text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Racial and Religious Hatred Bill
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  <p>Those voting No agreed that the "Lords amendment No. 4" to the <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldbills/031/06031.i-i.html"> Racial and Religious Hatred Bill</a> should stand.  This was against the wishes of the Government who had their <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/120/amend/60131m01.htm"> own amendments</a> prepared.</p>
  
  <p>"Lords amendment No. 4" was debated and passed in the Lords on <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds05/text/51025-18.htm"> 2005-10-25</a>.</p>
  
  <p>Once amendments No. 1 and 2 had  passed, the Lords <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds05/text/51025-13.htm"> took a break</a> from the earlier part of the committee debate (paradoxically signified by "the House resumed") before returning to this matter.</p>
  
  <p>What is described in that debate as <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds05/text/51025-18.htm"> "amendment No. 4"</a> is a new Clause 2A which was <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds05/text/51025-20.htm"> by leave withdrawn</a>, and doesn't appear in the <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldbills/031/06031.i-i.html"> amended Racial and Religious Hatred Bill</a>.</p>
  
  <p>Perhaps "Lords amendment No. 4" refers to the 4th amendment successfully passed by the Lords, which may or may not be <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds05/text/51025-22.htm"> "Amendment No.32"</a> (look down to the bottom of the page), which inserted the "or 3A" into section 2"(5)" of the <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldbills/031/06031.1-7.html#j610a"> amended Bill</a>, referring to the new Schedule 3A proposed for the Public Order Act 1986 as specified in "Amendment No. 31" passed in the <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds05/text/51025-21.htm"> Lords debate</a>, and might be refered to as "Lords amendment No. 3" in the <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2006-01-31a.189.0"> Parliamentary debate</a>.</p>
  
  In summary, it would appear that this Bill's "Schedule" primarily inserts a huge section of material into the Public Order Act 1986, which is not online.  <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/011/06011.i-i.html"> Version 1</a> was passed by the House of Commons on <a href="http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2005-07-11&number=35"> 2005-07-11</a>.  Then on <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds05/index/51025-x.htm#contents">2005-10-25</a> the House of Lords changed it to <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldbills/031/06031.1-7.html#j610a"> Version 2</a>.  And this current very seriously contested vote in the House of Commons which this page is about decided to stick by this version.  Had they voted against it, as the Government wanted them to, they would have replaced it with a <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/120/amend/60131m01.htm"> 
  Version 3</a>.</p>  
  
  <p>After working out what happened, I leave it to someone else to work out what all these different versions mean.  Something fairly simple has been made unnecessarily obfuscated in the documentary record, and we shouldn't need to tolerate this.</p>
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  