Section 54B — Terms of leases

Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3 – in the Scottish Parliament at 3:15 pm on 12 March 2003.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party 3:15, 12 March 2003

Amendment 103 is grouped with amendments 138, 31, 139, 33, 34, 104, 35, 36, 37, 38, 105 and 106.

If amendment 34 is agreed to, I cannot call amendment 104 and if amendment 36 is agreed to, I cannot call amendment 37 because of pre-emption. Amendment 103 would not pre-empt amendment 138.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour

The Rural Development Committee inserted section 54B at stage 2 to give 1991 act tenants a right to assign their interests in the tenancy. I opposed that at stage 2 because we were concerned that the amendment had been lodged without much consideration being given to its practical effects. We have consequently given a lot of thought to the new provision since stage 2, in consultation with the industry. Our considered view at the conclusion of that consideration is that section 54B will not in its current form benefit tenants generally, but could prove to be damaging to the sector as a whole.

I will make it clear what the effect of section 54B as it stands would be for tenants. The only tenants who would benefit from the right that section 54B gives would be those who plan to leave the industry fairly soon. However, even for those tenants there is no guarantee about what the value of the assignation might be. Not even the Scottish Tenant Farmers Action Group is able to predict whether the provision would in practice leave tenants with the funds that would help them to retire.

What about tenants who intend to stay on the land? Any prospect of an assigned value in the future would be cancelled out by the prospective increase in rent that a tenant would be required to pay to reflect the existence of the new right. Assignees who become new tenants would find that the effect of section 54B would be to deprive them—through a combination of increased rental payments and the initial assignation payment—of the valuable funds that they would otherwise put into their business.

Section 54B does not make sense from tenants' perspective. I should add that further problems would arise if the right to assign were to attract significant value. In that case, the immediate loss to the tenanted value of land, to a landlord with a tenant who was liable to exercise the right, could be substantial—perhaps up to 40 per cent to 50 per cent in some cases—because the landlord would lose the expectation of reclaiming vacant possession in the foreseeable future. Over time, that loss would be eroded as a result of the increased rent that the land would attract; that would mean that the tenant would have less to invest in the agricultural benefit of the land. We are concerned that, in the initial stages, a genuine risk of challenge under the European convention on human rights for a loss of property rights would emerge in those circumstances.

Just as we question section 54B as it stands, we also question some of Fergus Ewing's amendments. The National Farmers Union of Scotland raised with us the point that a tenant will lose the statutory right to compensation at waygo if the tenant assigns his or her interest. In amendments 31 and 139, Fergus Ewing appears to be trying to ensure that the outgoing tenant receives full compensation at waygo from the landlord, despite having assigned the interest.

However, amendment 139 contains a material ambiguity that we believe would make the provision technically defective. The amendment refers to the tenant's right to compensation at waygo on assignation, but who would be the tenant at that point—would the tenant be the assignor or the assignee? Who would pay the compensation—would it be the assignee or the landlord?

In amendments 33 to 35, Fergus Ewing seeks to adjust the basis on which the landlord may withhold consent to a proposed assignation. The effect would be to place the onus on the landlord to demonstrate that the proposed assignee did not have the ability to pay the necessary costs, or did not have the necessary skills and experience. The issues are similar to those that were debated this morning in our debate on amendments to section 7; our response remains the same. We have received no criticism on that aspect of the bill from tenants or their representatives. As with section 7, the current drafting also reflects the principle of delectus personae, which recognises that in such leases the landlord has some flexibility in selecting a tenant based on his or her comfort with that person.

I turn to the Executive amendments. Although I said that section 54B as drafted would not be beneficial for tenants, I acknowledge the concern that has been expressed by the Scottish Tenant Farmers Action Group, which I met last week. That group pointed out that it can be difficult for a tenant family to manage a farm effectively when the tenant is unable to pass on the position of tenant to a son or daughter as heir, who might be better able to develop the land effectively, productively and imaginatively. In those circumstances, it can be difficult for an aging farmer to obtain finance to invest in the land, whereas one or other of his offspring might be in a better position so to do. At present, the tenant remains the tenant until his or her death—until his or her physical demise—and must assume all the responsibilities of the tenant until that day. That is not right.

Executive amendments 103 to 106 will adjust section 54B to allow for assignation, but only between family members. That will enable a tenant to pass on their interest in the farm to a family member without waiting until succession on the death of the farmer. The tenant would acquire no financial interest in the tenancy, thus avoiding the practical difficulties that that would present. The landlord would suffer no loss because the new tenant would simply take up the position earlier than might have been the case under the 1991 act.

Beyond that right, any term in a lease that prohibits assignation would remain valid by virtue of amendment 105. Amendment 106 is a drafting amendment, which will delete section 54B(7), which is irrelevant for those purposes.

The Executive will support Fergus Ewing's amendment 36, which is an important addition to the whole. The amendment will remove the right of the landlord to acquire the tenant's interest on assignation. That is an important provision because allowing for such a right in a transfer between family members would cut across the tenant family's right to security of tenure, which is what we are trying to achieve. We are happy to accept Fergus Ewings's amendment 36. Indeed, we lodged a similar amendment, which was not accepted because it closely paralleled his amendment. If amendment 36 is agreed to, I understand that amendment 37 will not be necessary.

Fergus Ewing's manuscript amendment 138 would offer an alternative definition of a family to that which is offered in the Succession (Scotland) Act 1964. Let me make it quite clear that the relevant definition is the one in that 1964 act. After all, we are responding to a call from tenant farmers that a tenant should be able to bring forward succession rights—the succession rights that are laid out in the 1964 act—that would otherwise have had to wait until the farmer's death.

I move amendment 103.

Photo of Fergus Ewing Fergus Ewing Scottish National Party

I am delighted that the Executive will accept amendment 36—I feel as if we are now making some progress.

I want in speaking to the amendments to emphasise that the committee decided to support the measure by a vote of six to five. Rhoda Grant lodged the amendment that the Executive now feels would be dangerous and would have severely adverse consequences for the sector.

However, the principle that Rhoda Grant supported at stage 2 and which the SNP continues to support at stage 3 is very simple: secure tenants in Scotland should have security of tenure. They have an asset that they cannot pass on or transact, but those who hold commercial leases for shops and offices are able to transact that asset by selling it on. The principle would create a market that would allow those tenants who Ross Finnie described as being "stuck" to become unstuck and able to sell off their assets. It would also mean that they would be able to create opportunities for new tenants to come into the market. I advance my argument in such terms because I understand that certain Conservative members generally support markets and the ability to transact with assets, but I suspect that will not apply to the agricultural sector today.

My second serious point is that the Scottish Tenant Farmers Action Group supports the combined effects of my amendments. At a meeting yesterday John Kinnaird—the National Farmers Union of Scotland's new president—also supported them. I will explain the basis of his reasoning. He believes that a combination of amendments 31, 139, 36 and 138 would allow assignation with compensation to the outgoing tenant, and would give the landlord the benefit of conversion.

By mirroring section 2 provisions—which allow conversion from a secure tenancy to a LDT—we are saying that the incoming tenant would acquire a 25-year LDT. As John Kinnaird acknowledged, that would mean that there was something in this for everyone; the landlord would acquire the right to vacant possession. We lodged amendment 31 because of the argument that if that provision was not contained in the bill, we would be creating what might amount to a perpetual tenancy, so the landlord would never have any prospect of getting back vacant possession.

I do not intend to move amendments 33, 34 and 35 because we have in effect debated those amendments, which were reflected in amendments 9, 10 and 12, if my memory serves me correctly.

The provision that is contained in my amendments is vital for tenant farmers. If we really want to give secure tenants in Scotland a better deal, we must give them the opportunity to free up their assets so they can retire, and so that new people can come into the farming sector in Scotland.

Photo of Alex Fergusson Alex Fergusson Conservative

We will accept Executive amendments 103, 104, 105 and 106. I have little else to say except that I find that, as always, Fergus Ewing's amendments seek to tilt the balance of the bill a little bit too far away from the consensus that the stakeholders group achieved. They would certainly tilt that balance too far for us to be able to support them.

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat

The intention behind the concept of assignation was to free up the tenanted sector. In far too many cases, tenants are trapped in their tenancies. That is because what was always regarded as being of true value on a tenanted holding—the stock—has been significantly devalued in recent years because of the impact of BSE; much of the collateral and asset value has been lost.

Many people are trapped on their farms and are unable to realise enough money to buy a house so that they could move out and continue to farm. Creating the right to assign a tenancy to a third party would free up the tenanted sector, provide opportunities for new people to come in and allow third parties to access tenancies.

I am not convinced by the Executive's arguments on amendment 103, which seeks to limit third party assignations so that they can be made only to family members. The criticism that a more open system of assignation would create perpetual tenancies and that landowners could never expect to reclaim vacant land has been answered by Fergus Ewing's amendment 31, which would create a 25-year limited duration tenancy when a tenancy was assigned to a third party.

I want the minister to detail in his summing up why he thinks that it is wrong to permit all third party assignations. Unless I hear a good reason why we should not do so, I will not be minded to support the Executive on amendment 103.

Photo of Stewart Stevenson Stewart Stevenson Scottish National Party 3:30, 12 March 2003

In many ways, the same arguments apply on assignation to members of the family as applied to residency, which we debated earlier. Is assignation good for the tenanted farm or the landlord if an aging farmer continues working until he or she—I suspect that there are few shes—dies? Hardly: it is better that there should be a degree of planning about the assignation at an appropriate time for the farmer and his successor. On that basis, I support Fergus Ewing's proposals whole-heartedly, as I was happy to support Rhoda Grant's amendment 49 at stage 2—[ Interruption. ]

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

Order. There is a lot of activity on the back benches. If members want to speak to one another, they should do so outside.

Photo of Stewart Stevenson Stewart Stevenson Scottish National Party

The tenanted sector depends for its vibrancy on the turnover of tenancies. Fergus Ewing's amendments would permit acceleration in the turnover of tenancies. If more tenancies are turning over, more people will be attracted to the sector, which will benefit tenants and landlords. I am happy to support Fergus Ewing's amendments.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour

Stewart Stevenson contradicts what he said at stage 2. Fergus Ewing's amendments run against what Rhoda Grant sought in lodging amendment 49 at stage 2, which was a right to assign, which would give tenants a way out of tenancies, and would liberate land for further tenancies and perhaps stimulate the market. However, it is perverse that, at the point of stimulating the market, the value of the assignation would decrease, whereas the value of the assignation would increase in direct proportion to the lack of tenanted land on the market.

The imposition of a payment obligation on the landlord ought to be an integral part of Fergus Ewing's proposals, but it is not, which runs counter to his stated objective. I accept that Fergus Ewing is trying to ensure that the outgoing tenant receives full compensation at waygo from the landlord, despite having assigned their interest. That has been sought by the NFUS and others. While he undoubtedly intends for the outgoing tenant—the assignor—to benefit, it is possible to read amendment 139 with the result that compensation at waygo is payable to the assignee, who would become the tenant

"On assignation of a lease".

Furthermore, amendment 139 would not place a specific obligation to pay compensation at waygo on any party, which is a fairly major omission. As a matter of interpretation, Fergus Ewing will argue that the landlord is due to pay the compensation as normal at waygo, but that would obviously be a matter for the courts to determine because of the lack of clarity in amendment 139. The amendment would not make for good legislation and is not something that George Lyon should support, despite his past support for—among other things—the absolute right to buy.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 103 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 28

For: Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Butler, Bill, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Deacon, Susan, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Ferguson, Patricia, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, Maclean, Kate, Martin, Paul, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLeish, Henry, McMahon, Michael, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Stephen, Nicol, Stone, Mr Jamie, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wallace, Mr Jim, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Against: Adam, Brian, Canavan, Dennis, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Ingram, Mr Adam, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macmillan, Maureen, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, McLeod, Fiona, McNeil, Mr Duncan, Morgan, Alasdair, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Russell, Michael, Stevenson, Stewart, Ullrich, Kay, White, Ms Sandra

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 75, Against 25, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 103 agreed to.

Amendment 138 not moved.

Amendment 31 moved—[Fergus Ewing].

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 31 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 29

For: Adam, Brian, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, McLeod, Fiona, Morgan, Alasdair, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Stevenson, Stewart, Ullrich, Kay, White, Ms Sandra
Against: Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Butler, Bill, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Deacon, Susan, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, 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, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLeish, Henry, McMahon, Michael, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Stephen, Nicol, Stone, Mr Jamie, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wallace, Mr Jim, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan, Young, John

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 23, Against 77, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 31 disagreed to.

[Amendment 139 moved—[Fergus Ewing].]

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 139 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 30

For: Adam, Brian, Canavan, Dennis, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, McLeod, Fiona, Morgan, Alasdair, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Quinan, Mr Lloyd, Russell, Michael, Stevenson, Stewart, Ullrich, Kay, White, Ms Sandra
Against: Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Butler, Bill, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Deacon, Susan, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Ferguson, Patricia, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Fitzpatrick, Brian, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnstone, Alex, 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, McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay, McLeish, Henry, McMahon, Michael, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Stephen, Nicol, Stone, Mr Jamie, Tosh, Mr Murray, Wallace, Mr Jim, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan, Young, John

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 25, Against 79, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 139 disagreed to.

Amendments 33 and 34 not moved.

Amendment 104 moved—[Ross Finnie]—and agreed to.

Amendment 35 not moved.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

I take it that you do not want to move amendment 36, Mr Ewing.

Photo of Fergus Ewing Fergus Ewing Scottish National Party

No, I want to move it. Amendment 36 is my moment of triumph. [ Laughter. ]

Amendment 36 moved—[Fergus Ewing].

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

I will put that to the test. The question is, that amendment 36 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 31

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

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 89, Against 16, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 36 agreed to.

[Amendment 38 not moved.]

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

Does any member object to my calling on the minister to move amendments 105 to 110 en bloc, and to my putting a single question on the amendments?

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

In that case, I shall extract amendment 106 and put the questions separately.

Amendment 105 moved—[Ross Finnie]—and agreed to.

[Amendment 106 moved—[Ross Finnie].]

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The question is, that amendment 106 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 32

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

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

The result of the division is: For 80, Against 2, Abstentions 23.

Amendment 106 agreed to.