A divisionDivision No. 24 · Tuesday, 29 October 2024· Commons· Energy

Great British Energy Bill Report Stage: Amendment 4

96Ayes
353Noes
Defeated · majority 257 · Government won
198 did not vote
Aye98No354DID NOT VOTE · 198

647 Members · Aye 96 · No 353 · DNV 198 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament defeated Amendment 4 to the Great British Energy Bill on 29 October 2024 by 353 votes to 96. The amendment, tabled by the Liberal Democrats, would have placed an explicit duty on Great British Energy to deliver an emergency home insulation programme with targeted support for people on low incomes, alongside its existing remit to expand renewable energy. The vote matters because it determined whether home insulation for low-income households would be written directly into Great British Energy's statutory duties. Supporters of the amendment argued that cold, damp housing imposes a measurable cost on the NHS, citing an estimated £1.4 billion spent annually treating related illnesses, and that households already forced to choose between heating and eating needed urgent, targeted action. The government's position was to keep Great British Energy's remit focused on clean energy production without mandating specific delivery mechanisms within the legislation. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously against the amendment, providing the bulk of the 353 noes. The Liberal Democrats provided nearly all of the 96 ayes, joined by the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru, the Green Party, the Democratic Unionist Party, and the Ulster Unionist Party. There were no notable rebels on either side. The vote reflects a wider disagreement about how prescriptive Parliament should be in setting Great British Energy's operational priorities, with smaller opposition parties pushing for social and environmental duties to be placed directly in the Bill.

Voting Aye meant
Support giving Great British Energy an explicit duty to deliver emergency home insulation, particularly for low-income households facing fuel poverty.
Voting No meant
Oppose writing a specific home insulation programme into the Bill, preferring to leave Great British Energy's remit focused on clean energy production rather than mandating particular delivery mechanisms.
§ 01Who voted how.449 voting Members · 198 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
0
0
116
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
69
0
2
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
36
6
Independent
6
2
6
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
9
0
0
Reform UK
0
0
7
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
5
0
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Your Party
1
1
0
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
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
Victoria CollinsSupportiveHarpenden and Berkhamsted
Supports expanding Bill scope to retail, manufacturing, local government, elections and political parties; calls for digital sovereignty strategy to reduce reliance on US cloud providers and prioritise British tech procurement.Liberal Democrats · Voted aye · Read full speech (5,465 words)
Dame Chi OnwurahSupportiveNewcastle upon Tyne Central and West
Backs selective expansion to large retail businesses (£12bn+ revenue threshold) and calls for review of foreign state-owned cellular IoT providers; concerned about public sector lock-in to AWS and Microsoft.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,828 words)
Sir Iain Duncan SmithSupportiveChingford and Woodford Green
Supports the Bill but champions Amendment 3 to prohibit data-sharing with countries lacking fair trial guarantees; warns against treating totalitarian states as normal commercial actors.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,958 words)
Matt WesternSupportiveWarwick and Leamington
Agrees with concerns on Jimmy Lai, Jagtar Singh Johal, and IoT kill switches in critical infrastructure; supports human rights safeguards in data-sharing.Labour · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (1,686 words)
Peter FortuneQuestioningBromley and Biggin Hill
Questions practical feasibility of digital sovereignty strategy given prevalence of Taiwanese chips in tech supply chains.Unknown · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (32 words)
Jim ShannonSupportiveStrangford
Urges integration of Belfast's cyber-security sector (2,750 employees, £258m GVA) into national cyber strategy and calls for use of British tech firms by government.Unknown · Voted aye · Read full speech (103 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