Reasoned amendment on Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill
111Ayes
364Noes
Defeated · majority 253 · Government won173 did not vote
648 Members · Aye 111 · No 364 · DNV 173 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 8 January 2025 on a reasoned amendment (a procedural motion used to block a bill from advancing) to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill at its Second Reading. The amendment, tabled by the opposition, sought to prevent the bill from progressing to its next parliamentary stage. The government defeated it by 364 votes to 111, allowing the bill to proceed. The bill covers children's welfare and schools policy, and its progression means it will now move into detailed committee scrutiny. Defeating the reasoned amendment cleared the path for the government's education reform agenda to continue through Parliament. Those who voted for the amendment signalled opposition to the bill's broad approach, including concerns about school autonomy and what critics framed as centralisation of education policy. The vote divided along sharply partisan lines. All 319 Labour MPs and all 35 Labour and Co-operative MPs with a vote recorded opposed the amendment, while 99 Conservatives supported it and none voted against it. Six Reform UK MPs, two Democratic Unionists, and one each from the Ulster Unionist Party, Traditional Unionist Voice, and Restore Britain also voted for the amendment. Three independents voted with the opposition and six against. There were no notable cross-party rebellions within the governing party.
Voting Aye meant
Support blocking or delaying the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill from progressing, signalling opposition to the bill's broad approach or specific provisions
Voting No meant
Support allowing the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill to proceed to its next parliamentary stage, backing the government's education reform agenda
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
319
42
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
99
0
17
Liberal Democrats
—
0
0
71
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
35
7
Independent
—
3
6
5
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
6
0
1
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
—
2
0
3
Green Party of England and Wales
—
0
2
2
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
—
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
Secretary of State for Education: Bill is child-centred, strengthens safeguarding via multi-agency teams and child registers, reforms children's social care with kinship care support and profit caps, introduces breakfast clubs and uniform cost limits, restores local authority school planning powers, and moves away from fragmented competition towards collaboration while maintaining standards.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (5,002 words) →
Shadow Secretary of State: Welcomes safeguarding measures but opposes education provisions as dismantling two decades of academy-led progress; argues the Bill removes teacher pay flexibilities, curriculum autonomy, and competition mechanisms that drove standards up in international rankings; calls for national grooming gang inquiry as alternative to local inquiries.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,646 words) →
Chair of Education Committee: Supports Bill as necessary remedy for systemic failures from 2010-2024 (closed Sure Start centres, fragmented admissions, SEND crisis); welcomes safeguarding, breakfast clubs, and local authority restoration; presses Government on funding levels for full rollout and care leaver support expansion.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,956 words) →
Party spokesperson: Welcomes child safeguarding and supports spirit of constructive opposition; opposes reasoned amendment as wrecking; will seek amendments on kinship care expansion, mental health professionals in schools, free school meals auto-enrolment, and tutoring guarantees; wants pay provisions as floor not ceiling.Liberal Democrat · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,910 words) →
Senior Education Conservative: Defends academy system as cross-party consensus that raised standards; challenges Government dismantling of freedoms on curriculum, pay, and behaviour management; questions rationale for removing competition and parental choice in education.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,792 words) →
Backbench Labour MP: Defends academy expansion record under previous Labour and Conservative governments but argues Conservative free schools programme created unaccountable 'wild west'; praises Secretary of State's effort to restore system coherence and accountability.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (247 words) →
Backbench Labour, former teacher and local authority children's lead: Strongly supports safeguarding register and off-school visibility measures as essential protection against exploitation; defends clause 24 as appropriately cautious (only applying where section 47 child protection assessment underway) while protecting home-schooling rights.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,788 words) →
Cross-party supporter of grooming gang inquiry: Endorses Conservative amendment calling for national statutory inquiry into historical child sexual exploitation and grooming gangs to deliver justice for victims.SDLP · Voted aye · Read full speech (165 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0