A divisionDivision No. 16 · Tuesday, 8 October 2024· Commons· Education

Opposition Day: VAT on independent schools

190Ayes
363Noes
Defeated · majority 173 · Government won
94 did not vote
Aye192No363DID NOT VOTE · 94

647 Members · Aye 190 · No 363 · DNV 94 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 8 October 2024 on an Opposition Day motion brought by the Conservatives to scrutinise the government's plan to remove the VAT exemption on independent school fees. The motion was defeated by 363 votes to 190. Opposition Day motions are procedural devices that allow parties without government power to force a debate and vote on a policy of their choosing; they do not change the law but carry political weight as a statement of parliamentary opinion. The vote matters because it reflects the first significant Commons test of Labour's policy to charge VAT at 20 per cent on private school fees. The government intends to use the revenue raised to fund state education, including hiring additional teachers. Opponents argue the change will push pupils out of independent schools and into an already stretched state sector, increasing costs for local authorities and disrupting the education of children with special needs whose families rely on private provision. Labour and its Co-operative Party allies voted unanimously against the motion, a total of 350 no votes, with 53 Labour-affiliated MPs absent. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats both voted for the motion, contributing 107 and 64 ayes respectively, despite significant philosophical differences between the two parties on public spending. Reform UK's seven MPs and the Democratic Unionist Party's four also voted aye. No Conservative or Liberal Democrat MP voted no. The result was never in doubt given Labour's Commons majority, but the Liberal Democrats' decision to back a Conservative motion illustrated the cross-party unease about the specific policy's implementation, even among parties that broadly support higher state school funding.

Voting Aye meant
Support the opposition motion opposing or scrutinising VAT on independent school fees, signalling concern about the impact on private school pupils and families
Voting No meant
Reject the opposition motion, backing the government's plan to charge VAT on independent school fees in order to raise revenue for state education
§ 01Who voted how.553 voting Members · 94 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
315
46
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
107
0
9
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
63
0
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
35
7
Independent
8
4
2
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
7
0
0
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
4
0
1
Green Party of England and Wales
0
2
2
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
2
0
Your Party
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
1
0
0
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
1
0
0
Ulster Unionist Party
1
0
0

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

§ 02From the debate.6 principal speakers
Sarah OlneySupportiveRichmond Park
Broadly welcomes the Bill as temporary emergency action but supports amendments 7, 8, 9 and 6 to strengthen environmental liability assessment, parliamentary scrutiny of financial assistance, and explicit consideration of tariffs and carbon border adjustments in valuations.Liberal Democrats · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,303 words)
Toby PerkinsSupportiveChesterfield
Welcomes government investment in steel as essential to national security and defence capability; emphasises need for careful management of tariff regime to avoid harming downstream manufacturers and steel stockholders.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,547 words)
Dame Harriett BaldwinOpposedWest Worcestershire
Opposes open-ended powers and unlimited financial exposure; supports amendments capping assistance at £1m per employee over five years, requiring quarterly parliamentary reporting, limiting total assistance to £2.5bn, and establishing a duty to seek private sector purchasers.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,684 words)
Cat EcclesSupportiveStourbridge
Opposes new clause 9 (private purchaser duty) and new clause 11 (level playing field requirement) as risks to downstream steel-dependent industries; seeks exemptions or transitional arrangements for grades not domestically produced.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,486 words)
Calvin BaileySupportiveLeyton and Wanstead
Supports government intervention but warns that amendments risk procedural barriers and impediments to defence supply-chain security; emphasises need for integrated steelmaking strategy from ore through production.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (648 words)
Richard TiceQuestioningBoston and Skegness
Defends blast furnace capability at Scunthorpe as strategically vital; questions whether NAO auditors should make sovereign capability decisions and warns that constant availability for sale destabilises business and workforce.Reform UK · Voted aye · Read full speech (757 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