I am not arguing about that. I am arguing that the two-stage approach, which the Government originally favoured, was the proportionate one. If we are left with the McCartney amendment and nothing else, it will be a summary ban because it is an all-or-nothing position. That is my point. I maintain that, unless we ask the other place to think again, we will have on our hands a travesty of the parliamentary process. Without apology, I therefore beg to move.
Division on Earl Howe’s Amendment
Contents 82; Not-Contents 170. [See col. 638 for explanation of mistake in voting figures.]
Earl Howe’s Amendment disagreed.
Motion agreed.
Amendment 12
Moved by
Health Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Howe
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 9 November 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Health Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
714 c621 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:43:45 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_593540
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_593540
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_593540