Clause 251 — Proceedings for recovery orders in England and Wales or Northern Ireland

Orders of the Day — Proceeds of Crime Bill – in the House of Commons at 6:40 pm on 18th July 2002.

Alert me about debates like this

Votes in this debate

Lords amendment: No. 110.

Motion made, and Question put, That this House disagrees with the Lords in the said amendment.— [Mrs. McGuire.]

The House divided: Ayes 242, Noes 133.

Division number 314 Orders of the Day — Proceeds of Crime Bill — Clause 251 — Proceedings for recovery orders in England and Wales or Northern Ireland

Aye: 242 MPs

No: 133 MPs

Ayes: A-Z by last name

Tellers

Nos: A-Z by last name

Tellers

Question accordingly agreed to.

Lords amendment disagreed to.

Photo of Michael Lord Michael Lord Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

Order. I will take points of order after I have finished putting the Questions.

Lords amendments Nos. 113 and 166 disagreed to.

Subsequent Lords amendments agreed to [some with Special Entry].

Committee appointed to draw up Reasons to be assigned to the Lords for disagreeing to certain of their amendments to the Bill: Mr. Bob Ainsworth, Norman Baker, Mr. Dominic Grieve, Mr. John Heppell, Dr. Howard Stoate and Mr. David Wilshire; Mr. Bob Ainsworth to be Chairman of the Committee; Three to be the quorum of the Committee.—[Mr. Heppell.]

To withdraw immediately.

Reasons for disagreeing to certain Lords amendments reported, and agreed to; to be communicated to the Lords.

Photo of Eric Forth Eric Forth Conservative, Bromley and Chislehurst 7:15 pm, 18th July 2002

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You said a few moments ago that you would take no more points of order. I am troubled about that because, as you know, in the House hon. Members are usually free to make points of order, and the Chair hears points of order. Can you help the House and help me certainly by clarifying whether there is any deeper significance in what you said, or whether it was specific to the circumstances in which you said it?

Photo of Michael Lord Michael Lord Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

Perhaps I can answer the right hon. Gentleman's question directly. At the point when he raised the point of order, it was the responsibility of the Chair to put all the questions necessary to be put at that time. That is laid down by the House.

Photo of David Wilshire David Wilshire Conservative, Spelthorne

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. At Prime Minister's Question Time yesterday, the Prime Minister alleged that the Conservative party was opposed to the Proceeds of Crime Bill. It is undoubtedly the case, in my opinion, that that statement was directed at our support for what is known as the Lloyd amendment. That amendment was voted on a few moments ago without any opportunity to demonstrate that the Prime Minister was completely and utterly wrong in his allegation, and that our purpose in opposing the Government today was simply to make it clear that we are trying to improve the Bill. We were denied the right to put that on the record. What remedy do we have when the Prime Minister makes allegations that are not correct?

Photo of Michael Lord Michael Lord Deputy Speaker (Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means)

That is not a matter for the Chair at this point.