Labour and Lib Dem MPs who voted against gay marriage: full list

Twenty two Labour MPs and four Liberal Democrat MPs voted against the equal marriage bill last night.

While all the attention was on the Conservatives, who voted in greater numbers against equal marriage (136 MPs) than in favour of it (127 MPs), a not insignificant number of Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs also opposed the bill. Twenty two Labour MPs voted against it, with sixteen abstaining, and four Lib Dems voted against it, with seven abstaining. Below is a full list of them. 

Based on the figures, 45 per cent of Tory MPs voted against the bill (58 per cent including abstentions), nine per cent of Labour MPs did (15 per cent including abstentions) and seven per cent of Lib Dem MPs did (20 per cent including abstentions).

Labour MPs who voted against equal marriage (22)

Joe Benton (Bootle)

Ronnie Campbell (Blyth Valley)

Tom Clarke (Coatbridge, Chryston & Bellshill)

Rosie Cooper (Lancashire West)

David Crausby (Bolton North East)

Tony Cunningham (Workington),

Jim Dobbin (Heywood & Middleton)

Brian Donohoe (Ayrshire Central)

Robert Flello (Stoke-on-Trent South)

Mary Glindon (Tyneside North)

Paul Goggins (Wythenshawe & Sale East)

Dai Havard (Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney)

Michael McCann (East Kilbride, Strathaven & Lesmahagow)

Jim McGovern (Dundee West), Iain McKenzie (Inverclyde)

George Mudie (Leeds East)

Paul Murphy (Torfaen)

Stephen Pound (Ealing North)

Frank Roy (Motherwell & Wishaw)

Jim Sheridan (Paisley & Renfrewshire North)

Derek Twigg (Halton)

Mike Wood (Batley & Spen)

Liberal Democrat MPs who voted against equal marriage (4)

Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed)

Gordon Birtwistle (Burnley)

John Pugh (Southport)

Sarah Teather (Brent Central)

Labour MPs who did not vote (16)

Dame Anne Begg (Aberdeen South)

Gordon Brown (Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath)

Alex Cunningham (Stockton North)

Bill Esterson (Sefton Central)

Pat Glass (Durham North West)

Roger Godsiff (Birmingham Hall Green)

David Heyes (Ashton Under Lyne)

Jim Hood (Lanark & Hamilton East)

Khalid Mahmood (Birmingham Perry Barr)

Michael Meacher (Oldham West & Royton)

Ian Mearns (Gateshead)

Yasmin Qureshi (Bolton South East)

Virendra Sharma (Ealing Southall)

Gavin Shuker (Luton South)

Stephen Timms (East Ham)

Shaun Woodward (St Helens South & Whiston)

Liberal Democrat MPs who did note vote (7)

Norman Baker (Lewes)

Martin Horwood (Cheltenham)

Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye & Lochaber)

Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West)

John Thurso (Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross)

David Ward (Bradford East)

Jenny Willott (Cardiff Central)

Former children's minister Sarah Teather was one of four Liberal Democrat MPs to vote against equal marriage. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Forget planning for no deal. The government isn't really planning for Brexit at all

The British government is simply not in a position to handle life after the EU.

No deal is better than a bad deal? That phrase has essentially vanished from Theresa May’s lips since the loss of her parliamentary majority in June, but it lives on in the minds of her boosters in the commentariat and the most committed parts of the Brexit press. In fact, they have a new meme: criticising the civil service and ministers who backed a Remain vote for “not preparing” for a no deal Brexit.

Leaving without a deal would mean, among other things, dropping out of the Open Skies agreement which allows British aeroplanes to fly to the United States and European Union. It would lead very quickly to food shortages and also mean that radioactive isotopes, used among other things for cancer treatment, wouldn’t be able to cross into the UK anymore. “Planning for no deal” actually means “making a deal”.  (Where the Brexit elite may have a point is that the consequences of no deal are sufficiently disruptive on both sides that the British government shouldn’t  worry too much about the two-year time frame set out in Article 50, as both sides have too big an incentive to always agree to extra time. I don’t think this is likely for political reasons but there is a good economic case for it.)

For the most part, you can’t really plan for no deal. There are however some things the government could prepare for. They could, for instance, start hiring additional staff for customs checks and investing in a bigger IT system to be able to handle the increased volume of work that would need to take place at the British border. It would need to begin issuing compulsory purchases to build new customs posts at ports, particularly along the 300-mile stretch of the Irish border – where Northern Ireland, outside the European Union, would immediately have a hard border with the Republic of Ireland, which would remain inside the bloc. But as Newsnight’s Christopher Cook details, the government is doing none of these things.

Now, in a way, you might say that this is a good decision on the government’s part. Frankly, these measures would only be about as useful as doing your seatbelt up before driving off the Grand Canyon. Buying up land and properties along the Irish border has the potential to cause political headaches that neither the British nor Irish governments need. However, as Cook notes, much of the government’s negotiating strategy seems to be based around convincing the EU27 that the United Kingdom might actually walk away without a deal, so not making even these inadequate plans makes a mockery of their own strategy. 

But the frothing about preparing for “no deal” ignores a far bigger problem: the government isn’t really preparing for any deal, and certainly not the one envisaged in May’s Lancaster House speech, where she set out the terms of Britain’s Brexit negotiations, or in her letter to the EU27 triggering Article 50. Just to reiterate: the government’s proposal is that the United Kingdom will leave both the single market and the customs union. Its regulations will no longer be set or enforced by the European Court of Justice or related bodies.

That means that, when Britain leaves the EU, it will need, at a minimum: to beef up the number of staff, the quality of its computer systems and the amount of physical space given over to customs checks and other assorted border work. It will need to hire its own food and standards inspectors to travel the globe checking the quality of products exported to the United Kingdom. It will need to increase the size of its own regulatory bodies.

The Foreign Office is doing some good and important work on preparing Britain’s re-entry into the World Trade Organisation as a nation with its own set of tariffs. But across the government, the level of preparation is simply not where it should be.

And all that’s assuming that May gets exactly what she wants. It’s not that the government isn’t preparing for no deal, or isn’t preparing for a bad deal. It can’t even be said to be preparing for what it believes is a great deal. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.