A divisionDivision No. 12 · Thursday, 5 September 2024· Commons· Environment

Great British Energy Bill: Reasoned Amendment to Second Reading

94Ayes
348Noes
Defeated · majority 254 · Government won
205 did not vote
Aye96No348DID NOT VOTE · 205

647 Members · Aye 94 · No 348 · DNV 205 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 5 September 2024 to reject a Conservative reasoned amendment that sought to block the Great British Energy Bill at Second Reading. A reasoned amendment at this stage is a formal motion declining to give a bill its first full debate, effectively acting as a wrecking motion. The amendment was defeated by 348 votes to 94. The Bill proposes to create Great British Energy, a wholly Crown-owned company backed by up to £8.3 billion of public funding over the Parliament. Its statutory purposes would include facilitating and investing in clean energy production, improving energy efficiency, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and strengthening energy security. Defeating the amendment allowed the Bill to proceed to further scrutiny. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 305 Labour MPs and all 32 Labour and Co-operative MPs present voted against the amendment, as did all four Green MPs and the Ulster Unionist Party's representative. All 93 Conservative MPs who voted supported the amendment. One Reform UK MP and one Democratic Unionist Party MP also voted with the Conservatives, while five Independents voted against the amendment and one voted for it.

Voting Aye meant
Support blocking the Great British Energy Bill, arguing that public ownership adds unnecessary state complexity to an energy system already delivering strong results, and questioning whether £8.3 billion of public investment would make a meaningful difference to a £50 billion market.
Voting No meant
Support the Great British Energy Bill, backing public ownership of clean energy to improve energy security, generate returns for taxpayers, create UK jobs, and reduce dependence on foreign state-owned energy companies investing in British infrastructure.
§ 01Who voted how.442 voting Members · 205 absent

Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.

Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped No
0
305
56
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
93
0
23
Liberal Democrats
0
0
71
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
32
10
Independent
1
5
8
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
1
0
6
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
1
0
4
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
4
0
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Your Party
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
0

Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed

§ 02From the debate.8 principal speakers
Dame Harriett BaldwinOpposedWest Worcestershire
Bill exposes taxpayers to unlimited liability; amendments needed to narrow steel undertaking definition, restrict public interest test, require independent assessment and NAO value-for-money check, and limit sunset clause extension.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,988 words)
Chris McDonaldSupportiveStockton North
Bill's broad powers modelled on Banking Act 2009 and essential for swift intervention in market failure; wide definition of steel undertaking and public interest test provide needed flexibility; government will exercise powers proportionately.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (5,966 words)
Sarah OlneyNeutralRichmond Park
Supports temporary nationalisation as rescue measure but demands parliamentary accountability through statement requirement, affirmative procedure for regulations, stakeholder advisory committee, and jobs transition strategy.Liberal Democrats · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (1,339 words)
Sir Jeremy WrightOpposedKenilworth and Southam
Secretary of state's powers in clauses 1–3 are too broad; definition of steel undertaking could catch tangential steelmakers, public interest test is undefined and expansible, and indefinite sunset extension negates the purpose of a sunset clause.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,952 words)
Richard TiceSupportiveBoston and Skegness
Supports nationalisation and bill's swift passage; opposes conservative amendments as bureaucratic delays that would prevent necessary investment; calls for 10-year strategy, pro-British steel procurement, and blast furnace commitment.Reform UK · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (1,510 words)
Sarah ChampionSupportiveRotherham
Supports bill as historic reversal of industry neglect; praises steel strategy and £2.5bn investment; urges government to ensure trade measures do not inadvertently harm downstream businesses and steel stockholders.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,176 words)
Alan StricklandSupportiveNewton Aycliffe and Spennymoor
Bill's speed and flexibility are essential; amendments imposing prerequisites would cumulatively hamper swift action; nationalisation means strategic acquisition with independent board, not day-to-day government control; supports transparency balanced against commercial sensitivity.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,772 words)
Ann DaviesOpposedCaerfyrddin
Amendment 23 would guarantee protection of Welsh steel jobs and sites; Port Talbot was allowed to close when government could have intervened; Welsh steel deserves equal protection as English and Scottish sites.Plaid Cymru · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (789 words)
§ 03Related divisions.Same topic · recent
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0