division_name: [S1M-1957] Decision Time
motion: <p>This looks like the vote on S1M-1957</p><p>The description in the <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/businessBulletin/bb-01/bb-05-23f.htm">bulletin on 2001-05-23</a> is:</p><p class="bulletin-quote">
   *S1M-1957 Michael Russell: EducationâThat the Parliament notes Labourâs failure to meet its 1997 and 1999 manifesto pledges with regard to class sizes in the early primary years and the failure of the Executive to meet the same targets, as set in its first programme for government; further notes the examples of good practice that indicate a direct correlation between class sizes substantially smaller than the Executiveâs target and higher sustained levels of attainment; recognises also the clear results from programmes of class reduction that show the particularly strong effect which class sizes of 18 or less have on children suffering from social exclusion, and therefore calls upon the Executive to follow the SNPâs lead and work much harder to achieve real and meaningful reductions in class sizes in the early primary years, setting 18 as the maximum figure. Supported by: Kay Ullrich*, Roseanna Cunningham*, Christine Grahame*, Linda Fabiani*, Ms Sandra White* 
  </p><p>The description in the <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/businessBulletin/bb-01/bb-05-24f.htm">bulletin on 2001-05-24</a> is:</p><p class="bulletin-quote">
   S1M-1957 Education (lodged on 22 May 2001) Dorothy-Grace Elder* 
  </p><p>You can <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/search/?s=&phrase=S1M-1957&exclude=&from=2001-05-24&to=2001-05-24">search for this motion (S1M-1957) on TheyWorkForYou</a></p><p><b>Text Introducing Division:</b></p><p><p>The fifth question is that motion S1M-1957, in the name of Michael Russell, on education, as amended, be agreed to. Are we agreed?</p>
  
  <p> No.</p>
  
  <p>There will be a division.</p></p>