§ Mr. Mike O'BrienI beg to move amendment No. 9, in page 8, leave out lines 12 and 13 and insert—
'(a) current electoral systems in the United Kingdom and any pending such systems, together with such matters connected with any such existing or pending systems as the Commission may determine;(b) current systems of local government and national government in the United Kingdom and any pending such systems; and'.
Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Amendment No. 157, in page 8, leave out line 14.
Government amendment No. 10.
Amendment No. 159, in page 8, line 28, at end insert—
'(4A) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (4), any grant under subsection 3(b) may not be used to promote or otherwise publicise—
- (a) any change in the system of national government in the United Kingdom (other than a change that is pending for the purposes of this section);
- (b) any change in the electoral system in use at any particular election within the United Kingdom (other than a change that is pending for the purposes of this section); or
- (c) any change in the system of local government in use in any particular part of the United Kingdom (other than a change that is pending for the purposes of this section).'.
§ Mr. O'BrienA number of concerns were expressed in Committee about the extent of the remit given to the 96 Electoral Commission under clause 11. The clause sets out the commission's voter education function. It will have an important role to play in promoting a greater sense of citizenship and encouraging participation in the democratic process. However, it is not for the commission to promote alternative electoral systems or alternative systems of local, regional or national government.
The commission will be the custodian of fair play in any referendum on proportional representation for elections to the House or on the introduction of elected regional assemblies. In such circumstances, the commission's impartiality would be called into question if it had previously campaigned for electoral reform or for the introduction of elected regional government.
8.15 pm
Government amendments Nos. 9 and 10 will confine the commission's voter education function to promoting current or pending electoral or governmental systems. The reference to "pending" systems denotes new systems that have already been enacted, but are not yet in force. It is not a question of trying to promote something that is not yet in place.
For example, were the commission already in being, it would fall to it to explain the arrangements for the election of the London mayor, and we would wish it much luck in performing that task. It would also have to explain the arrangements for elections to the Assembly, albeit that the Greater London Authority is not yet in place.
The effect of the Government amendments is that the Electoral Commission will not be able to make grants to a body, under the provisions of clause 11(3), to promote the cause of proportional representation for elections to the House, or to campaign for regional elected government. With that assurance, I hope that the right hon. Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir G. Young), who is concerned about these issues, will decide not to press amendment No. 159.
Amendment No. 157 covers slightly different, but none the less familiar, territory. It would omit the reference in subsection (1) to the institutions of the European Union. Opposition Members appear readily to accept that if we are to boost turnout at local government elections, it will be necessary for the Electoral Commission to explain how local government works and impacts on our daily lives. People will be more inclined to vote if they believe that the body that they are being asked to elect is relevant to them and will make a difference to the community in which they live. If that is true of local government, it is surely also true of the European Parliament.
At the previous European elections, voter turnout was very low. If there are ways in which we can improve turnout, we should seriously consider them. The commission must have the scope to explain the role of the European Parliament and its relationship with the European Commission and the other institutions of the European Union. If amendment No. 157 were passed, the Electoral Commission would not be able to discharge its voter education function in respect of European parliamentary elections.
97 No political party can take comfort from the low turnout at last June's elections. The Electoral Commission cannot reverse the downward trend on its own, but, if it is to have any impact, it must at least be given the scope to run a meaningful campaign.
§ Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby)Will the Minister give way?
§ Mr. O'BrienI will give way shortly.
The amendment deals with Europe. We know from past experience what happens when one mentions the word "Europe" to Conservative Members. Unlike Pavlov's dog, they tend to break out in indignation, splits and general hypertension. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman will do precisely that, but I shall give way to him to find out.
§ Mr. RobathanI am so grateful to the Minister, because I can see that he is looking forward to my intervention. The task that he is setting the Electoral Commission of promoting public awareness of the institutions of the European Union is fairly large. Will he therefore illuminate the House as to his awareness of its institutions? Could he tell us what DG VII and DG VIII do?
§ Mr. O'BrienI cannot do so off the top of my head, because I have not been involved in these matters recently. However, I can tell the hon. Gentleman what DG V does—but can he tell me?
§ Mr. RobathanNo.
§ Mr. O'BrienIt might serve us both to be properly educated about the role of the European Commission, the European Parliament and the institutions of Europe. We could both do with a little more education on these matters. If we accepted amendment No. 157, which was tabled by Conservative Members, we might not receive the education that we need.
§ Sir George YoungI welcome Government amendments No. 9 and 10. They reflect amendment No. 42, which we moved in Committee. However, I think that amendment No. 159 is also necessary for reasons that I shall explain shortly.
As the Minister said, Government amendments Nos. 9 and 10 will keep the neutral and impartial Electoral Commission out of contentious issues by allowing it to promote only those electoral systems made by enactment. It will keep it out of promoting AV-plus and other forms of proportional representation before the House of Commons approves them—if, indeed, it ever does. I am grateful that the Minister confirmed that the commission could not promote public awareness of elected regional assemblies when they are not pending. It is worth reminding the House that the Neill committee did not envisage the commission embarking on the functions set out in clause 11.
I shall speak to amendments Nos. 157 and 159. Amendment No. 157 is similar to an amendment that we moved in Committee, so the Opposition's beach towel has already been laid on this deckchair. The amendment would preclude the commission from promoting public awareness of the institutions of the European Union. 98 The Minister may recall the powerful speech that I made on 14 February, from column 711 onwards, which he interrupted to make numerous concessions, but sadly not on that particular amendment.
Our case is the one that was just implied by my hon. Friend the Member for Blaby (Mr. Robathan). The European Union already has a substantial budget, far larger than that of the proposed Electoral Commission, to promote its institutions. It has 45 million euros to spend on general information and communication work concerning the European Union. The budget document published by the European Commission says of the budget for information and communication work:
these measures are designed to be an effective channel of communication and dialogue between the people of the European Union and the Community Institutions. They take account of specific national and regional characteristics, in close co-operation with the Member State authorities.There is therefore no need for UK taxpayers to double-fund a function for which they are already paying through the Commission.The Minister needs to take on board another issue. One of the institutions of which the Electoral Commission could promote public awareness, under clause 11, is the European central bank, which is a European institution. We could of course have a referendum on whether the UK should join the euro. Interest rates are fixed by the ECB, and the bank has responsibility for the conduct of monetary policy in Europe. The ECB's performance could therefore be at the heart of a debate about whether the UK should join the euro. Against that background, is it right that the commission should be involved in that debate by publishing literature about; and promoting public awareness of; the ECB?
The Minister mentioned the commission's voter education role, which I understand, but the commission also has a role to remain impartial and above the issues that may be raised in a referendum. For that reason, it should not embark on promoting awareness of European Union institutions. The commission, after all, would be the umpire in that referendum.
I shall use the argument that the Minister used on 14 February, when he said:
It would be injurious to the perceived neutrality of such a body—that is the commission—if it were seen to adopt a position on the question of alternative voting systems.That argument is equally valid if one applies it to the question of joining the euro: it would be injurious to the perceived neutrality of such a body if it were seen to promote public awareness of the role of the European central bank.Last time round, the Minister was less than convincing in his argument against the amendment. He simply said:
It is important that the scope of the commission's voter education role should extend to explaining the institutions of the European Union to voters.—[Official Report, 14 February 2000; Vol. 344, c. 712.]He repeated that argument again this evening. He went on to say that if the commission did not have that scope, turnout at European elections would remain low.There are two responses to that argument. First, by entering the euro debate the commission would prejudice its impartiality. Secondly, there is already a huge budget 99 to promote awareness of European institutions, so I was not reassured by what the Minister said today any more than I was on 14 February.
§ Mr. RobathanMy right hon. Friend and I agree entirely on this matter. Contrary to what the Minister said, I do not get excited when I read the word "Europe". Indeed, I can tell him that I am going on holiday in Europe this summer, God and the Government willing. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is such a low turnout in European elections because people are moved by Europe only in a contrary manner? To involve the Electoral Commission—which, as he said, is meant to be entirely neutral—in arguing for European Union institutions might not only compromise its neutrality, but lead everybody to doubt the worth of the commission, with which we agree.
Does my right hon. Friend agree also that today's opinion poll, showing that 69 per cent. of people are now ill-disposed towards the European single currency, reinforces his argument? If the Electoral Commission argues against that opinion, is not that likely to lead people to think that it is in some way flawed?
§ Sir George YoungMy hon. Friend makes a valid point. The Bill gives the Electoral Commission a duty, not an option, when it says:
The Commission shall promote public awareness of … the institutions of the European Union.One of the EU's key institutions is the European central bank, and it would be difficult for the commission to promote public awareness of that institution without in some way involving itself in what would inevitably be a controversial political argument about whether the ECB was doing a good job or a bad job. It would be better for the commission if it simply did not engage in that particular function at all.I move on to amendment No. 159. I hope that the Minister can persuade me that it is not necessary, but he has not yet done so. The amendment is needed because the phrasing of amendments Nos. 9 and 10 allows grants to be made to promote change in particular areas or elections so long as the proposed system is in use elsewhere in the UK. For example, a grant could be given to promote the use of the additional member system, the single vote or the single transferable vote for elections to the House on the grounds that those systems are already in use elsewhere in the UK for mayoral elections and elections to the Scottish Assembly, the Welsh Assembly, the Northern Ireland Assembly and the European Parliament.
If amendment No. 159 is not made, the commission will get involved in exactly the sort of controversy that the Minister said he did not want it to become involved in. Although those systems do not at present apply to elections to the House, they are in use elsewhere in the UK. The position without the amendment would be inconsistent with the Minister's remarks on 14 February, when he said that
it would be outside the powers of the commission to make a grant to an organisation to enable it to promote alternative voting systems.— [Official Report, 14 February 2000; Vol. 344, c. 712.]100 The Government amendments do not achieve that, so I hope that the Minister will accept amendment No. 159 to close the loophole.
§ Mr. StunellI oppose the Conservative amendments—and I am not happy with the Government amendments, either.
I say to the hon. Member for Blaby (Mr. Robathan), who has said that some of his best friends are European and, indeed, that he is going on holiday to Europe, that he lives in Europe. One of the problems for Conservative Members is that they do not accept that they are part of Europe in the first place.
It would be a serious mistake to clip the wings of the Electoral Commission and give it the role of explaining what local government does and why it is a good idea to participate in the decision-making process—although not to promote a specific form of local government—but say that it cannot do the same for the European Union.
The Conservatives' argument is somewhat two-edged because if their complaint about Europe is that it is dominating our lives, passing laws that we do not control and generally disrupting the universe, that is surely all the more reason to explain that evil to the British electorate and encourage them to play a part in European democratic procedures.
§ Mr. RobathanThe hon. Gentleman has not only given way to me but given me a geography lesson. How can he refer to Europe as "it" if we are within it? He was talking about it as though it were a foreign body, yet, as he has so rightly pointed out, it is not because we are part of it.
§ Mr. StunellThat is an interesting argument; the same is true of local government, Parliament and all other bodies on which the Electoral Commission has been given a job, exactly as the hon. Gentleman says. In its collective form, the European Union is the same. I see no justification for the Conservatives' approach, and I could not see it last time either. I do not think that that is for want of intelligence on my part. Their ideas are fundamentally misconceived.
I understand the spirit in which the Government's concessions have been made and their entirely honourable intention to ensure that the commission is not drawn into controversy. In restricting what the commission can do on electoral systems, I hope that its duty to explain and promote systems in use in the United Kingdom will remain clear. Judging by some preliminary findings from discussions with colleagues from the London area about the mayoral election and the ballot paper with which London electors will be faced, there is a substantial job to be done. There is clearly a substantial job to be done throughout the country in pointing out the many advantages—and perhaps one or two disadvantages—of the closed list system.
I very much hope that, in clipping the wings of the Electoral Commission for some apparently very good reasons, the Minister does not cause it to go into its shell and fail to take necessary action. I especially hope that he will not in any way be tempted by the right hon. Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir G. Young) to support amendment No. 159. The right hon. Gentleman said that 101 different electoral systems in the UK were a problem and that the wicked Electoral Commission might be drawn into explaining to another part of the United Kingdom the voting system in, let us say, Northern Ireland in the European elections, Scotland in the Scottish elections or, for that matter, London in the mayoral election. Both Government and Opposition amendments could inhibit the commission's wider duty of promoting and developing democracy, and are to be regretted.
§ Mr. RobathanComments about Europe made by the Minister, the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Mr. Stunell) and, indeed, me, illustrate the difficulties into which the Electoral Commission could walk if it tried to educate people about the European Union and the institutions thereof. We are self-evidently European. I stress to both hon. Gentlemen that I am not anti-European; nor do I leap up and down at the mention of the word "Europe". Indeed, I spent much time studying European history. When I did so, there was a distinction between British and European history. For the benefit of the hon. Member for Hazel Grove, I am going on holiday on the continent of Europe and not to Cornwall.
The educational requirement could strike at the purpose of the Electoral Commission. If its purpose is to be above party politics and political and detailed argument, it must remain neutral at all times. The Minister will say that it can educate on European and other matters while remaining neutral. That is true if it educates on electoral systems about which all parties agree, but if such education extends to various EU institutions, especially the European central bank, which my right hon. Friend the Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir G. Young) mentioned, the commission will inevitably be drawn into detailed argument.
However the Minister puts his argument, he will discover accusations of bias—possibly from both sides of the House. Such accusations, even if they are from both sides of the House, will tend, in the eyes of those who take contrary views, to undermine the perceived neutrality of the Electoral Commission. That is important. If the Electoral Commission starts discussing Europe or proportional representation or methods of voting, there will be accusations that the commission is getting involved in matters on which it should be neutral. That is a straightforward argument.
I shall not repeat my right hon. Friend's argument, as he expressed it better than I could. The particular case of the European central bank and the single currency is a good example. I could write the argument from one side and the Minister could write it from the other, and we would both think that we were being neutral, but if the Electoral Commission wrote a paper on the ECB, setting out the pros and cons, the Minister—whose position on the European currency I do not know—and I might be able to criticise it equally well from either side. The danger is that by getting involved in the debate, the Electoral Commission would lose its perceived neutrality, however hard it might try to maintain it.
I question whether it should be the purpose of the Electoral Commission to get involved in such matters, when there is an office in Storey's Gate, run by Mr. Geoffrey Martin, whom the Minister may know. The office exists in order to publish the great benefits that the European Commission brings to these isles. I do not disagree with much that the office publishes; indeed, 102 Mr. Martin and I often have genial conversations. However, what would be the purpose of such an office if the Electoral Commission acquired an educational responsibility? Might they not end up working in tandem and, again, might that not undermine the perceived neutrality of the Electoral Commission?
As was revealed by the Minister's ignorance about DG VII and VIII, and mine about DG V, the Electoral Commission would face an enormous task if it was required by the Government to educate people about the institutions of the European Union. The Minister and I do not know all the details of the EU, and we spend considerable time studying it, so that would be a huge task for the Electoral Commission, in which it might fail.
I shall not detain the House. The argument is important, although it is easily dismissed. The neutrality of the Electoral Commission could be undermined before it even started. I hope that the Minister will bear that in mind.
§ Mr. Mike O'BrienThe hon. Member for Blaby (Mr. Robathan) wants to go to Europe. We wish him well on his holiday, and from our point of view, the sooner he goes, the better.
§ Mr. RobathanIn that case, I shall go now.
§ Mr. O'BrienThat is a matter for the hon. Gentleman and his Whips. Our Whips are happy to give him permission to go.
Let us consider the argument and cut to the core of the concern expressed by the right hon. Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir G. Young) that there could be some mention of the European central bank. We have set up an Electoral Commission which will be above politics. The right hon. Gentleman welcomed the independence that the commission will have. It will be supervised by the Speaker's Committee. He welcomed the independent way in which that Committee will operate. There are many safeguards to preserve the independence and integrity of the Electoral Commission.
Will the right hon. Gentleman give that body some credit for common sense, when we appoint all these great and good people to run it, supervised, no doubt, by more great and good people from the House? There are enough safeguards. We want a neutral body that is not involved in questions such as whether we join the single currency or not. It would be ridiculous for the Electoral Commission to get involved in that debate. We want a body whose neutrality is not compromised, but we do not want a body that is neutered.
The right hon. Gentleman is proposing, in effect, to neuter the body that we are setting up to educate voters by providing basic information. Awareness of an institutional set-up such as the European central bank is unlikely to sway anyone one way or the other on whether we should join the single currency. I doubt whether the Electoral Commission wants to get involved in such a debate, or even provide information.
However, after the next election, and perhaps the subsequent election, a Conservative Government might—heaven forfend—return to office. The Conservative party is committed to not joining the single currency for only two 103 elections. It could subsequently determine that the time was right to join. The Electoral Commission might then decide to educate people about an institution of which we are a member. We are therefore making law for the future; it is wise to consider circumstances that may arise. Nobody wants the Electoral Commission's neutrality to be compromised. However, we do not want to neuter it.
§ Sir George YoungI appreciate that the Minister does not want to compromise the commission's impartiality. However, we feel strongly about amendment No. 157, and believe that it is important at this stage not to give the commission the duty that we are considering, and involve it in such a sensitive debate. At the appropriate time, we shall press the amendment to a Division.
§ Mr. O'BrienI regret that Conservative Members take that view. The sort of problem that they fear is in no danger of arising. They display their usual hypertensive reaction to the word "Europe".
On amendment No. 159, the Government do not believe that it would be possible for the Electoral Commission to promote proportional representation for election to Parliament under clause 11(3) by giving grants. The right hon. Gentleman knows the implications of Pepper v. Hart. We do not believe that the Electoral Commission will be able to give any organisation grants to promote proportional representation for parliamentary elections.
The hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Mr. Stunell) was right to say that voter education was important. We must ensure neutrality on some of the more sensitive issues. The Government want the Electoral Commission to remain strictly neutral on controversial political issues such as Europe, proportional representation and regional government—many Labour Members feel strongly about the latter. It is better for the Electoral Commission to stay out of the fray on such issues. However, it can inform people about proportional representation in European elections, and regional government in the devolved assemblies, especially if assemblies were to be established in England. There are potential opportunities for the Electoral Commission to perform a useful function.
§ Sir George YoungI am not a solicitor and I am not as familiar as the Minister with Pepper v. Hart. Is he saying that even if Government amendment No. 9 allowed the commission to make a grant to an organisation that could promote alternative electoral systems, which existed elsewhere in the United Kingdom, the commission would not be permitted to do that because of Pepper v. Hart?
§ Mr. O'BrienNo. Such grants could not be made by the Electoral Commission under the Bill. That is our interpretation of the Bill. The case of Pepper v. Hart provides that the a Minister's words may be taken into account in interpreting the wording of legislation. I am therefore telling hon. Members about the way in which the Government intend the legislation to operate.
The hon. Member for Blaby (Mr. Robathan) believed that if the Electoral Commission participated in educating the public about institutions, it would inevitably become involved in controversy and thus compromise its neutrality. Every weekday in our schools there are 104 teachers who teach politics. They do so in a way that is not party political. It is not biased and it does not involve controversy. The teaching is reasonably easy and it has not produced the compromise of neutrality among teachers that the hon. Gentleman suspects.
8.45 pm
We shall create an Electoral Commission that is composed of the great and the good. Behind it will be a Speaker's Committee, which will oversee it to ensure that its neutrality is not compromised. It cannot be reasonable to think that the members of the Commission would all lack common sense to such a level that they would embark on a dissertation on anything that would get them involved in the issues surrounding a single currency. They would not do so.
§ Mr. RobathanI have no idea where the Minister went to school, but in my school I well recall people who taught me politics in a partisan manner. One was a Conservative and one was a Labour supporter. I won a bet with the Labour supporter on the result of the 1970 general election, on which he reneged.
§ Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire)Typical.
§ Mr. RobathanIndeed.
More importantly, the Minister is making my point for me. If the Electoral Commission becomes involved in controversial issues—[Interruption.] To help the Minister, I went to Merchant Taylors' school. If the commission becomes involved in controversial issues on which there are two passionately held arguments, it runs the grave risk of being accused of bias. It may not be biased and it may be composed of the great and the good and very good at doing its work, but that will be the accusation. That is when the commission's reputation will be under threat.
§ Mr. O'BrienThe sort of people that the occupants of the Conservative Front Bench have asked us to put on the commission are those who are above politics, who are of high repute and of independence and neutrality. They are precisely the sort of people who would avoid getting into the compromising situation which the hon. Gentleman is outlining. We are not dealing with real fears about the commission being compromised. I do not think that there is a realistic prospect of its members getting themselves into that silly position. Instead, we are dealing with the internal disputes, views and hypertension of the Conservative party about Europe. If the Opposition divide the House, that is all that we have.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Amendment proposed: No. 157, in page 8, leave out line 14.—[Sir George Young.]
§ Question put, That the amendment be made:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 110, Noes 308.
107| Division No. 103] | [8.48 pm |
| AYES | |
| Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey) | Beresford, Sir Paul |
| Amess, David | Body, Sir Richard |
| Ancram, Rt Hon Michael | Boswell, Tim |
| Atkinson, David (Bour'mth E) | Bottomley, Peter (Worthing W) |
| Baldry, Tony | Bottomley, Rt Hon Mrs Virginia |
| Brady, Graham | MacGregor, Rt Hon John |
| Brazier, Julian | McIntosh, Miss Anne |
| Browning, Mrs Angela | MacKay, Rt Hon Andrew |
| Bruce, Ian (S Dorset) | Madel, Sir David |
| Chope, Christopher | Malins, Humfrey |
| Clappison, James | Mawhinney, Rt Hon Sir Brian |
| Clark, Dr Michael (Rayleigh) | May, Mrs Theresa |
| Clarke, Rt Hon Kenneth (Rushcliffe) | Moss, Malcolm |
| Nicholls, Patrick | |
| Duncan, Alan | O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury) |
| Duncan Smith, Iain | Ottaway, Richard |
| Evans, Nigel | Paice, James |
| Faber, David | Paterson, Owen |
| Fabricant, Michael | Pickles, Eric |
| Fallon, Michael | Prior, David |
| Flight, Howard | Redwood, Rt Hon John |
| Forth, Rt Hon Eric | Robathan, Andrew |
| Fowler, Rt Hon Sir Norman | Robertson, Laurence |
| Fox Dr Liam | Roe, Mrs Marion (Broxbourne) |
| Fraser, Christopher | Ross, William (E Lond'y) |
| Gale, Roger | St Aubyn, Nick |
| Garnier, Edward | Sayeed, Jonathan |
| Gill, Christopher | Shephard, Rt Hon Mrs Gillian |
| Gillan, Mrs Cheryl | Spelman, Mrs Caroline |
| Gray, James | Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John |
| Greenway, John | Steen, Anthony |
| Grieve, Dominic | Streeter, Gary |
| Gummer, Rt Hon John | Swayne, Desmond |
| Hamilton Rt Hon Sir Archie | Syms, Robert |
| Taylor, Sir Teddy | |
| Hammond Philip | Townend, John |
| Hawkins, Nick | Tredinnick, David |
| Hayes, John | Trend, Michael |
| Heald, Oliver | Tyrie, Andrew |
| Heathcoat-Amory, Rt Hon David | Viggers Peter |
| Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael | Walter, Robert |
| Hogg, Rt Hon Douglas | Wardle, Charles |
| Horam, John | Waterson, Nigel |
| Howard, Rt Hon Michael | Wells, Bowen |
| Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot) | Whitney, Sir Raymond |
| Jack, Rt Hon Michael | Whittingdale, John |
| Jackson, Robert (Wantage) | Widdecombe, Rt Hon Miss Ann |
| Jenkin, Bernard | Wilkinson, John |
| Key, Robert | Willetts, David |
| Kirkbride, Miss Julie | Wilshire, David |
| Lait, Mrs Jacqui | Winterton, Mrs Ann (Congleton) |
| Lansley, Andrew | Winterton, Nicholas (Macclesfield) |
| Lewis, Dr Julian (New Forest E) | Yeo, Tim |
| Lidington, David | Young, Rt Hon Sir George |
| Lilley, Rt Hon Peter | |
| Lloyd, Rt Hon Sir Peter (Fareham) | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Loughton, Tim | Mr. Tim Collins and |
| Lyell, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas | Mr. Nick Gibb. |
| NOES | |
| Abbott, Ms Diane | Betts, Clive |
| Ainger, Nick | Blears, Ms Hazel |
| Allan, Richard | Blizzard, Bob |
| Allen, Graham | Blunkett, Rt Hon David |
| Anderson, Janet (Rossendale) | Borrow, David |
| Ashton, Joe | Bradley, Keith (Withington) |
| Atkins, Charlotte | Bradshaw, Ben |
| Austin, John | Breed, Colin |
| Ballard, Jackie | Brown, Rt Hon Nick (Newcastle E) |
| Bayley, Hugh | Browne, Desmond |
| Beard, Nigel | Buck, Ms Karen |
| Beckett, Rt Hon Mrs Margaret | Burden, Richard |
| Begg, Miss Anne | Burgon, Colin |
| Bell, Martin (Tatton) | Burstow, Paul |
| Bell, Stuart (Middlesbrough) | Butler, Mrs Christine |
| Benn, Hilary (Leeds C) | Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge) |
| Bennett, Andrew F | Campbell, Rt Hon Menzies (NE Fife) |
| Benton, Joe | |
| Bermingham, Gerald | Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V) |
| Berry, Roger | Cann, Jamie |
| Best, Harold | Casale, Roger |
| Caton, Martin | Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale) |
| Cawsey, Ian | Hall, Patrick (Bedford) |
| Chapman, Ben (Wirral S) | Hamilton, Fabian (Leeds NE) |
| Chaytor, David | Hanson, David |
| Clapham, Michael | Heal, Mrs Sylvia |
| Clark, Dr Lynda (Edinburgh Pentlands) | Healey, John |
| Heath, David (Somerton & Frome) | |
| Clark, Paul (Gillingham) | Henderson, Doug (Newcastle N) |
| Clarke, Charles (Norwich S) | Henderson, Ivan (Harwich) |
| Clarke, Rt Hon Tom (Coatbridge) | Hepburn, Stephen |
| Clelland, David | Heppell, John |
| Clwyd, Ann | Hesford, Stephen |
| Coaker, Vernon | Hill, Keith |
| Coffey, Ms Ann | Hinchliffe, David |
| Coleman, Iain | Hoey, Kate |
| Colman, Tony | Hood, Jimmy |
| Connarty, Michael | Hopkins, Kelvin |
| Corbett, Robin | Howarth, Alan (Newport E) |
| Corbyn, Jeremy | Howells, Dr Kim |
| Corston, Jean | Hoyle, Lindsay |
| Cotter, Brian | Hughes, Ms Beverley (Stretford) |
| Cousins, Jim | Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N) |
| Crausby, David | Hughes, Simon (Southwark N) |
| Cryer, Mrs Ann (Keighley) | Hurst, Alan |
| Cryer, John (Hornchurch) | Hutton, John |
| Cummings, John | Iddon, Dr Brian |
| Cunningham, Rt Hon Dr Jack (Copeland) | Illsley, Eric |
| Jackson, Ms Glenda (Hampstead) | |
| Cunningham, Jim (Cov'try S) | Jamieson, David |
| Dalyell, Tam | Jenkins, Brian |
| Darvill, Keith | Johnson, Alan (Hull W & Hessle) |
| Davey, Edward (Kingston) | Johnson, Miss Melanie (Welwyn Hatfield) |
| Davey, Valerie (Bristol W) | |
| Davidson, Ian | Jones, Mrs Fiona (Newark) |
| Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (Llanelli) | Jones, Helen (Warrington N) |
| Davies, Geraint (Croydon C) | Jones, Ms Jenny (Wolverh'ton SW) |
| Rt Hon Terry (B'ham Hodge H) | |
| Jones, Dr Lynne (Selly Oak) | |
| Dean, Mrs Janet | Jones, Martyn (Clwyd S) |
| Denham, John | Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald |
| Dobbin, Jim | Keeble, Ms Sally |
| Donohoe, Brian H | Keen, Alan (Feltham & Heston) |
| Doran, Frank | Keen, Ann (Brentford & Isleworth) |
| Dowd, Jim | Kennedy, Jane (Wavertree) |
| Drew, David | Khabra, Piara S |
| Dunwoody, Mrs Gwyneth | Kidney, David |
| Eagle, Angela (Wallasey) | King, Ms Oona (Bethnal Green) |
| Eagle, Maria (L'pool Garston) | Kumar, Dr Ashok |
| Edwards, Huw | Ladyman, Dr Stephen |
| Efford, Clive | Laxton, Bob |
| Ellman, Mrs Louise | Lepper, David |
| Ennis, Jeff | Leslie, Christopher |
| Etherington, Bill | Levitt, Tom |
| Fearn, Ronnie | Lewis, Ivan (Bury S) |
| Field, Rt Hon Frank | Linton, Martin |
| Fisher, Mark | Lloyd, Tony (Manchester C) |
| Fitzpatrick, Jim | Llwyd, Elfyn |
| Flint, Caroline | Lock, David |
| Flynn, Paul | Love, Andrew |
| Foster, Rt Hon Derek | McAvoy, Thomas |
| Foster, Don (Bath) | McCabe, Steve |
| Gapes, Mike | McCafferty, Ms Chris |
| Gardiner, Barry | McDonagh, Siobhain |
| George, Bruce (Walsall S) | Macdonald, Calum |
| Gerrard, Neil | McDonnell, John |
| Gibson, Dr Ian | McFall, John |
| Gilroy, Mrs Linda | McGuire, Mrs Anne |
| Godsiff, Roger | McIsaac, Shona |
| Goggins, Paul | McKenna, Mrs Rosemary |
| Golding, Mrs Llin | Mackinlay, Andrew |
| Gordon, Mrs Eileen | Maclennan, Rt Hon Robert |
| Griffiths, Jane (Reading E) | McNulty, Tony |
| Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S) | Mactaggart, Fiona |
| Griffiths, Win (Bridgend) | McWalter, Tony |
| Grocott, Bruce | McWilliam, John |
| Hain, Peter | Marsden, Gordon (Blackpool S) |
| Martlew, Eric | Skinner, Dennis |
| Meacher, Rt Hon Michael | Smith, Rt Hon Andrew (Oxford E) |
| Meale, Alan | Smith, Angela (Basildon) |
| Merron, Gillian | Smith, Miss Geraldine (Morecambe & Lunesdale) |
| Michie, Bill (Shef'ld Heeley) | |
| Milburn, Rt Hon Alan | Smith, Llew (Blaenau Gwent) |
| Miller, Andrew | Snape, Peter |
| Mitchell, Austin | Soley, Clive |
| Moffatt, Laura | Southworth, Ms Helen |
| Moonie, Dr Lewis | Spellar, John |
| Moran, Ms Margaret | Squire, Ms Rachel |
| Morgan, Ms Julie (Cardiff N) | Starkey, Dr Phyllis |
| Morley, Elliot | Steinberg, Gerry |
| Mountford, Kali | Stevenson, George |
| Mullin, Chris | Stewart, David (Inverness E) |
| Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck) | Stewart, Ian (Eccles) |
| Murphy, Jim (Eastwood) | Stinchcombe, Paul |
| Naysmith, Dr Doug | Strang, Rt Hon Dr Gavin |
| Norris, Dan | Straw, Rt Hon Jack |
| O'Brien, Bill (Normanton) | Stringer, Graham |
| O'Brien, Mike (N Warks) | Stuart, Ms Gisela |
| O'Hara, Eddie | Stunell, Andrew |
| Olner, Bill | Sutcliffe, Gerry |
| Organ, Mrs Diana | Taylor, Rt Hon Mrs Ann (Dewsbury) |
| Pearson, Ian | |
| Pendry Tom | Taylor, Ms Dari (Stockton S) |
| Perham, Ms Linda | Taylor, David (NW Leics) |
| Pickthall, Colin | Taylor, Matthew (Trvro) |
| Pike Peter L | Temple-Morris, Peter |
| Plaskitt, James | Timms, Stephen |
| Pond, Chris | Tipping, Paddy |
| Pope, Greg | Todd, Mark |
| Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham E) | Truswell Paul |
| Prentice, Gordon (Pendle) | Turner, Dr Desmond(Kemptown) |
| Prosser Gwyn | Turner, Dr George (NW Norfolk) |
| Purchase, Ken | Turner, Neil (Wigan) |
| Quin, Rt Hon Ms Joyce | Twigg, Derek (Halton) |
| Quinn, Lawrie | Tyler, Paul |
| Rammell, Bill | Tynan, Bill |
| Vis, Dr Rudi | |
| Rapson,Syd | Walley, Ms Joan |
| Raynsford Nick | Ward, Ms Claire |
| Reed, Andrew (Loughborough) | Wareing, Robert N |
| Rendel, David | Watts David |
| Roche, Mrs Barbara | Webb, Steve |
| Rooker, Rt Hon Jeff | White, Brian |
| Rooney, Terry | Whitehead, Dr Alan |
| Ross, Ernie (Dundee W) | Wicks, Malcolm |
| Rowlands, Ted | Williams, Rt Hon Alan (Swansea W) |
| Roy, Frank | |
| Ruane, Chris | Williams, Alan W (E Carmarthen) |
| Ruddock, Joan | Williams, Mrs Betty (Conwy) |
| Russell, Bob (Colchester) | Winnick, David |
| Russell, Ms Christine (Chester) | Wise, Audrey |
| Ryan, Ms Joan | Wood, Mike |
| Salter, Martin | Woolas, Phil |
| Sanders, Adrian | Worthington, Tony |
| Sarwar, Mohammad | Wright, Anthony D (Gt Yarmouth) |
| Savidge, Malcolm | Wright, Dr Tony (Cannock) |
| Sedgemore, Brian | Wyatt, Derek |
| Shaw, Jonathan | |
| Sheerman, Barry | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Short, Rt Hon Clare | Mr. Robert Ainsworth and |
| Simpson, Alan (Nottingham S) | Mr. Don Touhig. |
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§ Amendment made: No. 10, in page 8, line 14, at end insert—
§ '(1A) For the purposes of subsection (1) any system such as is mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b) of that subsection is pending at a time when arrangements for giving effect to it have been made by any enactment but the arrangements are not yet in force.'.—[Mr. Mike Hall.]