division_name: [S1M-3943.1 (Amendment)] Decision Time
motion: <p>This looks like the vote on S1M-3943.1</p><p>The description in the <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/businessBulletin/bb-03/bb-02-26f.htm">bulletin on 2003-02-26</a> is:</p><p class="bulletin-quote">
   *S1M-3943.1 Irene McGugan: Educational Attainment for Looked After ChildrenâAs an amendment to motion (S1M-3943) in the name of Cathy Jamieson, leave out from "the use" to end and insert "funding and other initiatives to improve attainment of looked after children; regrets, however, that progress has been so slow, particularly as the Scottish Executive has brought this and associated issues with regard to looked after children to debate in the Parliament on no less than four previous occasions; recognises that the issues cannot be resolved without adequate qualified staff in the system; supports wholeheartedly better integrated childrenâs services but suggests that the Executive desist from blaming local authorities and local authority staff for the problems caused by its own and previous governmentsâ policy failures, and therefore urges the Executive to acknowledge and address the financial and staffing pressures that local authorities face every day in attempting to meet their statutory duties." Supported by: Michael Russell*
  </p><p>You can <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/search/?s=&phrase=S1M-3943.1&exclude=&from=2003-02-26&to=2003-02-26">search for this motion (S1M-3943.1) on TheyWorkForYou</a></p><p><b>Text Introducing Division:</b></p><p><p>The next question is, that amendment S1M-3943.1, in the name of Irene McGugan, which seeks to amend Cathy Jamieson's motion on educational attainment for looked-after children, be agreed to. Are we all agreed?</p>
  
  <p> No.</p>
  
  <p>There will be a division.</p></p>