division_name: [S1M-1918.2 (Amendment)] Decision Time
motion: <p>This looks like the vote on S1M-1918.2</p><p>The description in the <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/businessBulletin/bb-01/bb-05-10f.htm">bulletin on 2001-05-10</a> is:</p><p class="bulletin-quote">
   *S1M-1918.2 Michael Russell: HolyroodâAs an amendment to motion (S1M-1918) in the name of David McLetchie, leave out from "and now" to end and insert "; expresses considerable concern that this figure is likely to be exceeded and therefore calls upon the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body to ensure that any revised costs above that figure, as well as any changes to quality standards and completion dates that affect that figure, are laid before the Parliament for debate and approval; further calls upon the Conservatives to cease their boycott of the Holyrood Progress Group so that all the principal parties in the Parliament supervise this Parliamentary project together; asks the Scottish Executive to nominate a Minister to the Group, and expresses the wish that the Progress Group should become a sub-committee of the Corporate Body and that, following such a change, the Progress Group itself should report regularly and directly to formal meetings of the Parliament, rather than to informal meetings of members as at present, thus strengthening direct Parliamentary accountability for the project." Supported by: Linda Fabiani*, Andrew Wilson*, Shona Robison*, Kay Ullrich*, Fiona Hyslop* 
  </p><p>You can <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/search/?s=&phrase=S1M-1918.2&exclude=&from=2001-05-10&to=2001-05-10">search for this motion (S1M-1918.2) on TheyWorkForYou</a></p><p><b>Text Introducing Division:</b></p><p><p> The fourth question is, that amendment S1M-1918.2, in the name of Michael Russell, which seeks to amend motion S1M-1918, in the name of David McLetchie, on Holyrood, be agreed to. Are we agreed?</p>
  
  <p>No.</p>
  
  <p> There will be a division.</p></p>