text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Protection of Freedoms Bill - Amendment to Programme Motion
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  @ MP voted aye for more time to consider amendments to the Public Order Act, including reducing the scope of offence of causing harassment, alarm or distress.
  @ MP voted no against more time to consider amendments to the Public Order Act, including reducing the scope of offence of causing harassment, alarm or distress.
  
  The majority of MPs voted against spending more time considering amendments to the Public Order Act, including reducing the scope of offence of causing harassment, alarm or distress.
  
  MPs were considering their timetable for consideration of the Protection of Freedoms Bill.
  
  The amendment rejected in this vote was:
  
  :after âProceedingsâ on the first day insertâ
  : âNew Clauses relating to the Public Order Act 1986; andâ
  
  Had this rejected amendment been passed it would have ensured that amendments to the Bill, including proposals[1] to restrict the scope of [http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/5 Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986] were considered during the first day's debate on the Bill, from the start of the main business until 8.30pm, rather than being dealt with alongside many other matters on in the last hour allocated to the consideration of the Bill. 
  
  * [1] [http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-12/protectionoffreedoms.html Parliament's webpage on the Protection of Freedoms Bill (now an Act)]
  * [1] [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2010-2011/0146/amend/pbc1461705a.2205-2209.html Notices of Amendments including New Clause 1 "Causing harassment, alarm and distress: restriction of scope"] 
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  