- '.—(1) In section 5 of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 (matters subject to investigation) the following subsection shall be added at the end—
§
(8) For the purposes of this section, administrative functions exercisable by—
- (a) any Scheme manager appointed by the Secretary of State under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1995;
- (b) any person appointed by the Scheme Manager or the Secretary of State under section 3(4) of that Act; and
- (c) any person appointed by the Secretary of State under section 5(3)(c) of that Act,
shall be taken to be administrative functions of the Home Office."
- (2) In Schedule 3 to that Act (matters not subject to investigation), the following paragraph shall be inserted after paragraph 6B— "6C Action taken by—
- (a) a Scheme manager appointed by the Secretary of State under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1995 or any person appointed under section 3(4) of that Act, so far as that action constitutes a decision taken in respect of a claim for compensation; and
- (b) action taken by any person appointed under section 5(3)(c) of that Act, so far as that action is taken at the direction, or on the authority (whether express or implied), of an adjudicator appointed under section 5 of that Act.".'.—[Mr. Michael.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
§ Mr. MichaelI beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
New clause 2 seeks to establish something extremely important—accountability and proper scrutiny for the administration of the criminal injuries compensation scheme. The Bill seems to be specifically designed to exclude from the jurisdiction of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, the ombudsman, the actions of the administrative staff involved in running the scheme.
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, East (Mrs. Prentice), who first raised the issue in Committee and has brought to the attention of many of us who were concerned about accountability and transparency under the new scheme the importance of ensuring that the ombudsman's jurisdiction does run.
In Committee, we debated the provision which states that those appointed for the purpose of administering the provisions of the scheme which relate to the appeal system should
not be regarded as having been appointed to exercise functions ofor on behalf ofthe Secretary of State".The Opposition said that it seemed likely that that exclusion would be dangerous, and would go way beyond the Minister's intentions. The Minister said that his only intention in those words was to avoid interference by Ministers in the operation of the scheme with regard to individual cases.It is right that Ministers should not interfere in individual cases, and that an assessment of the circumstances of a case should be made by those dealing with it administratively and by adjudicators dealing with appeals without interference from the Minister. But, as we said in Committee, why was that form of words used? Why not use a form of words that has been tried and tested? The Minister was unable to give any justification, but he said that that was the limit of his intention.
When the Bill is examined more closely, it is seen that the words have the effect, whether intended or otherwise, of excluding the administration of the scheme from the jurisdiction of the parliamentary ombudsman. In Committee, the Minister gave no suggestion that that was his intention. I am sure that he would have explained to us any such intention. Therefore, I am not suggesting that he, individually and personally, intended the words to 1098 have the effect that I suggest they will have. But unless new clause 2 or something similar is included in the Bill, the operation of the scheme will be excluded from the ombudsman's scrutiny.
Therefore, I urge the Minister to accept the new clause. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, East also wishes to refer to the important arguments in support of the new clause.
§ Mrs. Bridget Prentice (Lewisham, East)I support new clause 2, which extends the powers of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration to this area of government. As a member of the Select Committee on the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, I am only too well aware of the extensive work done by the ombudsman and his team. I think that I speak on behalf of the Committee when I say that we have a most outstanding ombudsman in Mr. William Reid, and we should recognise him as such.
Last year, when the Select Committee investigated the powers, work and jurisdiction of the ombudsman, we said in our report that one of the indications of the success of that office was the fact that further ombudsmen have been established to bring the advantages of an independent and impartial investigator of complaints into other areas of public life. We went on to say that an added testimony to the office's achievements has been the gradual extension of the ombudsman's jurisdiction to more branches of the Executive.
The Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 is a case in point—the administrative actions of court and tribunal staff appointed by the Lord Chancellor now come within the ombudsman's jurisdiction. Only last year, the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Malone), who is now the Minister for Health, successfully piloted, with all-party support, a private Member's Bill that extended the ombudsman's jurisdiction to other tribunals.
§ 4.15 pm
It is important to state clearly what the ombudsman's role is. He investigates complaints from people who contend that they have prima facie evidence of maladministration leading to hardship or injustice. Our system still has what is called the MPs' filter; in other words, such complaints can be made only through Members of Parliament.
Another of our recommendations was that the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 should be amended to specify exclusions rather than inclusions to the commissioner's jurisdiction. In the Government's reply to our report, it is fair to say that they were not in principle opposed to that recommendation, but were concerned about whether primary legislation would be necessary to achieve it. Had that proposal been implemented, there would be no need for new clause 2.
On that basis, I cannot understand how the Government could not support this change to the 1967 Act, so that the Government's essential support for the principle would be established while we awaited the appropriate primary legislation.
I shall discuss the effects of the new clause on criminal injury compensation. The legislation, as my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Michael) pointed out, has many flaws, but we should ensure that, when things go wrong and there is maladministration, there is a well-established system to deal with it.
1099 Let me give an example. If I had been injured and made a claim under the new scheme, the scheme manager might say that I had no claim. I may have been unco-operative with the police or sustained the injury in a way that was not a direct result of criminal activity. Once the scheme manager has made that assessment and denied me the claim, I have the right to appeal. That is fine. If the appeals board examines the claim carefully and decides that the scheme manager was correct in his or her assessment, so be it: I would have exhausted all proper means at my disposal and would have to accept that conclusion.
However, what happens if the scheme manager loses the papers pertaining to my case or there are unreasonable delays in dealing with it, with the result that I subsequently lose financially? For example, newsagents who are attacked might have to employ someone to look after their businesses while they seek compensation. In such a case, the newsagent may well receive compensation eventually, but what redress does he have for the poor administration? Even if he were not to get compensation in the end, should he not have some recourse for the way in which the case was handled?
Constituents do not take cases to the ombudsman because they think that they are going to become millionaires overnight; far from it. Very often, they simply want an apology for the way in which their cases were handled and an assurance that changes will be made so that other people do not have to suffer in a similar way.
I began by commenting on the extension of the ombudsman's jurisdiction and the success of that office in seeking redress for injustice. I mentioned the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, on which new clause 2 is based. Our concern is that the Bill as it stands appears deliberately to take the staff who administer the scheme outside the jurisdiction of the ombudsman. That cannot be right, and it flies in the face of everything that the Government have said about open government. It seems to be contrary to the position they took when they supported the hon. Member for Winchester's Bill last year.
If the Minister of State does not feel able to accept the new clause, he has to answer this question: to whom are the staff of the scheme answerable for any act of maladministration leading to injustice? I remind him, as I did in Committee, that the explanatory and financial memorandum to the Bill refers to these staff as civil servants, so they ought to be responsible to someone.
We need to be clear that, in the interests of justice for the individual and good government for all, any maladministration will be investigated independently by the one person in whom Parliament has vested such responsibility—the ombudsman. For that reason, I commend the new clause to the House.
§ Mr. MacleanI can well understand the intention behind the new clause. It no doubt seeks to achieve high standards in the administration of the new scheme by making the administrative actions—actions other than the actual determination of awards, for which other provision will be made in the scheme—of those running it subject to the jurisdiction of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, more commonly known as the ombudsman.
1100 I make it quite clear that it is our firm intention that the new scheme should be run as effectively and efficiently as possible, and mechanisms will be built in to facilitate that. For example, the authority will be required to set standards of performance and targets, and will have to report on how it has measured up to them in its annual report. There will also be a fully developed and effective complaints procedure, enabling those who feel that their cases have not been well handled to make a formal complaint in the sure expectation that it will be speedily and properly considered, and that, where appropriate, redress will be made.
I accept, however, that there may be an argument for saying that such provisions do not go far enough, and that applicants who believe that their case has been subject to maladministration should have some means of seeking external reassurance. That is, of course, the role of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration in other contexts, and hon. Members have therefore, reasonably enough, looked to the ombudsman in this instance.
The fact is, however, that the administration of the scheme does not currently fall within the jurisdiction of the ombudsman. To give him such jurisdiction would therefore be a significant step, and one that should not be taken without prior discussion with him and other interested parties.
§ Mrs. Bridget PrenticeI am grateful to the Minister for allowing me to intervene on the issue of discussions with the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration. The commissioner raised the matter when he saw the Bill in draft form, because he was extremely concerned about the fact that he will not have jurisdiction in this sphere.
§ Mr. MacleanI am well aware of that. I was merely suggesting that, before we lobbed all sorts of things at the commissioner, we would need to have detailed discussions to work out the whys and wherefores and where the boundaries are. If the hon. Lady will permit me to continue, she may not be disappointed by what I have to say.
We would also need to consider carefully with the commissioner the resource and other implications of such a change, and to think very carefully about what might be, and what might not be, within his remit. I am sure that we are all aware of constituents who complain persistently, and perhaps unreasonably, and who demand referral of their case to the ombudsman, no matter how carefully their complaint or grievance—whether real or imaginary—has previously been handled, and no matter how many other appeal tribunals they have been through.
We must not lose sight of the fact that about one third of the 60,000 or 70,000 people who apply for compensation each year are, quite properly, turned down on grounds of eligibility, because they provoked the assault or for some other good reason. Inevitably, a number of those claimants will feel aggrieved, even after they have exhausted the scheme's extensive appeals process. If they then feel that they can try yet another tack—perhaps complaining to their Member of Parliament and, through their Member of Parliament, to the ombudsman that their case was rejected, not for perfectly proper reasons but because of some alleged maladministration—they may well do so. That could clog the system with bogus claims, which would create a substantial extra burden, first, for the ombudsman himself, 1101 and secondly, for the scheme's administrators, who would have to demonstrate that the real issue was one not of maladministration but of technical eligibility.
Thus, while on the one hand, I can see a need for workable and transparent checks and balances, I can also see a potential danger that such mechanisms—unless they were carefully defined—could be open to abuse. That would create a lot of nugatory work for everyone. That is why I say that we must think carefully about it and consider all the implications.
None the less, I can assure the House that, having listened to the arguments put forward and having heard other views, including those of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, we have decided that we must consider those views carefully and discuss them with him and others to see if that is a sensible route down which we should go.
In the meantime, it may not surprise the Opposition when I say that I cannot accept the technical terms of the amendment, which is technically flawed. That is not an accusation aimed at the Opposition. The hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Michael) will rightly say that he does not have the resources and facilities that I have to ensure that amendments are legally and technically correct. I shall not go into the reasons why it is technically flawed, but I repeat my assurance to the House that we shall consider it carefully.
There may be merit in considering the parts of the scheme that in other Departments would come within the scope of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration to find out whether it would be possible to draw clear boundaries between matters that are the responsibility of the Secretary of State—the overall administration of the scheme, for example—and those that are not, and how one could clearly ring-fence other matters, such as decisions on individual claims, in which the Secretary of State would not be involved.
I hope that, on the basis that we shall carefully consider the idea with a positive attitude, the hon. Members for Lewisham, East (Mrs. Prentice) and for Cardiff, South and Penarth will feel reassured and will not wish to press the new clause.
§ Mr. MichaelOf course I am pleased that the Minister has accepted that what we seek to do in the new clause is right. I am pleased that he has promised to consider it. But that does not go far enough. He has not promised to accept the principle that the ombudsman should have jurisdiction over the criminal injuries compensation scheme, or the necessity of building it into the Bill.
The Minister says that our new clause is flawed. That is curious, because we used the wording of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. If the new clause is deficient, there must be deficiencies in the Act that the Minister appears not to have identified.
In any event, the right hon. Gentleman has acknowledged that we do not have the expertise of Ministries and parliamentary draftsmen—but may I point out to him that after today's debate there will be a Second Reading debate in the House of Lords, and also opportunities in Committee in the House of Lords for two days in October? There will then be a Report stage in November. Moreover, amendments are still acceptable on Third Reading in the House of Lords, so there are plenty of opportunities for the Home Secretary or his representative in another place to fine-tune what we have 1102 proposed or to introduce changes, provided that that is accepted by those who will take part in the debates in another place.
There is therefore no reason why the Minister should not accept our new clause today, put the principle into the Bill and deal with any adjustments needed at a later stage. We want the ombudsman to have jurisdiction over the criminal injuries compensation scheme. So do the public, and so does the ombudsman. The new clause should be added to the Bill now, and if the Minister does not accept that, we shall divide the House.
Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:—
The House divided: Ayes 183, Noes 248.
| Division No. 185] | [4.27 pm |
| AYES | |
| Abbott, Ms Diane | Foulkes, George |
| Adams, Mrs Irene | Fyfe, Maria |
| Ainger, Nick | Gapes, Mike |
| Anderson, Donald (Swansea E) | Garrett, John |
| Armstrong, Hilary | George, Bruce |
| Ashton, Joe | Gerrard, Neil |
| Austin-Walker, John | Godman, Dr Norman A |
| Barnes, Harry | Godsiff, Roger |
| Battle, John | Golding, Mrs Llin |
| Bayley, Hugh | Gordon, Mildred |
| Beggs, Roy | Graham, Thomas |
| Bell, Stuart | Grant, Bernie (Tottenham) |
| Bennett, Andrew F | Griffiths, Win (Bridgend) |
| Betts, Clive | Grocott, Bruce |
| Blair, Rt Hon Tony | Gunnell, John |
| Bray, Dr Jeremy | Hain, Peter |
| Brown, Gordon (Dunfermline E) | Harman, Ms Harriet |
| Brown, N (N'c'tle upon Tyne E) | Harvey, Nick |
| Burden, Richard | Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy |
| Byers, Stephen | Henderson, Doug |
| Caborn, Richard | Heppell, John |
| Callaghan, Jim | Hill, Keith (Streatham) |
| Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge) | Hinchliffe, David |
| Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE) | Hodge, Margaret |
| Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V) | Hoey, Kate |
| Cann, Jamie | Hogg, Norman (Cumbernauld) |
| Carlile, Alexander (Montgomery) | Home Robertson, John |
| Church, Judith | Hood, Jimmy |
| Clarke, Eric (Midlothian) | Hoon, Geoffrey |
| Clarke, Tom (Monklands W) | Howarth, George (Knowsley North) |
| Clelland, David | Hoyle, Doug |
| Clwyd, Mrs Ann | Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N) |
| Coffey, Ann | Hutton, John |
| Cohen, Harry | Illsley, Eric |
| Connarty, Michael | Jackson, Glenda (H'stead) |
| Cook, Frank (Stockton N) | Jackson, Helen (Shef'ld, H) |
| Cook, Robin (Livingston) | Jamieson, David |
| Corbett, Robin | Jones, Jon Owen (Cardiff C) |
| Cousins, Jim | Jones, Lynne (B'ham S O) |
| Cunningham, Rt Hon Dr John | Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald |
| Dewar, Donald | Keen, Alan |
| Dixon, Don | Khabra, Piara S |
| Dobson, Frank | Kilfoyle, Peter |
| Donohoe, Brian H | Kirkwood, Archy |
| Dowd, Jim | Lestor, Joan (Eccles) |
| Dunwoody, Mrs Gwyneth | Lewis, Terry |
| Eagle, Ms Angela | Liddell, Mrs Helen |
| Eastham, Ken | Lloyd, Tony (Stretford) |
| Etherington, Bill | Llwyd, Elfyn |
| Evans, John (St Helens N) | Loyden, Eddie |
| Fatchett, Derek | Lynne, Ms Liz |
| Faulds, Andrew | McAllion, John |
| Flynn, Paul | McAvoy, Thomas |
| Forsythe, Clifford (S Antrim) | Macdonald, Calum |
| Foster, Rt Hon Derek | McFall, John |
| Foster, Don (Bath) | McLeish, Henry |
| McMaster, Gordon | Rooney, Terry |
| McNamara, Kevin | Ross, Ernie (Dundee W) |
| MacShane, Denis | Rowlands, Ted |
| Mahon, Alice | Ruddock, Joan |
| Marshall, Jim (Leicester, S) | Salmond, Alex |
| Meacher, Michael | Sheerman, Barry |
| Meale, Alan | Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert |
| Michael, Alun | Simpson, Alan |
| Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley) | Skinner, Dennis |
| Moonie, Dr Lewis | Smith, Andrew (Oxford East) |
| Morgan, Rhodri | Smith, Llew (Blaenau Gwent) |
| Morley, Elliot | Soley, Clive |
| Morris, Estelle (B'ham Yardley) | Spearing, Nigel |
| Mowlarn, Marjorie | Spellar, John |
| Mudie, George | Stevenson, George |
| Mullin, Chris | Straw, Jack |
| Murphy, Paul | Sutcliffe, Gerry |
| O'Brien, Mike (N W'kshire) | Taylor, Mrs Ann (Dewsbury) |
| O'Brien, William (Normanton) | Timms, Stephen |
| O'Hara, Edward | Tipping, Paddy |
| Olner, Bill | Touhig, Don |
| Orme, Rt Hon Stanley | Trimble, David |
| Parry, Robert | Turner, Dennis |
| Pearson, Ian | Walker, Rt Hon Sir Harold |
| Pendry, Tom | Wardell, Gareth (Gower) |
| Powell, Ray (Ogmore) | Wareing, Robert N |
| Prentice, Bridget (Lew'm E) | Wicks, Malcolm |
| Prentice, Gordon (Pendle) | Williams, Rt Hon Alan (Sw'n W) |
| Prescott, Rt Hon John | Williams, Alan W (Carmarthen) |
| Purchase, Ken | Wilson, Brian |
| Quin, Ms Joyce | Winnick, David |
| Radice, Giles | Wise, Audrey |
| Randall, Stuart | Wright, Dr Tony |
| Reid, Dr John | Young, David (Bolton SE) |
| Rendel, David | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Roche, Mrs Barbara | Mr. Robert Ainsworth and |
| Rooker, Jeff | Mr. Joe Benton. |
| NOES | |
| Ainsworth, Peter (East Surrey) | Carttiss, Michael |
| Aitken, Rt Hon Jonathan | Cash, William |
| Alison, Rt Hon Michael (Selby) | Channon, Rt Hon Paul |
| Amess, David | Chapman, Sydney |
| Ancram, Michael | Clappison, James |
| Arbuthnot, James | Clarke, Rt Hon Kenneth (Ru'clif) |
| Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham) | Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey |
| Ashby, David | Coe, Sebastian |
| Atkinson, Peter (Hexham) | Colvin, Michael |
| Baker, Rt Hon Kenneth (Mole V) | Congdon, David |
| Baker, Nicholas (North Dorset) | Conway, Derek |
| Baldry, Tony | Cope, Rt Hon Sir John |
| Banks, Matthew (Southport) | Cormack, Sir Patrick |
| Bates, Michael | Couchman, James |
| Batiste, Spencer | Cran, James |
| Beresford, Sir Paul | Curry, David (Skipton & Ripon) |
| Biffen, Rt Hon John | Davies, Quentin (Stamford) |
| Bonsor, Sir Nicholas | Davis, David (Boothferry) |
| Booth, Hartley | Day, Stephen |
| Boswell, Tim | Devlin, Tim |
| Bottomley, Peter (Eltham) | Dorrell, Rt Hon Stephen |
| Bottomley, Rt Hon Virginia | Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James |
| Bowis, John | Dover, Den |
| Boyson, Rt Hon Sir Rhodes | Duncan, Alan |
| Brandreth, Gyles | Dunn, Bob |
| Brazier, Julian | Dykes, Hugh |
| Bright, Sir Graham | Eggar, Rt Hon Tim |
| Brooke, Rt Hon Peter | Elletson, Harold |
| Brown, M (Brigg & Cl'thorpes) | Emery, Rt Hon Sir Peter |
| Browning, Mrs Angela | Evans, David (Welwyn Hatfield) |
| Bruce, Ian (Dorset) | Evans, Jonathan (Brecon) |
| Burt, Alistair | Evans, Nigel (Ribble Valley) |
| Butler, Peter | Evans, Roger (Monmouth) |
| Butterfill, John | Evennett, David |
| Carlisle, John (Luton North) | Faber, David |
| Carrington, Matthew | Fabricant, Michael |
| Field, Barry (Isle of Wight) | Major, Rt Hon John |
| Forman, Nigel | Malone, Gerald |
| Forsyth, Rt Hon Michael (Stirling) | Mans, Keith |
| Forth, Eric | Marlow, Tony |
| Fox, Sir Marcus (Shipley) | Marshall, John (Hendon S) |
| Freeman, Rt Hon Roger | Marshall, Sir Michael (Arundel) |
| French, Douglas | Martin, David (Portsmouth S) |
| Gale, Roger | Mawhinney, Rt Hon Dr Brian |
| Gallie, Phil | Mayhew, Rt Hon Sir Patrick |
| Gardiner, Sir George | Merchant, Piers |
| Garnier, Edward | Mills, Iain |
| Gillan, Cheryl | Mitchell, Sir David (NW Hants) |
| Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles | Moate, Sir Roger |
| Gorman, Mrs Teresa | Monro, Sir Hector |
| Gorst, Sir John | Montgomery, Sir Fergus |
| Grant, Sir A (SW Cambs) | Neubert, Sir Michael |
| Greenway, Harry (Ealing N) | Newton, Rt Hon Tony |
| Greenway, John (Ryedale) | Nicholson, David (Taunton) |
| Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth, N) | Nicholson, Emma (Devon West) |
| Hague, William | Norris, Steve |
| Hamilton, Rt Hon Sir Archibald | Onslow, Rt Hon Sir Cranley |
| Hanley, Rt Hon Jeremy | Ottaway, Richard |
| Hannam, Sir John | Page, Richard |
| Haselhurst, Sir Alan | Paice, James |
| Hawkins, Nick | Patnick, Sir Irvine |
| Hawksley, Warren | Patten, Rt Hon John |
| Hayes, Jerry | Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey |
| Heald, Oliver | Pawsey, James |
| Heath, Rt Hon Sir Edward | Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth |
| Heathcoat-Amory, David | Pickles, Eric |
| Hendry, Charles | Porter, Barry (Wirral S) |
| Higgins, Rt Hon Sir Terence | Portillo, Rt Hon Michael |
| Hill, James (Southampton Test) | Powell, William (Corby) |
| Hogg, Rt Hon Douglas (G'tham) | Redwood, Rt Hon John |
| Horam, John | Renton, Rt Hon Tim |
| Hordem, Rt Hon Sir Peter | Richards, Rod |
| Howard, Rt Hon Michael | Riddick, Graham |
| Howell, Sir Ralph (N Norfolk) | Robathan, Andrew |
| Hughes, Robert G (Harrow W) | Robertson, Raymond (Ab'd'n S) |
| Hunt, Rt Hon David (Wirral W) | Robinson, Mark (Somerton) |
| Hunter, Andrew | Rumbold, Rt Hon Dame Angela |
| Hurd, Rt Hon Douglas | Ryder, Rt Hon Richard |
| Jenkin, Bernard | Sackville, Tom |
| Jessel, Toby | Sainsbury, Rt Hon Sir Timothy |
| Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey | Scott, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas |
| Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N) | Shaw, David (Dover) |
| Jones, Robert B (W Hertfdshr) | Shephard, Rt Hon Gillian |
| Jopling, Rt Hon Michael | Shepherd, Colin (Hereford) |
| Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine | Shepard, Richard (Aldridge-B'hills) |
| Kirkhope, Timothy | Shersby, Sir Michael |
| Knapman, Roger | Sims, Roger |
| Knight, Mrs Angela (Erewash) | Spencer, Sir Derek |
| Knight, Greg (Derby N) | Spicer, Sir James (W Dorset) |
| Knight, Dame Jill (Bir'm E'st'n) | Spicer, Michael (S Worcs) |
| Kynoch, George (Kincardine) | Spink, Dr Robert |
| Lait, Mrs Jacqui | Spring, Richard |
| Lamont, Rt Hon Norman | Sproat, Iain |
| Lang, Rt Hon Ian | Squire, Robin (Hornchurch) |
| Lawrence, Sir Ivan | Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John |
| Legg, Barry | Stephen, Michael |
| Leigh, Edward | Stem, Michael |
| Lester, Jim (Broxtowe) | Stewart, Allan |
| Lidington, David | Streeter, Gary |
| Lightbown, David | Sweeney, Walter |
| Lilley, Rt Hon Peter | Sykes, John |
| Lloyd, Rt Hon Sir Peter (Fareham) | Tapsell, Sir Peter |
| Lord, Michael | Taylor, Ian (Esher) |
| Luff, Peter | Taylor, John M (Solihull) |
| Lyell, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas | Taylor, Sir Teddy (Southend, E) |
| MacGregor, Rt Hon John | Temple-Morris, Peter |
| MacKay, Andrew | Thomason, Roy |
| Maclean, Rt Hon David | Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N) |
| McLoughlin, Patrick | Thornton, Sir Malcolm |
| McNair-Wilson, Sir Patrick | Thumham, Peter |
| Madel, Sir David | Townend, John (Bridlington) |
| Maitland, Lady Olga | Townsend, Cyril D (Bexl'yh'th) |
| Tracey, Richard | Whittingdale, John |
| Tredinnick, David | Wiggin, Sir Jerry |
| Trend, Michael | Willetts, David |
| Twinn, Dr Ian | Wilshire, David |
| Viggers, Peter | Winterton, Mrs Ann (Congleton) |
| Waldegrave, Rt Hon William | Winterton, Nicholas (Macc'fld) |
| Walker, Bill (N Tayside) | Wolfson, Mark |
| Waller, Gary | Wood, Timothy |
| Ward, John | Yeo, Tim |
| Wardle, Charles (Bexhill) | Young, Rt Hon Sir George |
| Watts, John | |
| Wells, Bowen | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Wheeler, Rt Hon Sir John | Dr. Liam Fox and |
| Whitney, Ray | Mr. Simon Burns. |
§ Question accordingly negatived.