← Back to MPs
John Mason

John Mason

Last served Glasgow East (2008-07-24 – 2010-05-06)
100.0
Conservative
4 coded votes
251
Total votes
127
Ayes
124
Noes
0
Other

Parliamentary History

24 Jul 2008 – 6 May 2010 (1 yr 9 mo)

Ideology spectrum

100.0
ProgressiveCentreConservative

Conservative — based on 4 coded votes across 1 axes (2% coverage).

Policy axis scores

0 = progressive, 50 = centre, 100 = conservative. Based on coded division votes.

Climate / energy 100
Low confidence 4 votes

Voting trends (most recent 12 months of activity)

Voting record

December 2009 6 votes
November 2009 15 votes
Division Date Vote
The third crucial element of the Bill is remuneration. The Bill relates to improved corporate governance, which goes hand in hand with a strengthened regulatory framework. There is general consensus that remuneration practices in the financial services sector were a contributory factor in the recent financial crisis. That is why we are taking decisive action to tackle remuneration practices that i... 30 Nov 2009 NO
Division 5 30 Nov 2009 NO
Division 4 26 Nov 2009 AYE
My hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. Field) described the fag end of a Parliament that we are undoubtedly in at the moment. As we all know, we have reached the stage whereby the Government are pointlessly going into a last six months because they cannot call an election with any confidence of winning at the time that they normally would. We therefore have to fill the... 26 Nov 2009 NO
Division 1 25 Nov 2009 NO
Division 2 25 Nov 2009 NO
I am not sure where that leaves aims for a Digital Britain. The Home Office paper, "Protecting the public in a changing communications environment", would better serve the public by enabling roaming than by some of the other activities planned for e-mails and such like. Now, a burden is placed on the consumer to find the ability to access more than one network. Consumers sometimes have to purchase... 11 Nov 2009 NO
Given that the staff working at the sharp end do not want to be involved in mandatory sanctions for women with children up to the age of three, why does my hon. Friend think that Ministers are so wedded to those mandatory sanctions? They have not explained themselves and my hon. Friend might be able to shed some light on this issue. I do not accept that sanctions are necessary. All that can be sai... 10 Nov 2009 NO
I do not accept that sanctions are necessary. All that can be said for them is that they provide a structure for the relationship, because staff cannot simply give up the attempt to make contact; they must continue the encouragement. That is the only beneficial aspect of a sanctions programme that I can see, and if it is to be used so rarely, why invoke it? In an earlier intervention, which was ra... 10 Nov 2009 NO
I agree, and as the right hon. Gentleman will know, we have today been invited by the Home Secretary to extend the remit of the advisory committee to look at the possibility of admitting intercept evidence in coroners' inquests. I cannot speak for the right hon. Gentleman, but I would happily agree to the remit of the committee being widened in that way. With the leave of the House, I wish to repl... 9 Nov 2009 AYE
It is tempting on these occasions to load the IPC with a huge number of responsibilities. Part of what I have tried to set out is a balance of powers, so that it is the role of Government to set out need, get the skills strategy right and obtain the investment. The job of the IPC is to make a specific judgment about specific developments. That said, I am sympathetic to the point my hon. Friend mak... 9 Nov 2009 NO
Question accordingly agreed to. Lords amendment 59 disagreed to. 9 Nov 2009 NO
I will be very brief—briefer than I would otherwise be—one reason being that like many Members of the House, I would like to hear the views of the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard) , if, indeed, Mr. Deputy Speaker, you were minded to call him at any stage. In that hope, I will be as brief as I can be. It is exactly the same with a coroner's inquest. If somebody ha... 9 Nov 2009 AYE
We have made clear that on the question of public subsidy for nuclear—it was clear in the White Paper produced by my right hon. Friend the Member for Barrow and Furness (Mr. Hutton) —we are not going to provide public subsidy for the construction, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power stations. Motion made, and Question put forthwith ( Standing Order No. 83A ), 9 Nov 2009 NO
Division 241 9 Nov 2009 AYE
October 2009 9 votes
Division Date Vote
I must tell the Minister that that is an untruth. The Times printed an untruth. That is not what the shadow Chancellor said. It was clearly printed as a result of discussion in which the shadow Chancellor had engaged, and I know for a fact that the Tory Front Benchers were very concerned about that commitment. The hon. Member for Westbury made a number of stringent attacks on me and on my minister... 28 Oct 2009 NO
Division 233 28 Oct 2009 NO
Does my hon. Friend agree that, while the Liberal Democrat motion makes no mention of costings, the Government amendment confirms a commitment to spending up to £20 million to help Departments reduce their emissions? Is that not a very good reason to vote for the amendment? I confirm what my hon. Friend says. This country already has a good track record on energy efficiency, and I agree, that ener... 21 Oct 2009 AYE
The design of the scheme will be available by spring 2010, and we will move with all speed to get the payments made. The motion proposes the implementation of the ombudsman's recommendation for a scheme setting up a tribunal, which would mean that individual assessments took longer, and it would therefore take longer for the money to get through. I cannot give way; I have only four minutes left. M... 21 Oct 2009 AYE
Division 229 21 Oct 2009 AYE
Division 228 21 Oct 2009 AYE
That the following provisions shall apply to the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill: 1. The Bill shall be committed to a Committee of the whole House. Proceedings in Committee 2. Proceedings in Committee of the whole House shall be completed in four days. 3. The proceedings shall be taken in the following order: Clauses 1 and 2, Schedule 1, Clauses 3 to 19, Schedule 2, Clause 20, new Clause... 20 Oct 2009 NO
6. Proceedings on consideration shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour before the moment of interruption on the day on which those proceedings are commenced. 7. Proceedings on Third Reading shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the moment of interruption on that day. 8. Standing Order No. 83B (Programming committees) shall ... 20 Oct 2009 NO
Question accordingly negatived. Question put forthwith ( Standing Order No. 31(2) ), That the proposed words be there added. 19 Oct 2009 NO
Page 3/9