Originally Posted by :
Kenneth Clarke (Rushcliffe)
Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold)
Roger Gale (North Thanet)
John Gummer (Suffolk Coastal)
William Hague (Richmond Yorks)
Alan Haselhurst (Saffron Walden)
David Heathcoat-Amory (Wells)
Daniel Kawczynski (Shrewsbury & Atcham)
Julian Lewis (New Forest East)
Michael Lord (Central Suffolk & North Ipswich)
Michael Mates (East Hampshire)
George Osborne (Tatton)
Richard Ottaway (Croydon South)
Nicholas Soames (Mid Sussex)
Robert Walter (North Dorset)
Nigel Waterson (Eastbourne)
Ann Widdecombe (Maidstone & The Weald)
George Young (North West Hampshire)

Note Clarke, the supposed liberal leaning Tory not standing up for liberty at all.

Why don't the Tories throw him out? [/b]
[Rep]

If these people had voted no, the majority would have been down to 12.

Do we know if they were deliberate abstainers or just didn't turn up for some reason or otther?
[Rep]

This is an odd bunch -including -
Roger Gale the former Radio Caroline DJ - used to being a pirate!
Anne Widdecombe - voted to ban fox hunting!
David Heathcote-Amery - sat for hours picking over the EU constitution trying to save us from tyranny!

Nicholas Soames should know better! Probably was out to dinner!
[Rep]

Umm guys, these folks were probably in Portsmouth.
[Rep]

If it was laziness, then shame on them.

If there were some very good reasons, then I want to hear them.

Clarke said he would absatain. Makes you wonder if there is substance to this Bilderberg stuff.
[Rep]

The 18 tories are shown as absent. there were 20 labour members absent. In other words, it made no difference.

Also, we are unaware of any pairing that went on between the absent labour 'ayes' and the absent tory 'no's'. I suspect many of the 18 and 20 had made a formal pairing arrangement.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by C_steam:
The 18 tories are shown as absent. there were 20 labour members absent. In other words, it made no difference.

You're assuming those Labour members would have voted with the government (and the Tories against). That's not necessarily so.

Originally Posted by :
Also, we are unaware of any pairing that went on between the absent labour 'ayes' and the absent tory 'no's'. I suspect many of the 18 and 20 had made a formal pairing arrangement.

Aren't pairing arrangements usually recorded - so MPs who use them can prove they weren't neglecting their responsibilities?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by :
You're assuming those Labour members would have voted with the government (and the Tories against). That's not necessarily so.

True. But a reasonable supposition if you look at the ratio of tories who voted 'no' and the labourites who voted 'yes'.

Originally Posted by :
Aren't pairing arrangements usually recorded - so MPs who use them can prove they weren't neglecting their responsibilities?

I think so - but couldn't find any reference to who paired with who on this vote. Note to self - must try harder! :-)ops: Hence why I used the phrase 'I suspect'.
[Rep]

Apparently the Tory whip was to vote Aye, so they took the easy route and abstained. I wish that they could have shown more fibre and voted No, but I never hold much hope out for those blue benches.

However, the Conservative Party doesn't at the moment know where it lies, some say Authoritarian, others edge on the Libertarian side (not much alas.)
This is why this party is dying, and I do agree (with RKS) that we should make a stab at hastening it's demise and replacing it as a genuine freedom, small government loving party.

The Lib Dems are highly authoritarian, as are Nu Labour.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by C_steam:

Originally Posted by :
You're assuming those Labour members would have voted with the government (and the Tories against). That's not necessarily so.

True. But a reasonable supposition if you look at the ratio of tories who voted 'no' and the labourites who voted 'yes'.

Originally Posted by Alex:
Apparently the Tory whip was to vote Aye, so they took the easy route and abstained. I wish that they could have shown more fibre and voted No, but I never hold much hope out for those blue benches.

I don't understand this. Alex, are you really saying the Tories were told to vote with the government. If so, why wasn't the government majority much greater? C_steam, what were the proportions of yes and no for Tories and for Labour? Your comment would make sense if nearly all Labour voted yes and nearly all Tories voted no, but that doesn't seem to tie up with Alex's claim.
[Rep]