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
On 8 January 2025, the House of Commons voted on a reasoned amendment (a formal motion to decline giving a bill its Second Reading, explaining why) that sought to block the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill from proceeding. The amendment was defeated by 364 votes to 111, meaning the bill was allowed to advance to its next parliamentary stage for detailed scrutiny. The Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill covers a range of education and child welfare policy areas. Blocking it at Second Reading would have prevented any of its provisions from being examined in committee or amended on the floor of the House. With the amendment defeated, the bill proceeds toward potential law, meaning its provisions on schools, children's services, and related matters will now be subject to detailed parliamentary scrutiny and possible amendment rather than being stopped outright. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. The Conservative Party provided 99 of the 111 aye votes, joined by Reform UK with 6 votes, the Democratic Unionist Party with 2, and a handful of independents. Labour, Labour and Co-operative, and the Greens voted unanimously against the amendment, reflecting solid government support for the bill. The Conservatives' use of a reasoned amendment is a standard opposition tool to register principled objection to a bill's overall direction at the earliest opportunity; its defeat by a margin of more than three to one reflects the government's commanding Commons majority at this stage of the Parliament.
Voting Aye meant
Support blocking or delaying the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, signalling opposition to the government's approach to schools and children's welfare reform
Voting No meant
Oppose the reasoned amendment and allow the Bill to proceed to further parliamentary scrutiny, backing the government's legislative agenda on children's wellbeing and schools
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
72
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
35
7
Independent
—
3
7
4
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
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
Your Party
—
0
0
1
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