After section 6

Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3 – in the Scottish Parliament at 4:45 pm on 13th February 2002.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party 4:45 pm, 13th February 2002

Amendment 1 is grouped with amendments 33, 84, 84A, 84B, 84C, 84D, 84E, 84F, 84G, 84H, 84I, 84J and 84K. Although amendment 1 does not pre-empt amendments 33 and 84, and although amendment 33 does not pre-empt amendment 84, I presume that the Parliament will not agree to more than one of those amendments, if it agrees to any. If amendment 84D is agreed to, amendment 84E will have been pre-empted.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

The issue of compensation is extremely important for people who are going to be affected by the bill. I thought that the intention of the debate was to remove the effects of the bill from people who engage in legitimate pest control activities but, so far, it is not clear who will be affected by the bill. It is clear that the mounted hunts and those who engage in hare coursing will be affected, but it is not clear who else will be clobbered by the bill.

During stage 2, I lodged a compensation amendment because I have a fundamental problem with how the bill has been drafted. I said earlier that I thought that it should have focused on the mounted hunts and on hare coursing. We all know that baiting foxes is already illegal. However, the bill has not focused on those activities, and that is the problem with it. My compensation amendment failed in committee by one vote. It failed because the Executive opposed it. I was told that the Executive opposed anything that would cost money. There is no doubt that a compensation scheme will cost money, but that is not to say that it is not the right thing to introduce. I am heartened by the Executive's present position and by the fact that the argument has been won. It is right to give compensation to those people whose activities the Parliament chooses to make illegal.

This is not like other situations, in which a company or an industry goes bust and we try to help it. The Parliament is legislating to outlaw various activities that are legal at the moment. Under the European convention on human rights, we have to offer people who are directly affected by the bill compensation. The Presiding Officer has already indicated that only one of the three proposed compensation schemes can be accepted. I am heartened that Karen Gillon has proposed a compensation package that is backed by the Scottish Executive, even though the Executive is not backing mine. I would have liked the Executive to back my compensation proposal, and I shall explain why.

It is most appropriate to set up an independent commission on hunting compensation. When there is a dispute, it is useful to have an independent mechanism to adjudicate on compensation. Amendment 84—although it at least advocates the principle of compensation—leaves the compensation process in the hands of Scottish ministers. I am pleased that the argument has been won and that the Executive is paying attention to people's basic human rights. Compensation is absolutely essential. Whichever of the three amendments is chosen—and I would like there to be as much debate as possible in the time that we have available—all members should vote for one of them.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

Mr Rumbles, I ask you to clarify whether you are moving your amendment.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

I am considering that. Do I not do that at the end of the debate, when I respond?

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

No. I must determine on which amendment the debate hangs. You must inform me.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

I do not know whether there is support in the chamber for amendment 1—that is my problem. I move amendment 1.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

You have to move it or not move it.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

I am sorry. The loudspeakers in the chamber have broken and I am straining to hear.

I call Alex Fergusson to speak to amendment 33 and the other amendments in the group.

Photo of Alex Fergusson Alex Fergusson Conservative

I hope that you can hear me all right, Presiding Officer.

During the recent debate on the Fur Farming (Prohibition) (Scotland) Bill, two weeks ago, I drew the Parliament's attention to the mean-mindedness of the Executive in offering compensation in that bill when none would be sought and refusing it in the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Bill although real and devastating loss will be felt by hundreds of real and devastated people. Those people are not the so-called toffs, against whom I understand that this bill is aimed, but real, down-to-earth, honest-to-goodness working people.

Naive and innocent politician that I am, I had reckoned without an unseen and previously unheralded arm of the Scottish Executive—certainly unseen at the Rural Development Committee for the past two years—in the shape of Karen Gillon, who suddenly, belatedly and with what I think is called the technical assistance of the Executive, whacked in an amendment, more or less at the last minute. I believe, as do most members, that amendment 84 is an Executive amendment in all but name. Even if it is not, it seems to have received the blessing of the First Minister, which as good as makes it an Executive amendment.

I suppose we are meant to applaud amendment 84's effort to address the subject of compensation, but I cannot do so. Close inspection of amendment 84 shows beyond a doubt that only those who cease to carry on an activity under section 1 that was carried on before, and ended because of, the enactment of section 1 could apply for compensation. Under amendment 84, therefore, only a landowner or the master of hounds—as far as I can see—would be able to apply for compensation. In addition, amendment 84 states only that such an application "may" receive attention from the minister.

How would amendment 84 compensate Wendy Turnbull—a groom from the Borders—who chooses her low-paid way of life out of love for her job and for the house that goes with it? How would they compensate Paul Allison—a self-employed farrier whom many members will have met—who depends on hunters for 60 per cent of his business every year? How would amendment 84 compensate Ian Forsyth, who is a haulier whose business is irrevocably bound up with the world of mounted fox hunting? How would it compensate anyone, other than the couple of toffs against whom the bill is apparently aimed? The simple answer is that amendment 84 would not compensate anyone, because the Executive and those who support Karen Gillon's unamended amendment 84 do not want it to.

Amendment 84 is nothing less than a thinly veiled attempt to pay lip service to compensation. Frankly, it is not worth the paper on which it is written. The only meaningful way to put a compensation package into the bill is to support amendment 33. It is interesting that amendment 33 has also had the technical assistance of the Executive, because—except for a minor change of wording—it provides for exactly the same compensatory package as the Executive put into the Fur Farming (Prohibition) (Scotland) Bill. If the wording of amendment 33 was good enough for that bill, surely it is good enough for the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Bill.

I argue that amendment 33 is an Executive amendment. It offers meaningful compensation, which a bill that removes a person's right to earn a living surely has a moral obligation to offer. I beg members to support amendment 33, which is the only amendment that is meaningful and worthy of support.

Photo of Karen Gillon Karen Gillon Labour

I begin by taking exception to remarks that were made by Alex Fergusson, as I come from the Borders, was brought up there and now represent what is ostensibly a rural constituency. He talked about real, good, down-to-earth, honest, working-class people. I consider myself one of those people and I consider the constituents who have made representations to me to be good, honest, working-class people.

When considering compensation, members have several options. The first option is to do nothing. Some members will believe that to be the right thing to do, perhaps because of the adversarial nature of the debate and the entrenched positions that people have adopted. I do not agree with that position.

The second option is to adopt a scheme of compensation. That is the correct way forward. I have held three views throughout the progression of the bill. One is that the right of gamekeepers and farmers to go about their legitimate business should be protected. My votes on the bill have reflected that view throughout, as have my comments and my actions. I will continue to argue that the bill will protect the rights of gamekeepers and farmers.

Photo of Karen Gillon Karen Gillon Labour

No, Mr Gallie. Sit down.

A compensation scheme should relate to the fact that mounted fox hunting will have been made illegal. However, that should not remove employers' responsibility for correctly looking after their employees. We should do nothing that takes away that responsibility. In particular, the compensation scheme should not prevent the opportunity to develop new activities, such as drag hunting, in the Borders or other affected areas.

We have two other options before us, both of which are uncosted. The first is Mike Rumbles's option, which would put compensation in the hands of an unelected quango. It would put in jeopardy the spending priorities of the people of Scotland, which are education, health and transport because neither the amendment in the name of Mike Rumbles nor the amendment in the name of Alex Fergusson give an indication of how much their proposals would cost. I do not accept that—

Photo of Karen Gillon Karen Gillon Labour

I will give members an indication of how much it will cost. [Interruption.] If people let me finish my speech, they will find out what I am going to say. Barracking from the Tories about compensation for people who are made unemployed as a result of Government legislation is ironic. They should speak to the miners, the steelworkers and the shipyard workers about compensation.

Photo of David McLetchie David McLetchie Conservative

They received tens of thousands of pounds.

Photo of Karen Gillon Karen Gillon Labour

Compensation for people who have been made redundant is not a laughing matter. It is remarkable that the leader of the Conservative party should find the issue funny.

The issue of compensation needs to be addressed. The scheme that I have suggested that we introduce puts implementation in the hands of the ministers, who are directly elected by the Scottish Parliament and who are accountable to the people of Scotland for their actions. They are also responsible for their departmental budgets and will have to base any decisions on the spending priorities of the Government. Any decision that they make will need to come before the Parliament and that is why I accept amendment 84K. I believe that any proposal should come back to the Parliament—under a negative statutory instrument if necessary—for final agreement and ratification.

Photo of Fergus Ewing Fergus Ewing Scottish National Party

Given that Karen Gillon has criticised the other two proposals on the basis that they do not say how much they would cost, can she tell us how much her scheme would cost?

Photo of Karen Gillon Karen Gillon Labour

The scheme deals with people who are directly affected—although I cannot guess who will apply for compensation. The obvious people who will be affected are, for example, people who have hounds that are trained and bred for a specific purpose and which will, because they could not be redeployed or kept as pets, have to be destroyed in a humane way. Many of the people who have horses do not use those horses solely for the purpose of hunting, although that may be very much part of their lives. People in the Borders ride their horses for many reasons, only one of which is hunting.

I estimate that the cost of the proposal would be around £150,000 to £200,000.

People who are made redundant are eligible for compensation under redundancy payment schemes—in the same way as people who were made redundant in my constituency when Daks-Simpson's factories closed and people in other places throughout Scotland. If employers have contracts of employment with their employees, they should honour them. Those contracts will require relative redundancy payments to be made. If people do not like that situation, I am sorry, but that is the fact of the matter for people day in, day out across Scotland. It would not be in the interests of my constituents or the other people of Scotland to bankrupt the Executive to provide compensation and relieve employers of their responsibility.

Photo of David Mundell David Mundell Conservative

I am grateful to Karen for accepting my amendment—it is just a pity that it is the wrong one.

On top of all the ridiculous things that have been said today, Karen Gillon is arguing that we should compensate landowners who cannot hold a hare-coursing event on their ground. They are the people who are covered by her amendment. So tightly drawn is the amendment that people become eligible for compensation only if they actually cease committing a criminal activity. Those are the only people who are actively involved in the activity. Karen Gillon has not come here to stand up for the working class; she is standing up for the toffs. She is standing up for the master of the hounds, who is the only employed person who can get compensation. The grooms and the kennel maids will get nothing.

Photo of Jim Wallace Jim Wallace Liberal Democrat

In 1996, I supported a Conservative move in the House of Commons that outlawed the ownership and use of smaller firearms. Will Mr Mundell tell me whether the compensation scheme that the Conservative Government introduced compensated people for anything other than the direct loss of the guns that were made illegal under the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997?

Photo of David Mundell David Mundell Conservative

I am not familiar with that, because, as Jim Wallace knows, I was not in the House of Commons then—and I probably never will be.

Amendment 84 is just like the bill: the pretence that fox hunting is to be banned is the same as the pretence that any compensation is on offer to anybody who will be directly affected by the bill. There will be no such compensation. The amendment is a con. I urge members not to buy it, as it will deliver nothing. I urge members to support amendment 33.

Photo of Jamie McGrigor Jamie McGrigor Conservative

I will speak only to amendment 84D, which is the only one of the amendments in my name in the group that I will move. Amendment 84D addresses the central flaw of amendment 84, which is that it will compensate only those whose jobs not only cease because of but are outlawed by the bill. That neglects the much broader ripple effect that the bill will have on the rural industries that depend on hunting. Why should there be compensation for furriers but not for farriers?

Photo of Tricia Marwick Tricia Marwick Scottish National Party

I will deal with amendment 1. No more than 20 people are employed by hunts in Scotland. There is no need for anybody to lose their job under the bill. If the hunt managers chose to, they could adopt drag hunting instead of fox hunting. The kennel jobs and the hounds would then survive.

I had a phone call at the beginning of the consideration of the bill from a woman who would not give me her name. She said, "Tricia, I work for a hunt. I would be far happier drag hunting, but the hunters won't have it, so I am forced to campaign against the bill to save my job. I know that you are right and I wish you well." In areas where hunts have ceased to exist, equestrian activity has increased. Farriers, feed shops and vets will therefore find increased opportunities.

I will address tied housing, which Mike Rumbles also raises in amendment 1. As most members know, I previously worked for Shelter Scotland. I can tell members that there are many problems with current legislation, which mean that people who are sacked are also left homeless. The minister knows that—I have spoken to him about it.

I will examine what tied housing exists for. It is required, usually in rural areas, to ensure that someone who does a particular job also has somewhere to live. The reason for eviction is that the house is needed for some worker who comes in to do the same job as the person who has left. If employers or hunt managers argue that, because of the bill, a job no longer exists, the person who does that job will be made redundant. If the job has ceased to exist, the person will not be replaced and there is no need for the former worker to lose the house. It is simple for the hunt managers to convert the tied tenancy into a secure tenancy. If anybody is evicted because of the bill, it will be because of the vindictiveness of the hunt managers who evict them.

I do not believe that a case has been made for compensation, but if members believe that there is a case for compensation, I urge them to support amendment 84 and to reject amendments 1 and 33.

Photo of Phil Gallie Phil Gallie Conservative

I address my remarks to Karen Gillon. Today, all members received e-mails from her pleading with us to accept amendment 84. I was prepared to consider that. However, when I stood up to ask a pertinent question, I was dismissed. If that is the way that she wants to gather support, so be it.

I put three points to Karen Gillon. First, like Alex Fergusson, I ask what will happen to the Wendy Turnbulls of the world and to people such as Bob Robertson of Annbank, who has taken a lifetime to build up a saddler's business that depends on the hunt.

I put it to Karen Gillon that amendment 84 is nothing other than a sop to the European convention on human rights. The intention is simply to ensure that somewhere in the process we have gone along the line of meeting requirements.

Karen Gillon had the audacity to talk about cost. Has she looked at the overall cost of the bill—the cost on policing resources and the cost on our justice system? When she looks at cost, she should look at the whole picture.

Photo of John Home Robertson John Home Robertson Labour 5:15 pm, 13th February 2002

Seldom in the history of parliamentary proceedings has so much legislative energy been applied on behalf of so many to deal with so few. Two years of parliamentary deliberations have been spent on banning the activities of just 10 fox hunts. Now we are discussing compensation. Personally, I would not have chosen the banning of fox hunting as a priority for legislation in our new Parliament.

I have heard some fairly unconvincing arguments on both sides of the debate. The animal welfare argument for the bill has been overstated. On the other hand, it is sheer rubbish to suggest that the entire economy of rural Scotland depends on those 10 fox hunts. Nevertheless, here we are talking about compensation.

Fox hunting is a particularly nasty spectator sport. I know from my experience as a farmer that it is an extremely inefficient way of controlling foxes. Having represented a Scottish rural constituency for 23 years, I know that the majority of people throughout Scotland—rural as well as urban—are opposed to fox hunting.

As a libertarian, I am reluctant to interfere with the rights of minorities. It is right that we should consider compensation, even though the minority concerned said very little about the rights of other minorities during the Thatcher years, for example. As a democrat and a Scot who has spent long years fighting to achieve democratic control over Scottish legislation, my highest priority is to fulfil the considered decisions of the Parliament. It is right that those decisions should cover appropriate compensation.

I supported Elaine Murray's amendment at stage 2, which would have dealt with the matter in a very different way. When that amendment was not agreed to, I supported the bill. Today, I have in general supported the considered decisions of the Rural Development Committee. Now I will support amendment 84.

Photo of Margaret Ewing Margaret Ewing Scottish National Party

As a farm worker's daughter, it is a pleasure to follow a farm worker. I have listened with great interest to most of the debate. I am very concerned about some aspects of what has happened this afternoon.

In the case of compensation, I want to address in particular the issue of tied housing. On my lapel, I am wearing a medal that my father received for 30 years' service as a ploughman. From my experience, I know that if the job goes, the house goes. It is as simple as that. There is no secure tenancy in a tied house.

I ask Karen Gillon to think through the matter very seriously, because her scheme would allow the toffs to put people out from their tied cottages and to turn those cottages into holiday homes or chalets. That would add to the toffs' money, but it would make the former tenants of the cottages homeless—they would have to look for homes. If someone lives in a tied cottage, it is not easy even to get on to a council list. I know that from personal experience. I am proud of the work that my father did, but I will never forget the insecurity of being brought up in a tied house.

Photo of Dennis Canavan Dennis Canavan Independent

Will Karen Gillon be good enough to clarify a point about amendment 84? As I understand it, amendment 84 would confine compensation to people who have to cease an activity that will become an offence when the bill is enacted. Shoeing a horse will not become an offence, nor will cleaning out a stable. How on earth could the farrier or the stable hand qualify for compensation under amendment 84?

Photo of Margo MacDonald Margo MacDonald Independent

I would like to address the amendments on compensation as the convener of the Subordinate Legislation Committee.

Photo of Margo MacDonald Margo MacDonald Independent

I will say this carefully, so members should listen.

Unfortunately, no time has been given for the proper process of scrutiny that this Parliament says is preferable to the process that is followed at Westminster. On compensation, we must be seen to be fair. We must be seen to examine the issue properly. Although I have more sympathy with one of the amendments than with the others, all the amendments have fallen outwith the scrutiny of the Subordinate Legislation Committee. We know that that stores up trouble. I therefore urge members to have great caution in adopting any measure without proper scrutiny, even if one amendment might appear a bit fairer than the others.

Photo of Ross Finnie Ross Finnie Liberal Democrat

I want to make something clear about the approach that the Executive takes to compensation, not only for this bill but across the piece. Members present will be aware that, from time to time and in almost every portfolio, the Executive is called upon to consider the question of compensation. We must apply some consistency about the legal test of whether compensation is required. The advice that we received was that compensation would not necessarily be required for the bill.

Let me repeat that the first thing that we must consider is the activity that the bill would cause to cease. We must then consider the assets that would, in effect, be expropriated as a consequence of the bill. Having assessed those tests, we are then required to assess what the proportionate response would be in relation to those assets.

Amendment 1 is so widely drawn that it goes way beyond not only the principles of the bill but the principles that the Executive has been able to provide for any case that it has had to consider.

Amendment 33 has been lifted straight from the Fur Farming (Prohibition) (Scotland) Bill. In response to a question from Alex Fergusson at the conclusion of the stage 1 consideration of that bill, I made it clear that the losses addressed and the assets expropriated under that bill gave rise to the drafting of that section, which he has borrowed in amendment 33. I am bound to say that the Fur Farming (Prohibition) (Scotland) Bill is a different proposition from that which is before us today.

There is no doubt that the activities that the bill will catch, if it is enacted, are hunting and hare coursing. An appropriate and proportionate response would need to be given to those activities. In those circumstances, I believe that amendment 84 is appropriate and is proportionate to the mischief that may be caused to individuals or assets as a consequence of the bill. Accordingly, if MSPs were minded to give compensation, I would invite them to support amendment 84.

Photo of Ross Finnie Ross Finnie Liberal Democrat

I would also invite members to reject the amendments to amendment 84. To accept any of amendments 84A to 84K would be to redraw and extend the scope of amendment 84 in a way that is simply not appropriate.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The minister was not giving way; he had finished his speech. Bad luck, Mr Ewing.

Photo of Fergus Ewing Fergus Ewing Scottish National Party

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. We have not had any guidance on whether the Scottish Executive supports the figure that has been mentioned, which was between £150,000 and £250,000. Will you give us guidance on whether we will get a statement from the Executive on the matter?

Photo of Dorothy-Grace Elder Dorothy-Grace Elder Independent

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. We deserve clarity. Ms Gillon mentioned the figure of £150,000 to £250,000, which would work out at between £400 and £600 each. We must know what we are voting on.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

Order. That is not a point of order, nor is it a matter for me.

I call the member in charge, Bristow Muldoon. We are tight for time, so you must finish by 17.28 to leave two or three minutes for Mr Rumbles.

Photo of Bristow Muldoon Bristow Muldoon Labour

The amendments to provide compensation are a not-so-subtle attempt by the bill's opponents to introduce what Stewart Stevenson described astutely in the Rural Development Committee as "a poisoned pill". The amendments would place uncosted proposals upon the Scottish Executive. They would result in considerable damage to the Executive's expenditure on a whole range of areas such as education, health and transport. Amendment 1, in the name of Mike Rumbles, and amendment 33, in the name of Alex Fergusson, must be resisted for that reason.

The issue of jobs has been mentioned several times. I do not think that significant numbers of jobs will be lost as a result of this bill.

Photo of Bristow Muldoon Bristow Muldoon Labour

No, thank you.

Published reports indicate that the numbers of jobs at risk are far smaller than the numbers that are claimed by opponents of the bill. Some ridiculous claims have been made—I believe that Mr McLetchie originally claimed that 14,000 jobs were at risk.

Let me give members an example. In West Lothian, the hunt ceased 10 years ago. Since then, the number of people who have horses in West Lothian has risen. Farriers and stable hands need not lose their jobs if the people who are currently involved in hunting move into other equestrian activities.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

Mr Rumbles, you have two minutes and you should indicate whether you intend to press or withdraw your amendment.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

Some important points have been made. Karen Gillon said that Alex Fergusson and I had no idea how much our proposals—in amendments 33 and 1 respectively—would cost. That is absolutely true. I have no idea how much my proposal will cost, because we have no idea at all who will be affected by the bill. I am sure that Karen Gillon would admit that it has become clear that she does not know how much Executive money her amendment 84—

Photo of Karen Gillon Karen Gillon Labour

Given that Mr Rumbles's amendment 1 and Alex Fergusson's amendment 33 are far more wide-ranging than my amendment 84, does Mr Rumbles accept that to offer a blank cheque on an issue such as this would be irresponsible of this Parliament?

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

I do not agree that it would be irresponsible, because I believe firmly that, if this Parliament takes away in law the activities of gamekeepers, of people connected with the hunt, or of whomever, we will have to compensate people appropriately.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

I am sorry—I have only a short time.

I understand that amendment 1 would probably cost a lot more than the others. What interests me is ensuring that we win the argument over compensation. That is the most important issue.

Tricia Marwick's remarks bore no relation to reality, and I am sorry to note that she has left her place. Margaret Ewing's response on the issue of tied housing was far more eloquent than any that I could give.

We can choose only one of the three amendments. It is obvious from previous votes that there will be no support for my amendment 1. It is also obvious that there will be no support for Alex Fergusson's amendment 33. The most important thing is that we vote for the principle of compensation. Karen Gillon has proposed a scheme, therefore I will not press my amendment.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

I ask the permission of members for Mr Rumbles to withdraw amendment 1. Are members agreed?

Members:

No.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

In that case, we move straight to a vote.

The question is, that amendment 1 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Photo of Fergus Ewing Fergus Ewing Scottish National Party

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Can we have some guidance on whether the financial memorandum that accompanies this bill—which sets out the position in relation to the costs to the Scottish Executive—is affected by the sudden emergence of the figure that Karen Gillon has announced? There has been a lack of a clear statement from the Scottish Executive of what the costs will be. The financial referendum did not make any reference to the issue that we have been discussing.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

That is the responsibility of Mr Watson. I will press on.

The question is, that amendment 1 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Photo of Alex Neil Alex Neil Scottish National Party

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. The financial memorandum states that the bill will not involve costs to local authorities. It has not been made clear whether the £150,000 that Karen Gillon mentioned will come from a local authority budget—in which case the financial memorandum is rubbish—or from the Scottish Executive. Will the minister make that clear?

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The financial memorandum was produced by Mr Watson at an early stage, before compensation was talked about. I am determined to move on.

The question is, that amendment 1 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 41

For: Aitken, Bill, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Fergusson, Alex, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Harding, Mr Keith, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, Monteith, Mr Brian, Mundell, David, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Stone, Mr Jamie, Wallace, Ben, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Adam, Brian, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Butler, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Ewing, Fergus, Fabiani, Linda, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Grahame, Christine, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGugan, Irene, McLeish, Henry, McLeod, Fiona, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Russell, Michael, Scott, Tavish, Sheridan, Tommy, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Thomson, Elaine, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Welsh, Mr Andrew, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Abstentions: Brown, Robert, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Gorrie, Donald, Harper, Robin, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Tosh, Mr Murray, Young, John

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party 5:30 pm, 13th February 2002

The result of the division is: For 28, Against 90, Abstentions 7.

Amendment 1 disagreed to.

Amendment 33 moved—[Alex Fergusson].

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 33 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 42

For: Aitken, Bill, Cunningham, Roseanna, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fergusson, Alex, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Harding, Mr Keith, Harper, Robin, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McLetchie, David, Monteith, Mr Brian, Mundell, David, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Stone, Mr Jamie, Wallace, Ben, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Adam, Brian, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Butler, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Crawford, Bruce, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Fabiani, Linda, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGugan, Irene, McLeish, Henry, McLeod, Fiona, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Scott, Tavish, Sheridan, Tommy, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Thomson, Elaine, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Welsh, Mr Andrew, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Abstentions: Brown, Robert, Tosh, Mr Murray

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 33, Against 87, Abstentions 2.

Amendment 33 disagreed to.

Amendment 84 moved—[Karen Gillon].

Amendment 84A moved—[David Mundell].

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 84A be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 43

For: Aitken, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Cunningham, Roseanna, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fergusson, Alex, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Harding, Mr Keith, Hyslop, Fiona, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, MacDonald, Ms Margo, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, Monteith, Mr Brian, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Stone, Mr Jamie, Wallace, Ben, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Adam, Brian, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Canavan, Dennis, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Crawford, Bruce, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, McAllion, Mr John, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGugan, Irene, McLeish, Henry, McLeod, Fiona, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNulty, Des, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Scott, Tavish, Sheridan, Tommy, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Thomson, Elaine, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Abstentions: Fabiani, Linda, Harper, Robin, Lochhead, Richard, McNeill, Pauline, Tosh, Mr Murray, Young, John

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 37, Against 77, Abstentions 6.

Amendment 84A disagreed to.

Amendment 84B moved—[Mr Jamie McGrigor].

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 84B be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 44

For: Aitken, Bill, Cunningham, Roseanna, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fergusson, Alex, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Harding, Mr Keith, Hyslop, Fiona, Johnstone, Alex, MacDonald, Ms Margo, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, Monteith, Mr Brian, Mundell, David, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Raffan, Mr Keith, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Wallace, Ben
Against: Adam, Brian, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Crawford, Bruce, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harper, Robin, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McAllion, Mr John, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGugan, Irene, McLeish, Henry, McLeod, Fiona, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scott, Tavish, Sheridan, Tommy, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stevenson, Stewart, Stone, Mr Jamie, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Thomson, Elaine, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Welsh, Mr Andrew, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Abstentions: Fabiani, Linda, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wilson, Andrew, Young, John

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 31, Against 88, Abstentions 4.

Amendment 84B disagreed to.

Amendment 84C moved—[Mr Jamie McGrigor].

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 84C be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 45

For: Aitken, Bill, Cunningham, Roseanna, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fergusson, Alex, Fraser, Murdo, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Harding, Mr Keith, Hyslop, Fiona, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, Monteith, Mr Brian, Mundell, David, Neil, Alex, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Raffan, Mr Keith, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Stone, Mr Jamie
Against: Adam, Brian, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Crawford, Bruce, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harper, Robin, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGugan, Irene, McLeish, Henry, McLeod, Fiona, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Radcliffe, Nora, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scott, Tavish, Sheridan, Tommy, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Thomson, Elaine, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Welsh, Mr Andrew, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Abstentions: Fabiani, Linda, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Paterson, Mr Gil, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wilson, Andrew, Young, John

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 29, Against 87, Abstentions 6.

Amendment 84C disagreed to.

Amendment 84D moved—[Mr Jamie McGrigor].

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 84D be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 46

For: Aitken, Bill, Cunningham, Roseanna, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fergusson, Alex, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Harding, Mr Keith, Hyslop, Fiona, Johnstone, Alex, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, Monteith, Mr Brian, Mundell, David, Neil, Alex, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Raffan, Mr Keith, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Wallace, Ben
Against: Adam, Brian, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Brankin, Rhona, Butler, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Crawford, Bruce, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harper, Robin, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGugan, Irene, McLeish, Henry, McLeod, Fiona, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scott, Tavish, Sheridan, Tommy, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stevenson, Stewart, Stone, Mr Jamie, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Thomson, Elaine, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Abstentions: Fabiani, Linda, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Paterson, Mr Gil, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wilson, Andrew, Young, John

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 28, Against 87, Abstentions 6.

Amendment 84D disagreed to.

Amendment 84E moved—[David Mundell].

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 84E be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 47

For: Aitken, Bill, Cunningham, Roseanna, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Harding, Mr Keith, Hyslop, Fiona, Johnstone, Alex, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLetchie, David, Monteith, Mr Brian, Mundell, David, Neil, Alex, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Raffan, Mr Keith, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Wallace, Ben
Against: Adam, Brian, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Crawford, Bruce, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harper, Robin, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGugan, Irene, McLeish, Henry, McLeod, Fiona, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scott, Tavish, Sheridan, Tommy, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stevenson, Stewart, Stone, Mr Jamie, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Thomson, Elaine, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Welsh, Mr Andrew, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Abstentions: Fabiani, Linda, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Paterson, Mr Gil, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wilson, Andrew, Young, John

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 25, Against 88, Abstentions 6.

Amendment 84E disagreed to.

Amendments 84F to 84J not moved.

Amendment 84K moved—[David Mundell].

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 84K be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 48

For: Aitken, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Cunningham, Roseanna, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Fergusson, Alex, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Harding, Mr Keith, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Gordon, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Marwick, Tricia, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLeod, Fiona, McLetchie, David, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morgan, Alasdair, Mundell, David, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robison, Shona, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Sheridan, Tommy, Smith, Iain, Stevenson, Stewart, Stone, Mr Jamie, Sturgeon, Nicola, Wallace, Ben, Welsh, Mr Andrew, Wilson, Andrew, Young, John
Against: Adam, Brian, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McLeish, Henry, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Robson, Euan, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Swinney, Mr John, Thomson, Elaine, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Abstentions: Crawford, Bruce, Harper, Robin, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, Tosh, Mr Murray

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 54, Against 63, Abstentions 5.

Amendment 84K disagreed to.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 84 be agreed to. Are we all agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 49

For: Baillie, Jackie, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Chisholm, Malcolm, Cunningham, Roseanna, Deacon, Susan, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Gillon, Karen, Gorrie, Donald, Gray, Iain, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jenkins, Ian, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lyon, George, Macdonald, Lewis, MacKay, Angus, Macmillan, Maureen, Marwick, Tricia, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McNeil, Mr Duncan, Morgan, Alasdair, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Iain, Smith, Mrs Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stone, Mr Jamie, Thomson, Elaine, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Welsh, Mr Andrew, Wilson, Allan, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Adam, Brian, Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Barrie, Scott, Butler, Bill, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Fergusson, Alex, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Godman, Trish, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Grahame, Christine, Grant, Rhoda, Harding, Mr Keith, Hughes, Janis, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Johnstone, Alex, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, Maclean, Kate, Martin, Paul, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLeod, Fiona, McLetchie, David, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Peattie, Cathy, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Robison, Shona, Russell, Michael, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Sheridan, Tommy, Smith, Elaine, Stevenson, Stewart, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Ben, Whitefield, Karen
Abstentions: Crawford, Bruce, Harper, Robin, Lochhead, Richard, MacDonald, Ms Margo, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, McLeish, Henry, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Tosh, Mr Murray

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 47, Against 67, Abstentions 10.

Amendment 84 disagreed to.