`—After section 59(3) of the principal Act (Development orders) there is inserted—
(4) No development order may grant permission for the erection of a building for the purposes of agriculture.'."—[Mr. Win Griffiths.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.4.45 pm
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this it will be convenient to take new clause 18—Agricultural buildings ( No. 2 )—'Planning Permission shall be required for the erection of a building for the purposes of agriculture in specially designated conservation areas including national parks, areas of outstanding natural beauty, national nature reserves, sites of special scientific interest, heritage coastline, marine nature reserves, conservation areas and any other areas of special landscape value identified by local authorities.'.New clause 19—Planning control over agricultural and forestry roads'After section 59(3) of the principal Act (Development orders) there is inserted:(4) No development order shall grant permission for the formation of a private way for the purposes of agriculture or forestry.".'.
§ Mr. Griffiths
Quite a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since we last considered the Bill. I am a new Member of the House, having been elected at the previous general election—I had hoped that I would have been re-elected by now, but things have happened to put off the next general election. As a new Member, I was intrigued by the Government's failure on 16 May, the day of the Monmouth by-election, to move the business motion on the Order Paper to continue and complete business on the Bill on that day. I checked to find out how often that had happened in the past decade, and I could find only three other examples. On two of those occasions the business was considered the next day, as the previous evening's motion suggested, and on the other occasion the business was considered immediately after the weekend. This time, however, we have had a five-week wait.
In some ways we have benefited from having had to wait, because in the meantime the Government have made significant concessions. The most important of those was embodied in new clause 20, but there have also been some concessions in relation to the new clauses on agricultural and forestry buildings and roads—the subject of our new clauses.
We welcome the further Government concessions on special exemptions from full planning control of agricultural and forestry buildings and roads, which have long been the cause of one of the great anomalies in the planning system. Although I welcome the Government's attempt to take account of the anomaly, I must still say that it does not go far enough. We 314 believe that the only satisfactory solution is that embodied in our new clauses—that agricultural and forestry buildings and roads should be the subject of proper planning approvals.
The present situation is unsatisfactory. I shall cite two examples from my constituency to illustrate the problems. One example relates to my own village of Cefn Cribwr. The village runs for a mile or so along the top of a ridge, so that from almost every house in the village there is a magnificent view of the surrounding countryside. I am talking in this case about the view from the common, by the Wesleyan Methodist church, towards Margam park, the mountains and the Llynfi and Afan valleys. It is an absolutely magnificent view—one of the best that one could wish to find anywhere in the world.
Recently, a local farmer was able to put up a building for agricultural purposes which, to all intents and purposes, blocked the view enjoyed by a number of people. Right next to the site of that building there is a waterworks holding water for the village of Cefn Cribwr. The fanner could easily have placed the building below the waterworks without affecting the visual amenity enjoyed by anybody. The farmer claims that the planning authority said that the place that he had chosen was perfectly all right and that the building would offend nobody, although the planning authority vigorously denied that it had ever made such a recommendation in its discussions with him. Because the building was not subject to any proper planning procedure, the fanner was able to site it in such a way that it is severely detrimental to the visual amenity enjoyed by those living in Cefn Cribwr.
My second example concerns the laying of agricultural roads, sometimes to the anger of many in my constituency of Bridgend. I shall cite only one case although, on several occasions in the few years for which I have been the Member of Parliament for Bridgend, the actions of Mr. Boland, the estate manager in question, have caused consternation and anger to those living in and around the community of Penyfai. On just about every occasion, it has been found that he has acted within the law—or, rather, right up against the edge of the law—so that it has been very difficult for the planning authority to act. A matter of weeks ago, he built a new road. So large were the mounds of earth and so extensive were the works being undertaken that it looked as though a motorway was under construction. It is generally agreed that the agricultural purpose of the road is very difficult to define, although no doubt when pressed by the local planning authority, Ogwr borough council, Mr. Boland will produce an explanation of the road's agricultural purpose; indeed, he has probably already done so. Nobody in the community can see what that purpose is. If that road had been subject to proper planning procedures, there would have been an opportunity for its true use to be estimated and for the planning authority to make a real decision about whether it should be approved or not. As it is, the planning authority has no power to do that, and it would not have such power even under the Government's concessions.
I appeal to the Government to reconsider the concessions that they have made and consider some means —without the need to introduce primary legislation—by which the notification to local authorities of new buildings 315 or roads can be made the subject of a proper planning application if concern is expressed either by the planning officer or in observations made by local people.
I accept that the Government have made considerable concessions and that they have improved matters. Nevertheless, I look forward to hearing that they are prepared to go even further and accept the new clause.
§ Mr. Steen
The Minister will know that, in Committee, I expressed my concern about the way in which agricultural buildings under 5,000 sq ft could be put up without any planning consent being given. I emphasised the problems that I face in south Devon where a few farmers—I stress that it is only a few—have cocked a snook at the planning system and have put up agricultural buildings of 5,000 sq ft and under in very sensitive areas. One is on the heritage coastline, right on the edge of the cliff, and can be seen for miles around. Another was sited in the most sensitive of all areas, on the banks of the river Dart. It is a white concrete structure that can be seen for miles around and a long way up the river. The farmer in question said that he used it to store apples. Only two weekends ago a third building of just under 5,000 sq ft was put up at the 850 ft contour—the top of the hill is at 860 ft—just above Totnes Cross, a landmark that can be seen for miles around. We are not quite sure of the purpose for which the building is intended but, to many people for miles around, it is a tremendous eyesore. It does not do the countryside any good, it certainly does not do tourism any good and it ruins the quality and value of the landscape.
I should stress that the majority of farmers throughout the country and in south Devon are highly responsible, admirable people who have the highest regard for the environment and the countryside and would not dream of acting in that way. A few rogue farmers, however, have put the whole profession in a bad light.
The Government rightly decided that something would have to be done about the problem, even though a minority rather than a majority of farmers were involved. I am delighted that, since the Bill left the Standing Committee, the Government have answered at length a question tabled by my hon and learned Friend the Member for Burton (Mr. Lawrence) in connection with the problem. That answer appeared at column 487 of Hansard on 7 June.
The Government have advanced an ingenious idea. As I understand it—perhaps the Minister will confirm that my understanding is correct—the Government are saying that, whenever an agricultural building of whatever size is to be built, the farmer must go to the planning authority and explain that he intends to put up that building on a particular site. I am sure that the planning authorities would never have agreed to the siting of the buildings on the heritage coastline, on the banks of the Dart and at 850 ft above Totnes Cross. The planning authority must then suggest to the farmer an acceptable alternative site on his land. If the farmer is not prepared to accept the decision, he must go to appeal and have the planning inspector hear his case. I want to be clear whether that applies to all buildings, including buildings of 5,000 sq ft and under, and whether it is also relevant to areas of outstanding natural beauty. Am I right in thinking that the whole countryside will be covered by regulations stating that farmers can no longer put up barns without the planning authorities' agreement to the site?
316 New clause 18 was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, East (Mr. Dykes) who is unfortunately attending a Select Committee at present. He informs me that there are four farms in Harrow, East and he is concerned about the problem to which I have drawn the attention of the House. He has told me that, if I have it right, and no more farm buildings will spring up on sensitive sites, as they have in south Devon, he would not wish to press the new clause to a Division. I would not wish to press it either because I think that the Government have done a very good job. I merely want to make sure that I have understood the Government's position correctly and, more important, that my farmers understand it correctly. I look forward to hearing the Minister's confirmation that agricultural buildings under 5,000 sq ft will no longer be built in sensitive places if the planning authorities say that they may not.
§ 5 pm
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Tim Yeo)
These amendments seek to end the limited permitted development rights for constructing agricultural buildings and farm and forestry roads, so that specific planning permission would be required in every case. New clauses 14 and 18 would end such rights throughout England and Wales and resemble an amendment tabled by the Opposition in Committee —both then and now, they reflect the Opposition's traditional hostility to agriculture and a lack of sympathy for the difficult circumstances in which many farmers find themselves today.
I am not sure whether new clause 18 has been moved, but it has been referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for South Hams (Mr. Steen) and it aims to end permitted development rights for erecting agricultural buildings in national parks, areas of outstanding national beauty, sites of special scientific interest and in other specially designated conservation areas. That would mean that every small change in the line of a farm road and every farm building, however small, would require a full planning application to the local authority. That would be out of proportion, and has not been justified.
However, we take such issues seriously and recognise that there is concern in rural areas, which, as my hon. Friend the Member for South Hams said, is caused by insensitivity on the part of a small number of farmers, who unfortunately tar the agricultural community with their reputation because of the occasional erection of a farm building in an objectionable position.
I am glad to assure the hon. Member for Bridgend (Mr. Griffiths) that the two examples that he quoted in his constituency would be completely and satisfactorily dealt with by the changes that the Government propose to make. When we announced a significant extension of planning controls over agricultural buildings and farm and forestry roads last week, we dealt with precisely the sort of problems that he referred to.
For some time, there have been discretionary controls in national parks over permitted development. The White Paper last year proposed to extend the system to other parts of England and Wales as well as to introduce controls over small farm buildings. Following public consultation, we announced that we would not only implement those two proposals but we would go further. In national parks, farmers and foresters already have to 317 notify the planning authority of all new buildings that they propose to erect under permitted development rights. The authority may then choose to exercise control over the siting, design and external appearance of new buildings on visual amenity grounds. That system works well and we have decided to extend the arrangements to all parts of England and Wales, and to extend the scope of the control.
The new arrangements will cover not only new buildings, as we proposed in the consultation paper, but also significant extensions and alterations, and farm and forestry roads. The considerations to be taken into account by local planning authorities will not be limited to visual aspects, but will extend to the desirability of preserving ancient monuments and their settings, known archaeological sites, the settings of listed buildings, and sites of recognised nature conservation value, including SSSIs.
The new arrangements will be accompanied by guidance to local planning authorities, stressing the importance of reconciling environmental considerations with the operational requirements of farm and forestry business.
The second main strand of our announcement, which has not attracted much controversy in this short debate, is the extension of full development control to all farm holdings of less than five hectares.
§ Mr. Win Griffiths
I was anxious not to disturb the Minister in the early part of his speech, but I wish to ask him about one aspect of the notification procedure. If there were no agreement between the developer—the farmer—and the planning authority about the siting of a building or road, would the developer have to accept the local authority's point of view? Also, is there any scope for the public to be involved in the procedure, as is the case in a normal planning application?
§ Mr. Yeo
It is not quite a normal planning application, but the farmer will have to accept the view of the local planning authority. If he cannot reach agreement about where a building should be sited through negotiation and discussion with the authority, he will have to take the matter to the Department of the Environment, to appeal. In that case, he may be able to secure his building.
These proposals will give the local authority adequate controls to prevent farm buildings from being constructed in places which are considered to be objectionable or offensive for any of the reasons that I have given.
Experience in the national parks shows that it is usually possible to reach agreement. Common sense will prevail in the vast majority of cases, and I have every reason to believe that that will turn out to be the case. In the majority of the examples that hon. Members come across, a small alteration in the position or the design of a building will remove most of the objections to it.
I hope that that also deals with the concerns expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for South Hams. Any farm building and some extensions will now be covered by these new proposals. Therefore, a farmer who intends to undertake such development will effectively be brought under control as regards the position and design of the buildings.
§ Mr. John Home Robertson (East Lothian)
I apologise for missing the earlier part of the debate.
The Minister is referring to the effect of the new legislation in England and Wales. Can he confirm that similar changes will apply in Scotland, since his hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland is sitting beside him?
§ Mr. Yeo
As the hon. Gentleman recognises, we are the listening Government. The paper invited views on the position throughout Scotland. Responses are still being considered and the Scottish Office is unable to announce its conclusions yet. However, I know that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary will have noted the matters that have been raised from both sides of the House in this debate and I hope that they will be reflected in the decision that his Department reaches in due course.
These measures will provide more effective control over development of all kinds associated with agricultural holdings. They will produce substantial environmental benefits and will ensure that the rural economy can continue to prosper and to make its own contribution to the quality of the environment, while controlling those effects of agricultural and forestry development that are potentially damaging to that environment. They represent a significant extension of local authority controls over agriculture and forestry, and we look to local authorities to operate them sensibly and efficiently. We will monitor the operation of the new system carefully. We intend to review the position in three years, with a view to making any further modifications shown to be necessary, either by increasing or by reducing control.
§ Mr. Yeo
We shall advise local authorities about the new arrangements with a planning policy guidance note, which will not only set out exactly what is required, but will offer some help as to how the rules are to be interpreted.
In the light of my remarks and due to the fact that the proposals will be subject to review in three years' time, I hope that the hon. Member for Bridgend will decide to withdraw the new clause.
§ Mr. Mark Wolfson (Sevenoaks)
I thoroughly welcome the statement that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary made. The Government have struck an entirely sensible balance between giving proper importance to environmental considerations—in line with their policy on the environment—and commitment to preserving a balanced way in the countryside. They have been fully aware of the pressures on farmers and the need not to make constraints upon them too onerous. The ball is now in the farmers' court; it is up to them to come up with a sensible proposed siting and to discuss it with the local authorities. If it is not found to be suitable at that stage farmers will have to be flexible when finding a proper balanced solution, thus avoiding the need to go to appeal. That view will be 319 welcomed on both sides of the House, especially by hon. Members who represent shire counties. It is a major step forward and is most welcome.
§ Mr. Home Robertson
Again I apologise for the fact that I was not present for the earlier part of the debate. This is an important issue. I represent a largely rural constituency. I have always thought it absurd that householders require planning permission for even the most minor alterations to their houses—a dormer window or a porch—whereas farmers are able to erect very large and sometimes unsightly buildings without needing anyone's consent.
I refer briefly in passing to a problem that afflicts my constituency. Developers are acquiring whole farms and, in effect, asset stripping them by turning rows of cottages, or old farm buildings, into houses because they have a fast track to getting planning permission for that purpose. It is a very profitable exercise. There is a market for such properties within commuting distance of Edinburgh. However, it is undermining the rural economy and destroying long-established farming units. There is a need for more effective control over that change of use of farming units. That point ought to be taken into account in any Scottish Office review into the planning procedures that affect such buildings.
§ Mr. Win Griffiths
As I said in my opening speech, I welcome the Government's concessions. They represent an improvement. Nevertheless, there are two matters that still worry me and, I know, very many other people.
First, the Minister made glowing references to the experience of the national parks. When national park officers were consulted, seven out of nine of the national park authorities said that they wanted proper planning controls. However well the Government may think the system is working, there is an element of disquiet. The vast majority of national park authorities would like proper planning permission to prevail.
§ Mr. Yeo
I acknowledge that the majority of national park officers have stated their preference for full planning controls, but I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will also acknowledge that they have said that they feel that the notification system now in operation provides a rapid, relatively cheap and non-controversial method of control over the visual impact of developments.
§ Mr. Griffiths
I readily acknowledge that that has been said, but it has to be placed in the context of their preference for full planning permission to prevail.
As for the negotiation procedures, it is generally reckoned that the planning permission process need be no longer than the average time taken in private negotiations. As we believe that proper planning control is needed, and also an opportunity for public participation when particularly controversial proposals are notified to the local planning authority, we should like the will of the House to be tested in a Division.
§ Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 164, Noes 299.322
|Division No. 180]||[5.12 pm|
|Abbott, Ms Diane||Anderson, Donald|
|Adams, Mrs Irene (Paisley, N.)||Archer, Rt Hon Peter|
|Allen, Graham||Ashton, Joe|
|Alton, David||Barnes, Harry (Derbyshire NE)|
|Barron, Kevin||Livingstone, Ken|
|Battle, John||Lofthouse, Geoffrey|
|Beckett, Margaret||Loyden, Eddie|
|Bell, Stuart||McAllion, John|
|Benn, Rt Hon Tony||McAvoy, Thomas|
|Blair, Tony||Macdonald, Calum A.|
|Blunkett, David||McFall, John|
|Boyes, Roland||McKelvey, William|
|Brown, Gordon (D'mline E)||McMaster, Gordon|
|Brown, Nicholas (Newcastle E)||Madden, Max|
|Brown, Ron (Edinburgh Leith)||Mahon, Mrs Alice|
|Buckley, George J.||Marek, Dr John|
|Caborn, Richard||Marshall, David (Shettleston)|
|Callaghan, Jim||Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)|
|Campbell, Ron (Blyth Valley)||Martin, Michael J. (Springburn)|
|Campbell-Savours, D. N.||Martlew, Eric|
|Cartwright, John||Maxton, John|
|Clark, Dr David (S Shields)||Meacrter, Michael|
|Clarke, Tom (Monklands W)||Meale, Alan|
|Clwyd, Mrs Ann||Michael, Alun|
|Cohen, Harry||Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley)|
|Cook, Frank (Stockton N)||Moonie, Dr Lewis|
|Corbett, Robin||Morgan, Rhodri|
|Corbyn, Jeremy||Morley, Elliot|
|Cousins, Jim||Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)|
|Cox, Tom||Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon)|
|Crowther, Stan||Mullin, Chris|
|Cryer, Bob||Murphy, Paul|
|Dalyell, Tarn||Nellist, Dave|
|Darling, Alistair||Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon|
|Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (Llanelli)||O'Neill, Martin|
|Davis, Terry (B'ham Hodge H'l)||Orme, Rt Hon Stanley|
|Dewar, Donald||Patchett, Terry|
|Dixon, Don||Pendry, Tom|
|Dobson, Frank||Pike, Peter L.|
|Duffy, Sir A. E. P.||Powell, Ray (Ogmore)|
|Dunwoody, Hon Mrs Gwyneth||Prescott, John|
|Eadie, Alexander||Primarolo, Dawn|
|Edwards, Huw||Quin, Ms Joyce|
|Ewing, Harry (Falkirk E)||Radice, Giles|
|Faulds, Andrew||Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn|
|Field, Frank (Birkenhead)||Reid, Dr John|
|Fields, Terry (L'pool B G'n)||Richardson, Jo|
|Fisher, Mark||Robertson, George|
|Flynn, Paul||Robinson, Geoffrey|
|Foot, Rt Hon Michael||Rogers, Allan|
|Foster, Derek||Rooker, Jeff|
|Foulkes, George||Rooney, Terence|
|Fyfe, Maria||Rowlands, Ted|
|Galbraith, Sam||Salmond, Alex|
|Garrett, John (Norwich South)||Sedgemore, Brian|
|Garrett, Ted (Wallsend)||Sheerman, Barry|
|George, Bruce||Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert|
|Godman, Dr Norman A.||Shore, Rt Hon Peter|
|Golding, Mrs Llin||Short, Clare|
|Gordon, Mildred||Skinner, Dennis|
|Gould, Bryan||Smith, Andrew (Oxford E)|
|Graham, Thomas||Smith, Rt Hon J. (Monk'ds E)|
|Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)||Smith, J. P. (Vale of Glam)|
|Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy||Snape, Peter|
|Haynes, Frank||Soley, Clive|
|Heal, Mrs Sylvia||Spearing, Nigel|
|Hinchliffe, David||Strang, Gavin|
|Hoey, Ms Kate (Vauxhall)||Straw, Jack|
|Hogg, N. (C'nauld & Kilsyth)||Taylor, Mrs Ann (Dewsbury)|
|Home Robertson, John||Turner, Dennis|
|Hood, Jimmy||Wareing, Robert N.|
|Hoyle, Doug||Watson, Mike (Glasgow, C)|
|Hughes, John (Coventry NE)||Welsh, Michael (Doncaster N)|
|Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)||Williams, Rt Hon Alan|
|Hughes, Roy (Newport E)||Wilson, Brian|
|Illsley, Eric||Winnick, David|
|Janner, Greville||Wise, Mrs Audrey|
|Jones, Barry (Alyn & Deeslde)||Worth ington, Tony|
|Jones, Ieuan (Ynys Môn)||Wray, Jimmy|
|Jones, Martyn (Clwyd S W)||Young, David (Bolton SE)|
|Kinnock, Rt Hon Neil|
|Lamond, James||Tellers for the Ayes:|
|Leighton, Ron||Mr. Ken Eastham and|
|Lewis, Terry||Mr. Jimmy Dunnachie.|
|Alexander, Richard||Dover, Den|
|Alison, Rt Hon Michael||Dunn, Bob|
|Allason, Rupert||Durant, Sir Anthony|
|Amess, David||Dykes, Hugh|
|Arbuthnot, James||Eggar, Tim|
|Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)||Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)|
|Ashby, David||Evennett, David|
|Ashdown, Rt Hon Paddy||Fairbairn, Sir Nicholas|
|Aspinwall, Jack||Favell, Tony|
|Atkins, Robert||Fearn, Ronald|
|Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)||Fenner, Dame Peggy|
|Baldry, Tony||Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)|
|Barnes, Mrs Rosie (Greenwich)||Finsberg, Sir Geoffrey|
|Beaumont-Dark, Anthony||Fishburn, John Dudley|
|Beith, A. J.||Fookes, Dame Janet|
|Bellingham, Henry||Forman, Nigel|
|Bellotti, David||Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)|
|Bendall, Vivian||Fowler, Rt Hon Sir Norman|
|Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)||Franks, Cecil|
|Benyon, W.||Freeman, Roger|
|Bevan, David Gilroy||French, Douglas|
|Biffen, Rt Hon John||Fry, Peter|
|Blackburn, Dr John G.||Gale, Roger|
|Blaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter||Gardiner, Sir George|
|Body, Sir Richard||Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian|
|Bonsor, Sir Nicholas||Glyn, Dr Sir Alan|
|Boswell, Tim||Goodhart, Sir Philip|
|Bottomley, Peter||Goodlad, Alastair|
|Bottomley, Mrs Virginia||Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles|
|Bowden, A. (Brighton K'pto'n)||Gorman, Mrs Teresa|
|Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)||Gorst, John|
|Bowis, John||Grant, Sir Anthony (CambsSW)|
|Boyson, Rt Hon Dr Sir Rhodes||Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)|
|Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard||Greenway, John (Ryedale)|
|Brandon-Bravo, Martin||Gregory, Conal|
|Brazier, Julian||Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)|
|Bright, Graham||Grist, Ian|
|Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)||Ground, Patrick|
|Browne, John (Winchester)||Grylls, Michael|
|Bruce, Ian (Dorset South)||Hague, William|
|Bruce, Malcolm (Gordon)||Hamilton, Rt Hon Archie|
|Buchanan-Smith, Rt Hon Alick||(Epsom)|
|Buck, Sir Antony||Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)|
|Budgen, Nicholas||Hampson, Dr Keith|
|Burns, Simon||Hannam, John|
|Burt, Alistair||Hargreaves, A. (B'ham H'll Gr')|
|Butler, Chris||Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndburn)|
|Butterfill, John||Harris, David|
|Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)||Haselhurst, Alan|
|Carlisle, John, (Luton N)||Hawkins, Christopher|
|Carr, Michael||Hayes, Jerry|
|Carrington, Matthew||Hayhoe, Rt Hon Sir Barney|
|Carttiss, Michael||Hayward, Robert|
|Cash, William||Heathcoat-Amory, David|
|Chalker, Rt Hon Mrs Lynda||Hicks, Mrs Maureen (Wolv' NE)|
|Channon, Rt Hon Paul||Hicks, Robert (Cornwall SE)|
|Chapman, Sydney||Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.|
|Chope, Christopher||Hill, James|
|Churchill, Mr||Holt, Richard|
|Clark, Rt Hon Alan (Plymouth)||Hordern, Sir Peter|
|Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)||Howarth, Alan (Strat'd-on-A)|
|Clark, Rt Hon Sir William||Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd)|
|Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)||Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey|
|Colvin, Michael||Howell, Ralph (North Norfolk)|
|Conway, Derek||Howells, Geraint|
|Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)||Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)|
|Coombs, Simon (Swindon)||Hunt, Rt Hon David|
|Couchman, James||Hunt, Sir John (Ravensbourne)|
|Cran, James||Irvine, Michael|
|Currie, Mrs Edwina||Irving, Sir Charles|
|Curry, David||Jack, Michael|
|Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)||Jackson, Robert|
|Davis, David (Boothferry)||Janman, Tim|
|Day, Stephen||Jessel, Toby|
|Devlin, Tim||Johnston, Sir Russell|
|Dickens, Geoffrey||Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)|
|Dicks, Terry||Jones, Robert B (Herts W)|
|Dorrell, Stephen||Jopling, Rt Hon Michael|
|Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James||Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine|
|Kennedy, Charles||Ridsdale, Sir Julian|
|Key, Robert||Rifkind, Rt Hon Malcolm|
|Kilfedder, James||Roberts, Rt Hon Sir Wyn|
|King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield)||Roe, Mrs Marion|
|King, Rt Hon Tom (Bridgwater)||Ross, William (Londonderry E)|
|Kirkhope, Timothy||Rossi, Sir Hugh|
|Kirkwood, Archy||Rost, Peter|
|Knapman, Roger||Rowe, Andrew|
|Knight, Greg (Derby North)||Ryder, Rt Hon Richard|
|Knight, Dame Jill (Edgbaston)||Sayeed, Jonathan|
|Knowles, Michael||Shaw, David (Dover)|
|Lang, Rt Hon Ian||Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')|
|Latham, Michael||Shelton, Sir William|
|Lawrence, Ivan||Shephard, Mrs G. (Norfolk SW)|
|Lee, John (Pendle)||Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)|
|Lester, Jim (Broxtowe)||Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)|
|Lightbown, David||Sims, Roger|
|Lilley, Rt Hon Peter||Skeet, Sir Trevor|
|Livsey, Richard||Speed, Keith|
|Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)||Speller, Tony|
|Lord, Michael||Spicer, Sir Jim (Dorset W)|
|Luce, Rt Hon Sir Richard||Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)|
|McCrindle, Sir Robert||Squire, Robin|
|MacKay, Andrew (E Berkshire)||Stanbrook, Ivor|
|Maclean, David||Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John|
|McLoughlin, Patrick||Steel, Rt Hon Sir David|
|McNair-Wilson, Sir Michael||Steen, Anthony|
|McNair-Wilson, Sir Patrick||Stern, Michael|
|Madel, David||Stevens, Lewis|
|Malins, Humfrey||Stewart, Allan (Eastwood)|
|Mans, Keith||Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)|
|Maples, John||Stewart, Rt Hon Sir Ian|
|Marlow, Tony||Stokes, Sir John|
|Marshall, John (Hendon S)||Summerson, Hugo|
|Martin, David (Portsmouth S)||Tapsell, Sir Peter|
|Maude, Hon Francis||Taylor, Ian (Esher)|
|Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin||Taylor, Sir Teddy|
|Mellor, Rt Hon David||Temple-Morris, Peter|
|Meyer, Sir Anthony||Thompson, D. (Calder Valley)|
|Michie, Mrs Ray (Arg'l & Bute)||Thorne, Neil|
|Mills, Iain||Thornton, Malcolm|
|Miscampbell, Norman||Thurnham, Peter|
|Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)||Townsend, Cyril D. (B'heath)|
|Mitchell, Sir David||Tredinnick, David|
|Moate, Roger||Trotter, Neville|
|Monro, Sir Hector||Twinn, Dr Ian|
|Montgomery, Sir Fergus||Viggers, Peter|
|Morris, M (N'hampton S)||Waldegrave, Rt Hon William|
|Morrison, Sir Charles||Walden, George|
|Moss, Malcolm||Walker, Bill (T'side North)|
|Moynihan, Hon Colin||Wallace, James|
|Mudd, David||Waller, Gary|
|Needham, Richard||Walters, Sir Dennis|
|Neubert, Sir Michael||Ward, John|
|Newton, Rt Hon Tony||Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)|
|Nicholls, Patrick||Watts, John|
|Nicholson, David (Taunton)||Wells, Bowen|
|Nicholson, Emma (Devon West)||Wheeler, Sir John|
|Norris, Steve||Whitney, Ray|
|Onslow, Rt Hon Cranley||Widdecombe, Ann|
|Paice, James||Wigley, Dafydd|
|Patnick, Irvine||Wilkinson, John|
|Patten, Rt Hon John||Wilshire, David|
|Pawsey, James||Winterton, Nicholas|
|Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth||Wolfson, Mark|
|Porter, Barry (Wirral S)||Wood, Timothy|
|Porter, David (Waveney)||Woodcock, Dr. Mike|
|Portillo, Michael||Yeo, Tim|
|Powell, William (Corby)||Young, Sir George (Acton)|
|Price, Sir David|
|Rathbone, Tim||Tellers for the Noes:|
|Rhodes James, Sir Robert||Mr. John M. Taylor and|
|Riddick, Graham||Mr. Tom Sackville.|
§ Question accordingly negatived.