Finance Bill Committee New Clause 3
184Ayes
359Noes
Defeated · majority 175 · Government won104 did not vote
647 Members · Aye 184 · No 359 · DNV 104 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 10 December 2024 on whether to add New Clause 3 to the Finance Bill during its committee stage in the House of Commons. The clause was defeated by 359 votes to 184. The government opposed the addition, and its majority held comfortably. The Finance Bill gives legal effect to the Budget's tax and spending measures. New Clause 3 was proposed by opposition MPs against the government's wishes, but the specific content of the clause is not available in the data provided, making it impossible to describe precisely what policy it would have advanced or blocked. What is clear is that its defeat left the government's version of the Bill intact at this stage of scrutiny. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 349 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted did so against the clause. The 184 votes in favour came from a cross-opposition alliance: 96 Conservatives, 66 Liberal Democrats, 9 Scottish National Party MPs, 5 Democratic Unionists, 3 Plaid Cymru members, 3 Reform UK MPs, and 2 independents. The Greens voted with the government. The Finance Bill subsequently passed its Third Reading on 3 March 2025 by 339 votes to 172, suggesting the government retained control of the legislation throughout.
Voting Aye meant
Support adding New Clause 3 to the Finance Bill, as proposed by opposition MPs against the government's wishes
Voting No meant
Oppose New Clause 3, backing the government's version of the Finance Bill without this addition
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
96
0
20
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
65
0
6
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
34
8
Independent
—
3
6
5
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
9
0
0
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
3
0
4
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
5
0
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
4
0
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
3
0
1
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Your Party
—
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
0
0
1
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
CGT rate increases (10%→18%, 20%→24%) and carried interest reform are necessary to repair £22bn fiscal gap while remaining internationally competitive; phased BADR increases protect entrepreneurs.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,153 words) →
CGT changes contradict Labour's pro-growth rhetoric, create perverse incentives to sell businesses before April 2025, risk retrospective anti-forestalling rules, and carried interest measure costs £4.5m to raise zero revenue.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,527 words) →
CGT increase is suboptimal; should instead introduce indexation allowance, three-rate structure, and higher allowance to raise £5.2bn (vs £2.5bn) while being fairer to ordinary savers and long-term investors.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,332 words) →
CGT increases address tax avoidance gap between CGT and income tax rates; entrepreneurial investment depends on infrastructure/skills not exit taxation; Budget supports that vision.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,352 words) →
While supporting progressive taxation, CGT reform incomplete: should index gains for inflation, target smaller gains, reform reliefs, and close Monaco loophole to truly be fair; cannot support unamended clause.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (894 words) →
Energy profits levy increase (35%→38%) and abolition of 29% investment allowance necessary to fund energy transition while maintaining decarbonisation allowance; ESIM price floor provides certainty; consultation on post-2030 regime planned.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,593 words) →
Energy levy increases risk 26% lower capex, 6.3% lower oil and 9.2% lower gas production per OBR; removal of investment allowance jeopardises 200,000 jobs; new clause 3 review essential given Aberdeen warnings.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,463 words) →
CGT reform is incomplete technocratic fix; should have fundamentally redesigned CGT following IFS guidance on indexation, asset-specific rates, and wealth tax; clauses do nothing for Scotland's economy.SNP · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,243 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0