away with the money—or, in the case referred to last week, the washers— that they may find in the meter. If a person is prepared to take a prepayment meter, and if it is reasonable to provide such a meter, if direct payment has been agreed— from the social security office or by standing Order—or if a person has agreed to pay a deposit, there should be no question of disconnection. If someone disconnected under the existing arrangements agrees to the proposals, he should automatically be reconnected immediately.
Our objective is to prevent disconnections, and that is why amendment No. 116 is so important. The argument is overwhelming. The increase in fuel poverty that the Government are imposing on people on low incomes is 586 intensifying and, as drafted, the Bill would increase the possibility of hardship. The amendment is reasonable, practical and workable, and I hope that the Minister will accept it.
§ Mr. Kevin Barron (Rother Valley)First, I should like to comment briefly on the absence of Conservative Members. The hon. Member for Gordon (Mr. Bruce) will remember our debate in Committee on fuel poverty. From the beginning of the sitting at 10.30 am until 7 pm every Tory Back Bencher who spoke defended the code of practice, only to be wiped off the floor when the Secretary of State spoke later. Perhaps Tory Members are not too keen on having a re-run of that in this debate.
The amendments pursue a number of the issues that we raised in Committee and seek to ease the burden of fuel debt for badly off consumers and to ensure that no one's fuel supply is disconnected because he or she is unable to meet the fuel bill.
People are fuel-poor for several reasons. Obviously, income plays a major part. People on low incomes have great difficulty in providing themselves and their families with enough heat to keep warm and enough power for adequate lighting and hot water. Unfortunately, those whose bills are the largest and the most difficult to meet tend to live in homes with no insulation, damp proofing, double glazing or central heating. In the long term, it will be only through a policy of bringing all homes up to insulation standards, as well as ensuring that everyone has an adequate income, that we will make inroads into solving the problems of fuel poverty.
It is important to stress that now, because, as a result of changes in employment regulations, the different funding of projects through the Manpower Services Commission and the changes made to employment training, unfortunately many schemes that had been useful in helping people who live in poorly insulated homes to fight fuel poverty have had to be stopped in the past six months.
However, at least at the moment we can ensure that people do not have to live without heat or power. Living like that is a miserable experience which causes great stress to individuals and families, as well as depriving them of warmth and light. I am sure that in this day and age and in this country, which is energy-rich in coal, oil and gas, there should be no need for people to suffer fuel poverty.
We are anxious to avoid the massive increases in disconnections that followed the privatisation of the gas industry. As the House knows, since that privatisation disconnections have risen by 30,000 per year.
In Committee, we were pleased that the Secretary of State finally agreed with us that the present voluntary code of practice, which had been defended by many of his hon. Friends, has not proved adequate and has not protected consumers who need protection. The Secretary of State told the Committee:
there are good grounds for moving to the system that Mr. McKinnon— the director of Ofgas—is recommending for gas …we shall add a similar clause to the licence. It will be a better arrangement."— [Official Report, Standing Committee E, 31 January 1989; c. 607–8.]It was on that basis that we withdrew all our amendments on fuel poverty to this section of schedule 6. The Secretary of State gave the Committee an assurance that the House would see the proposed clause. He said that he hoped that that could happen before reaching this stage of our proceedings on the Bill but, unfortunately, he has 587 notified us that that cannot happen because Mr. McKinnon is revising his proposals in the light of the consultations that he has held since the original publication of the modification for the licence.4.15 pm
The major weakness of the original proposals— I assume that the Secretary of State as well as Mr. McKinnon is considering this—was that the additional protection would be available only to those who made contact with British Gas. Advice agencies have expressed their worry that those who do not make contact— out of fear, because they are unaware of the need to do so, because of language or literacy problems or because they have no experience of dealing with bills— will fall into even greater debt and suffer disconnection. All hon. Members who have ever dealt personally with those who have been disconnected or who are in default with electricity boards will know that such people normally fall within the categories that I have outlined.
There has also been no clarification about with whom contact should be made or how, whether it should be in person, in writing, by telephone, to the accounts department or to a showroom. A customer may believe himself to have made contact, but that will not prove sufficient. For all those reasons, we would prefer that the additional protection that will be afforded customers will not be dependent on their making the contact. In any case, at least the "who" and the "how" should be defined and the administrative procedures explained.
The proposed modification still leaves the question of access to pre-payment meters rather vague. We were told by the Secretary of State that electricity consumers would have a new right to demand a pre-payment meter, but that appears to be only at the point of disconnection or in lieu of a deposit. It is absolutely right that pre-payment meters should be provided as an alternative to disconnection, but there is no reason why a consumer should have to reach that point before being able to make such a choice. Every consumer should have the right to choose to have supply through a pre-payment meter at any stage. Wider availability of such meters would help to prevent the build-up of debt. Problems arise when one cannot meet one's quarterly bill, and one way of avoiding that problem is to pay for one's electricity as one goes along, by means of a pre-payment meter.
We are pleased that the Government are at last making some moves on the issue of disconnections and are no longer simply asserting that the voluntary code is suifficient in either its content or application. However, it would be even better if a full and comprehensive code of practice were written into the Bill. We attempted to do that in Committee, but, of course, it was not accepted. Such a code of practice would make clear the rights and obligations of both consumers and suppliers and would enshrine the principle of a right to warmth and light. That is what we hoped would happen, but, unfortunately, the Government were not able to accept it. We hope that the measures that will be brought forward and written into the licence will achieve Mr. McKinnon's aspiration of making disconnections a thing of the past. We urge the Secretary of State to adopt our suggestions.
I do not know whether the hon. Member for Gordon will want to press his amendment to a vote. If he does, the official Opposition will support him.
588 Whether or not the Secretary of State meant to say what he did in Committee, we believe that he must take action so that even if a code is not included in the Bill, there will at least be a code in the licences to give direct specifications to the supply boards about how they should treat customers who have fuel debt and about the availability of pre-payment meters. Such meters should be available throughout the country, not just in some area or supply boards.
We hope that the Minister will show some good will and that that will happen. We said in Committee that we did not wish to divide the Committee, and we do not wish to divide the House on this issue. However, as Mr. McKinnon said of gas, we hope that electricity disconnections will become a thing of the past.
§ Mr. Michael SpicerThe hon. Member for Rother Valley (Mr. Barron) is right that pre-payment meters will not be available on demand except as a substitute for a demand of security. However, under clause 21 the director will have powers to arbitrate if he thinks that there is any unfairness in any dispute where there is demand but where the company does not wish to give pre-payment metering, if he thinks that pre-payment metering would help people.
In answering both the hon. Member for Rother Valley and the hon. Member for Gordon (Mr. Bruce), I shall speak only briefly now because we have already had lengthy discussions on this subject. The number of disconnections has been falling, by and large, throughout the country over a three-year period. Therefore, although I do not think that the hon. Member for Gordon was relating disconnections specifically to weather conditions, I should like to put on the record that I do not think that it is right to do that.
On the understandable question that the hon. Member for Gordon asked me at Question Time and to which he has again referred, we have not yet been able to bring forward the licence conditions that will apply to the problem that he has outlined. I confirm what my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State told the Committee; these codes will be the subject of licence conditions. There is no doubt about that. But, as the hon. Member has said, and as my right hon. Friend said in Committee, we want to make sure that they are absolutely on a par with the code that is currently under discussion between Mr. McKinnon and British Gas.
The problem that we face is that there has been a round of consultations between Mr. McKinnon and the industry, as a result of which he is making proposals further to strengthen the conditions. We do not want the conditions that we attach to licences for the electricity industry to be in any way weaker that those in respect of gas. The only issue at the moment is to make sure that the two sets of conditions are comparable—preferably indentical. The wait for the outcome of the gas discussions is all that is holding us up at the moment. That is why we have not been able to bring the conditions forward for this stage of the parliamentary deliberations. Certainly, we shall want to do so before the Bill receives Royal Assent. I hope that what I have said amounts to a substantive answer to the hon. Gentleman's legitimate concern about this matter.
Amendment No. 116 suggests that where there is some form of payment arrangement, that arrangement provides security. Manifestly it does not. It is not an alternative to prepayment as a form of security. Therefore we cannot accept amendment No 116. Nor, 589 I fear, can we accept No. 115, because the industry and the Government already accept the principle that if a payment arrangement allowing both the recovery of an outstanding debt and payment for future charges is entered into and is kept, disconnection should not be necessary. That is clearly set out in the industry's voluntary code of practice on the payment of bills. The public electricity suppliers will be required, as a condition of their licence to produce a code and to agree it with the director. Thus, I think that the spirit of amendment No. 115 is met.
In relation to amendment No. 152— indeed, this is implied in amendments No. 115— we cannot accept the idea that the existence of a pre-payment meter itself constitutes some sort of security that debt will be settled. Manifestly, that is not the case. The substance of amendment No. 152 was referred to in Committee. I think that it was I who pointed out that 15 working days are allowed for payment of bills and that this reflects existing practices within the industry. In England and Wales, some 166,000 consumers are billed monthly, so the 28-day condition is not appropriate for them.
The second part of the amendment leads me briefly to remind the House that, for the first time, the supplier will have to go through a formal procedure before he can disconnect a consumer. In any case, there can be no disconnection where there is a genuine dispute. In addition, under the licence, the public electricity supplier will be obliged to produce a code of practice on payment of bills, including arrangements, for people having difficulty meeting their bills. While I am unable, at the moment to give the details of the conditions, I can say that it is intended that a distinction shall be made between those who cannot pay their bills and those who will not pay their bills. That is a perfectly fair distinction to make.
I think that we are meeting what all sides of the House undoubtedly want, which is that pre-payment meters should be available as an alternative to security; that where people want a pre-payment meter, but are not offered one by the supplying company, the director shall arbitrate; and that there shall be written into the licences a code of practice that will ensure that all this is done fairly and in the best interests of consumers.
Given that that is the spirit behind the amendments, and behind the Labour party's pronouncements on this matter, I very much hope that the hon. Member for Gordon will not press the amendments.
§ Mr. Malcolm BruceI am grateful to the Minister for clarifying the position on the code of practice. It is a little disappointing, although I understand the reasons, that it is not possible to shed any more light on the nature of the code of practice that we discussed in Committe. The hon. Member for Rother Valley (Mr. Barron) has pointed out, quite rightly, that there was not much support from the Secretary of State's own side for his commitment to an improved code of practice. Possibly that is because he had not told his hon. Friends his view before he entered the debate at the end. There is a feeling that some Conservative Members are less than sympathetic to the need for this kind of code of practice. However, I accept that the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary are not in that category that they are determined that the agreement in respect of gas should be applied to electricity.
§ Mr. BarronWe should not jump to too many conclusions. The hon. Member for Gordon (Mr. Bruce) will recall that the Minister said earlier that there was no question but that this would be written into the licences. Well, it was not in the draft licences. We can only assume that at that time the Government were going to let the industry draw up its own supply codes. It is because of what happened in Committee that a supply code will be written into the draft licence.
§ Mr. BruceThe hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. It is very interesting that in Committee the Secretary of State was clearly somewhat stung by the attack— though perhaps that is an internal matter for those who were present. Perhaps he decided on the spot that the Opposition's arguments were correct. Perhaps he decided that the suggestion that there should be a worse code of practice for electricity consumers than for gas consumers was ludicrous and indefensible, and determined, at that point, to do something about it. I accept that he is still committed to that position, but he has not actually come up with the answer. Obviously, that makes the position a little difficult for us at this stage.
The Minister took issue with me on the question of security. I feel that the reference to security is a sufficient undertaking to the supplier. The amendment says:
'Security' means any arrangement in consequence of which a public electricity supplier may be assured of payment of money due to him and shall include a deposit …in favour of such supplier.It seems to me that that is a pretty clear definition of "security"— meaning that the supplier will get his money, and that there is an adequately agreed method: by paying a deposit up front, or by going for a meter, or by some mutually agreeable standing order arrangement, both sides having the right to appeal to the director.As the Minister will appreciate, I do not claim total credit for the amendment or its contents. It has been thought through, and I believe that it would write into the Bill a specific defence for those who face the possibility of disconnection. I should like to give the lie to, or lay to rest, any suggestion that I or my colleagues, or any Opposition Member, is interested in enabling people who can pay their electricity bills to get away with failing to do so. I believe that the wording of the amendment takes care of that. People in that category could be forced to pay a deposit, or to set up an unbreakable standing order, or to provide some other kind of security. But people who cannot pay would have the option of a meter or a direct payment, such as is provided by the fuel direct scheme, from social security. That seems to me to be a very considerable improvement on the present arrangement, and will ensure that the supplier gets his money— which I think is quite reasonable, even though suppliers' charges are too high — and that the customer is able to keep up with payments because they are geared in a way enabling him to pay as he goes along and to monitor both the cost and the level of consumption.
I hope that the Minister will accept that I am not being churlish when I say that I wish to divide the House. I believe that we do not have a firm enough position on the record. If the amendment were included, it would improve the Bill considerably. It would in no way be incompatible with the code of practice, but rather it would help to stiffen the contents of the code of practice that we have not yet seen. The issue is sufficiently important to divide the House.
§ Question put, That the amendment be made—
§ The House divided: Ayes 146, Noes 226.
593| Division No. 147] | [4.29 pm |
| AYES | |
| Abbott, Ms Diane | Holland, Stuart |
| Adams, Allen (Paisley N) | Home Robertson, John |
| Allen, Graham | Hood, Jimmy |
| Anderson, Donald | Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd) |
| Archer, Rt Hon Peter | Howells, Dr. Kim (Pontypridd) |
| Armstrong, Hilary | Hughes, John (Coventry NE) |
| Banks, Tony (Newham NW) | Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N) |
| Barnes, Harry (Derbyshire NE) | Hughes, Roy (Newport E) |
| Barnes, Mrs Rosie (Greenwich, | Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S) |
| Barron, Kevin | Hughes, Simon (Southwark) |
| Beckett, Margaret | Jones, Barry (Alyn & Deeside) |
| Beith, A. J. | Jones, leuan (Ynys Môn) |
| Benn, Rt Hon Tony | Jones, Martyn (Clwyd S W) |
| Bermingham, Gerald | Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald |
| Bidwell, Sydney | Lambie, David |
| Blair, Tony | Lamond, James |
| Boateng, Paul | Lestor, Joan (Eccles) |
| Bray, Dr Jeremy | Lofthouse, Geoffrey |
| Bruce, Malcolm (Gordon) | Loyden, Eddie |
| Buchan, Norman | McAllion, John |
| Buckley, George J. | McAvoy, Thomas |
| Caborn, Richard | Macdonald, Calum A. |
| Callaghan, Jim | McKay, Allen (Barnsley West) |
| Campbell-Savours, D. N. | McKelvey, William |
| Carlile, Alex (Mont'g) | Maclennan, Robert |
| Clark, Dr David (S Shields) | Madden, Max |
| Clelland, David | Mahon, Mrs Alice |
| Coleman Donald | Marek, Dr John |
| Cook, Robin (Livingston) | Marshall, David (Shettleston) |
| Corbett, Robin | Maxton, John |
| Corbyn, Jeremy | Meacher, Michael |
| Cox, Tom | Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley) |
| Crowther, Stan | Mitchell, Austin (G't Grimsby) |
| Cummings, John | Morgan, Rhodri |
| Cunliffe, Lawrence | Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe) |
| Cunningham, Dr John | Mowlam, Marjorie |
| Dalyell, Tam | Mullin, Chris |
| Dixon, Don | Murphy, Paul |
| Doran, Frank | O'Brien, William |
| Duffy, A. E. P. | O'Neill, Martin |
| Dunwoody, Hon Mrs Gwyneth | Orme, Rt Hon Stanley |
| Eadie, Alexander | Patchett, Terry |
| Eastham, Ken | Pendry, Tom |
| Evans, John (St Helens N) | Pike, Peter L. |
| Ewing, Harry (Falkirk E) | Powell, Ray (Ogmore) |
| Fatchett, Derek | Prescott, John |
| Faulds, Andrew | Quin, Ms Joyce |
| Field, Frank (Birkenhead) | Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn |
| Fisher, Mark | Richardson, Jo |
| Flannery, Martin | Roberts, Allan (Bootle) |
| Flynn, Paul | Robertson, George |
| Foot, Rt Hon Michael | Rogers, Allan |
| Foster, Derek | Rooker, Jeff |
| Foulkes, George | Ross, Ernie (Dundee W) |
| Fraser, John | Rowlands, Ted |
| Fyfe, Maria | Ruddock, Joan |
| Garrett, John (Norwich South) | Salmond, Alex |
| Garrett, Ted (Wallsend) | Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert |
| George, Bruce | Skinner, Dennis |
| Godman, Dr Norman A. | Smith, Andrew (Oxford E) |
| Golding, Mrs Llin | Smith, C. (lsl'ton & F'bury) |
| Gordon, Mildred | Smith, Rt Hon J. (Monk'ds E) |
| Gould, Bryan | Snape, Peter |
| Grant, Bernie (Tottenham) | Soley, Clive |
| Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S) | Stott, Roger |
| Griffiths, Win (Bridgend) | Taylor, Matthew (Truro) |
| Grocott, Bruce | Thompson, Jack (Wansbeck) |
| Hardy, Peter | Turner, Dennis |
| Harman, Ms Harriet | Wall, Pat |
| Haynes, Frank | Wareing, Robert N. |
| Heffer, Eric S. | Welsh, Michael (Doncaster N) |
| Henderson, Doug | Williams, Rt Hon Alan |
| Williams, Alan W. (Carm'then) | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Wise, Mrs Audrey | Mr. Archy Kirkwood and Mr. Menzies Campbell. |
| NOES | |
| Adley, Robert | Fry, Peter |
| Aitken, Jonathan | Gale, Roger |
| Alexander, Richard | Gardiner, George |
| Alison, Rt Hon Michael | Garel-Jones, Tristan |
| Allason, Rupert | Gill, Christopher |
| Amess, David | Glyn, Dr Alan |
| Amos, Alan | Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles |
| Arbuthnot, James | Gow, Ian |
| Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham) | Greenway, Harry (Ealing N) |
| Ashby, David | Gregory, Conal |
| Atkins, Robert | Griffiths, Sir Eldon (Bury St E') |
| Atkinson, David | Grist, Ian |
| Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley) | Ground, Patrick |
| Batiste, Spencer | Gummer, Rt Hon John Selwyn |
| Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke) | Hague, William |
| Benyon, W. | Hamilton, Hon Archie (Epsom) |
| Biffen, Rt Hon John | Hanley, Jeremy |
| Blackburn, Dr John G. | Harris, David |
| Bonsor, Sir Nicholas | Hayes, Jerry |
| Boscawen, Hon Robert | Hayhoe, Rt Hon Sir Barney |
| Boswell, Tim | Hayward, Robert |
| Bottomley, Peter | Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael |
| Bottomley, Mrs Virginia | Hill, James |
| Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich) | Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm) |
| Bowis, John | Holt, Richard |
| Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard | Hordern, Sir Peter |
| Brandon-Bravo, Martin | Howarth, Alan (Strat'd-on-A) |
| Brazier, Julian | Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd) |
| Bright, Graham | Howell, Ralph (North Norfolk) |
| Brooke, Rt Hon Peter | Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W) |
| Browne, John (Winchester) | Hunt, David (Wirral W) |
| Bruce, Ian (Dorset South) | Hunt, John (Ravensbourne) |
| Buchanan-Smith, Rt Hon Alick | Hunter, Andrew |
| Buck, Sir Antony | Hurd, Rt Hon Douglas |
| Budgen, Nicholas | Irvine, Michael |
| Burns, Simon | Irving, Charles |
| Burt, Alistair | Jack, Michael |
| Butcher, John | Janman, Tim |
| Butterfill, John | Jessel, Toby |
| Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln) | Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey |
| Carrington, Matthew | Jones, Robert B (Herts W) |
| Carttiss, Michael | Jopling, Rt Hon Michael |
| Chalker, Rt Hon Mrs Lynda | Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine |
| Channon, Rt Hon Paul | Key, Robert |
| Chapman, Sydney | King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield) |
| Chope, Christopher | Kirkhope, Timothy |
| Clark, Hon Alan (Plym'th S'n) | Knapman, Roger |
| Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S) | Knight, Greg (Derby North) |
| Conway, Derek | Lamont, Rt Hon Norman |
| Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest) | Lang, Ian |
| Coombs, Simon (Swindon) | Latham, Michael |
| Cope, Rt Hon John | Lawrence, Ivan |
| Couchman, James | Leigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh) |
| Cran, James | Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark |
| Critchley, Julian | Lester, Jim (Broxtowe) |
| Curry, David | Lightbown, David |
| Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g) | Lilley, Peter |
| Day, Stephen | Lloyd, Sir Ian (Havant) |
| Devlin, Tim | Lloyd, Peter (Fareham) |
| Dicks, Terry | Lord, Michael |
| Dorrell, Stephen | McCrindle, Robert |
| Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James | MacGregor, Rt Hon John |
| Durant, Tony | MacKay, Andrew (E Berkshire) |
| Eggar, Tim | Maclean, David |
| Emery, Sir Peter | McLoughlin, Patrick |
| Evennett, David | McNair-Wilson, Sir Michael |
| Fairbairn, Sir Nicholas | McNair-Wilson, P. (New Forest) |
| Fallon, Michael | Malins, Humfrey |
| Favell, Tony | Mans, Keith |
| Field, Barry (Isle of Wight) | Maples, John |
| Finsberg, Sir Geoffrey | Martin, David (Portsmouth S) |
| Fishburn, John Dudley | Mates, Michael |
| Fookes, Dame Janet | Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin |
| Forman, Nigel | Mayhew, Rt Hon Sir Patrick |
| Forsyth, Michael (Stirling) | Mellor, David |
| Meyer, Sir Anthony | Sayeed, Jonathan |
| Miller, Sir Hal | Scott, Nicholas |
| Mills, Iain | Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey) |
| Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling) | Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb') |
| Mitchell, Sir David | Shelton, Sir William |
| Montgomery, Sir Fergus | Shephard, Mrs G. (Norfolk SW) |
| Moore, Rt Hon John | Shepherd, Colin (Hereford) |
| Morris, M (N'hampton S) | Shersby, Michael |
| Morrison, Sir Charles | Sims, Roger |
| Morrison, Rt Hon P (Chester) | Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield) |
| Moss, Malcolm | Spicer, Sir Jim (Dorset W) |
| Moynihan, Hon Colin | Spicer, Michael (S Worcs) |
| Neale, Gerrard | Squire, Robin |
| Nelson, Anthony | Stanbrook, Ivor |
| Neubert, Michael | Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John |
| Newton, Rt Hon Tony | Steen, Anthony |
| Nicholls, Patrick | Stern, Michael |
| Onslow, Rt Hon Cranley | Stevens, Lewis |
| Page, Richard | Stewart, Andy (Sherwood) |
| Paice, James | Stradling Thomas, Sir John |
| Patnick, Irvine | Sumberg, David |
| Patten, Chris (Bath) | Summerson, Hugo |
| Patten, John (Oxford W) | Taylor, Ian (Esher) |
| Pawsey, James | Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman |
| Porter, Barry (Wirral S) | Thurnham, Peter |
| Portillo, Michael | Tredinnick, David |
| Powell, William (Corby) | Trotter, Neville |
| Price, Sir David | Wakeham, Rt Hon John |
| Raffan, Keith | Walden, George |
| Raison, Rt Hon Timothy | Walker, Bill (T'side North) |
| Rathbone, Tim | Wardle, Charles (Bexhill) |
| Redwood, John | Wheeler, John |
| Riddick, Graham | Widdecombe, Ann |
| Ridley, Rt Hon Nicholas | Yeo, Tim |
| Rossi, Sir Hugh | Younger, Rt Hon George |
| Rost, Peter | |
| Rowe, Andrew | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Rumbold, Mrs Angela | Mr. David Heathcoat-Amory and Mr. John Mark Taylor. |
| Ryder, Richard | |
| Sackville, Hon Tom | |
| Sainsbury, Hon Tim |
§ Question accordingly negatived.