the vote was division no november it was on an amendment to the bill not the bill itself the amendment would have required the prosecution to prove that a statement was intended to incite terrorism rather than that it might have that effect in order to secure a conviction the original result announced was ayes noes had galloway attended he would have voted aye and the result would have been declared a tie at but the speaker would have given his casting vote to the noes in line with precedent that a tie on an amendment is broken in the direction of the bill as originally introduced it subsequently turned out that the tellers had counted one extra mp as voting aye and the result was actually to but that is not particularly relevant the point for the mention is not that galloway's absence actually deprived the opposition of the chance to defeat the government but that following the vote many people said that it did given the high profile which galloway gave to this aspect of politics it was not surprising that his absence was particularly noteworthy talk