Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill Report Stage: New Clause 2
174Ayes
340Noes
Defeated · majority 166 · Government won133 did not vote
647 Members · Aye 174 · No 340 · DNV 133 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 15 January 2025 on New Clause 2 to the Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill at Report Stage. The clause would have required the Secretary of State to conduct a review of the impact of the bill's new business rate multipliers within 18 months of those provisions coming into force, consult businesses, the Valuation Office Agency, and billing authorities, and publish the findings before Parliament. The motion was defeated by 340 votes to 174. The bill introduces lower multipliers for retail, hospitality and leisure properties with rateable values below £500,000, funded by higher multipliers on properties valued at £500,000 or more, from April 2026. Had New Clause 2 passed, the government would have faced a statutory obligation to assess whether those changes were working as intended, with formal input from key stakeholders. Its defeat means no such legal requirement exists; any monitoring of the multipliers' effects will be at the government's discretion. All 336 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted opposed the clause. The 174 votes in favour came primarily from the 97 Conservatives and 64 Liberal Democrats who voted, with small contributions from Reform UK, independents, and one Democratic Unionist Party MP. The division reflects the government's resistance to opposition-imposed scrutiny requirements, a recurring pattern at Report Stage of this bill. Later divisions in March 2025, when the Lords returned amendments, show the bill continued to be contested, with the government repeatedly defeating attempts to amend it.
Voting Aye meant
Support requiring a statutory review of the impact of new business rate multipliers, arguing the changes are significant enough to warrant formal monitoring and an opportunity to change course.
Voting No meant
Oppose legislating for a mandatory review, with the government confident in its own monitoring capacity and unwilling to accept opposition-imposed scrutiny requirements.
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
301
60
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
97
0
19
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
63
0
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
35
7
Independent
—
7
3
4
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
6
0
1
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
—
1
0
4
Green Party of England and Wales
—
0
0
4
Plaid Cymru
—
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
1
1
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
—
0
0
1
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Supports permanent business rates reduction for retail/hospitality/leisure but demands impact assessments and broader reform including manufacturing; opposes VAT on private schools.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,142 words) →
Warns of unintended consequences: small businesses could be 80% worse off while big chains like Starbucks gain 40% under the scheme; calls for differential impact assessment.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (649 words) →
Supports Bill as common-sense rebalancing favouring local independents over online giants; cites expert evidence that Bill benefits 98% of retail stores and has marginal impact on private schools.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (798 words) →
Opposes removal of private school charitable relief and business rate rises; cites closure of Carrdus school (120 pupils); seeks amendment to delay implementation and protect SEND schools.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (993 words) →
Criticises Bill as smoke-and-mirrors: cuts to relief offset by higher multipliers; raises will hit major employers (supermarkets, hotels, NHS); revaluation will compound increases; seeks review via New Clause 2.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,052 words) →
Defends Bill as essential to support high streets and fund state education; rejects amendments as diluting support; private schools are businesses and should pay rates like any other.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,083 words) →
Argues Bill harms SMEs, data centres, breweries, zoos, and stadiums; contradicts Labour's pre-election promise to abolish business rates; removal of private school relief harms state schools via lost facility-sharing.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,532 words) →
Backs Bill as fair and necessary; private schools are businesses and should contribute; focuses on high street support and equity in education funding for state sector.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,028 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0