← Back to MPs
Mr John Lyons

Mr John Lyons

LAB Labour Former MP
Last served Strathkelvin and Bearsden (2001-06-07 – 2005-05-05)
56
Total votes
30
Ayes
26
Noes
0
Other

Parliamentary History

7 Jun 2001 – 5 May 2005 (3 yrs 10 mo)

Voting trends (most recent 12 months of activity)

Voting record

March 2005 24 votes
Division Date Vote
(a) the amount specified in section 257(2) of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 shall be £7,090; and (b) the amount specified in section 257(3) of that Act shall be £7,220. (2) Accordingly, section 257C(1) of that Act, so far as it relates to the amounts so specified, shall not apply for that year. And it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution s... 22 Mar 2005 AYE
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his second speech. I am reminded that lawyers sometimes appear to have a sort of taxi meter that charges in guineas according to the length of their speeches. In response to a contribution from my noble Friend Lord Goodhart, Lord Kingsland, the Conservative spokesman, said: "What possible confidence can the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, have that a non-lawyer s... 16 Mar 2005 AYE
Question accordingly agreed to. Mr. Speaker then proceeded to put the remaining Question required to be put at that hour. Lords amendment: No. 33 10 Mar 2005 AYE
I think that we have narrowed the issue to two points. Does my right hon. Friend accept that a criminal court convicted that individual and that the legislation that we are passing will allow people to be restricted or detained on the basis of hearsay evidence through the security services? The defendant will know nothing about it; nor will the public, and therein lies the road to miscarriages of ... 10 Mar 2005 AYE
Question accordingly agreed to. Lords amendment 33D disagreed to. 10 Mar 2005 AYE
Question accordingly agreed to. Lords amendments Nos. 27B, 31B and 32B disagreed to. 10 Mar 2005 AYE
Question accordingly agreed to. Mr. Deputy Speaker then proceeded to put the remaining Questions required to be put at that hour. Lords amendments: 27B, 31B and 32B 10 Mar 2005 AYE
The position on the sunset clause is the biggest absurdity of all. We have a Labour peer—Baroness Hayman, previously a Member of this House—putting forward the eminently sensible suggestion of a sunset clause, to come into effect after a year, for this legislation, which is acknowledged on all sides to be temporary, emergency and not entirely well considered. That is not acceptable. To say that to... 10 Mar 2005 AYE
Question accordingly negatived. Amendment proposed: (b), in line 5, leave out from "effect" to end.—[Mr. Lidington.] 10 Mar 2005 NO
Does the Secretary of State agree that Sinn Fein should take note of the fact that those who have sought and sustained a constructive dialogue nevertheless find themselves with no alternative but to support the sanctions? That is a consequence of the strains that the IRA's actions have now placed on the process. Sinn Fein really must reflect—I am sure that it will—on our debate and start visibly t... 10 Mar 2005 NO
Question accordingly agreed to. Lords amendment: No. 9 9 Mar 2005 NO
Question accordingly agreed to. Lords amendment, as amended, agreed to. 9 Mar 2005 AYE
Far more important than that almost but not quite arcane point about the standard of proof is the condition that the suspect must have the best opportunity to answer the case against him. I have been greatly cheered by the attitude of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary to reviewing the system of special advocates. Will my hon. and learned Friend give way? No, I do not have time and others wan... 9 Mar 2005 AYE
Question accordingly agreed to. Lords amendment disagreed to. 9 Mar 2005 NO
I cannot give way to the right hon. Gentleman. I will just complete my five minutes before I resume my place. I realise that he is on the side of the angels but his particular angel is being too naive if he thinks that we are half way near to getting the sort of terrorism legislation that the House should approve, in any circumstances, once it is given the proper time to debate it. I regret that I... 9 Mar 2005 AYE
Question accordingly negatived. 'In section 41 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (c. 52) (regulation of construction, weight, equipment and use of vehicles), at the end of subsection (2) insert— "(m) for prohibiting the modification or retrofitting to the front of a motor vehicle any equipment which in the opinion of the Secretary of State may render the vehicle more likely to cause injury to a third p... 8 Mar 2005 NO
"The information is not collected centrally."—[ Official Report , 26 April 2004; Vol. 420, c.765W . ] During the last Session, I tabled early-day motion 1186 on that very issue, expressing disappointment, and it seemed to me that the Road Safety Bill would be a very appropriate means by which to introduce a new clause on the subject. "crash direction and force data can markedly improve injury pred... 8 Mar 2005 NO
Question accordingly negatived. 'If a person causes the death of another person by driving a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place while disqualified from driving by order of a court he is guilty of an offence.'. —[ Mr. Chope.] Brought up, and read the First time. 8 Mar 2005 NO
Will the Minister address the point that I raised earlier—whether the penalties should be the same in all parts of the jurisdiction and whether it is not unfair that in some parts of the country, there can be a trade-off between a speed awareness course and a penalty, whereas in others there is no option? It is the case that these courses have been pioneered in some parts of the country. Because t... 8 Mar 2005 NO
First, it was originally proposed by myself, his hon. Friend the Member for Worthing, West (Peter Bottomley) and my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Dudley, North (Ross Cranston) , who is, sadly, to retire from the House, despite his distinguished service in the Government and on the Select Committee on Constitutional Affairs. It is obvious that when the three individuals concerned all signe... 1 Mar 2005 AYE
Clause 78, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Government amendments Nos. 271 to 275 made. Clause 79, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Government amendments Nos. 276, 612, 277, 278, 613, 279 and 614 made. Clause 80, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. 1 Mar 2005 AYE
It is absolutely right that Lord Chancellors have no such statutory restriction, but equally, because they are judges they are in fact constrained in what they can do when they cease to hold that office. But not in a ministerial context, and I am surprised that— [Interruption.] Statutorily, there is no such bar on former Lord Chancellors holding other ministerial posts. I shall elaborate on some o... 1 Mar 2005 NO
"duty to ensure the provision of resources for the efficient and effective support of the courts for which I am responsible." I may add that the following sentence is: "So help me God." The Lord Chancellor will certainly need divine assistance if he is to fulfil that obligation. I made the point in an intervention that it would be extraordinary to single out the Lord Chancellor to swear an oath to... 1 Mar 2005 NO
Government new schedule 3— Renaming of the Supreme Courts of England and Wales and Northern Ireland . Government amendments Nos. 651 to 666. This group of amendments gives effect in part to the recommendations of the Select Committee on the Bill in the other place that the supreme court of England and Wales and the Supreme Court of Judicature of Northern Ireland should be renamed and, when necessa... 1 Mar 2005 AYE
February 2005 6 votes
Division Date Vote
Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman that, although there has been some latitude, he is again going very wide of the amendments under discussion. I am grateful for your guidance, Mrs. Heal. Let me ask the Home Secretary a question that I asked the Minister when I thought that she would respond to this brief debate. I urge the Home Secretary to tell us that we will have a proper chance to discuss ame... 28 Feb 2005 NO
I suggest to the Minister that we need not have reached this situation in the first place. This problem has existed for three years and the Liberal Democrats have consistently pointed out that the Government should have tackled it during that time, rather than leaving it until a point at which, because of a Law Lords judgment, we are faced with such a short time scale. It cannot be right that we h... 28 Feb 2005 AYE
Question accordingly agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time. Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 83(A) , 23 Feb 2005 AYE
Question accordingly negatived. Main Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 62 (Amendment on Second or Third Reading) :— 23 Feb 2005 AYE
As to the contribution of the hon. Member for Henley (Mr. Johnson) , does he accept that there is a serious threat, which I thought was fairly common ground? Does he accept that some people cannot be prosecuted through a conventional legal system? Does he accept that detention in prison under part 4 is not sustainable in the light of the Law Lords' judgment? Frankly, in those circumstances, what w... 23 Feb 2005 NO
That is not the comfort zone that I was seeking concerning the interpretation of this clause. It is my understanding that the Minister is actually saying that the aggravation factor will not apply if, for example, the children are at a school premises and attending a Sunday school. indicated dissent. The Minister could intervene to tell me that such children would be protected while attending such... 22 Feb 2005 NO
Page 1/2