Armed Forces Commissioner Bill Report Stage: Amendment 10
191Ayes
338Noes
Defeated · majority 147 · Government won118 did not vote
647 Members · Aye 191 · No 338 · DNV 118 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 21 January 2025 on Amendment 10 to the Armed Forces Commissioner Bill at Report Stage, a Conservative proposal to specify in law particular welfare topics the new Commissioner would be required to investigate. The amendment was defeated by 338 votes to 191. The Armed Forces Commissioner Bill creates a new independent office to investigate general welfare matters affecting serving personnel and their families, replacing the existing Service Complaints Ombudsman. Amendment 10 would have gone further by prescribing specific subjects, including housing and pensions, that the Commissioner must address. Its defeat means the Bill proceeds without that list, leaving the Commissioner to determine their own investigative priorities within the broader remit of "general service welfare matters." The vote divided almost entirely along government versus opposition lines. All 333 Labour and Labour Co-operative MPs who voted did so against the amendment. Every Conservative MP who voted supported it, as did the Liberal Democrats, the SNP, the DUP, Plaid Cymru, the Greens, and Reform UK. The result closely mirrored a companion vote earlier the same day on Amendment 9, which was also defeated by 338 to 192. The government's core argument throughout was that prescribing topics in legislation would undermine the Commissioner's independence; the opposition argued that naming specific issues would strengthen accountability on matters already known to affect service life.
Voting Aye meant
Support adding specific prescribed welfare topics to the Commissioner's remit in the legislation, ensuring named issues such as housing and pensions are explicitly within scope
Voting No meant
Oppose prescribing specific topics in the Bill, arguing the Commissioner should independently determine their own priorities without Parliament dictating them in advance
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
96
0
20
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
63
0
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
32
10
Independent
—
6
4
4
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
7
0
2
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
4
0
3
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
5
0
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Your Party
—
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
1
0
0
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
The Bill is welcome but must go further with 11 amendments covering recruits, family members, independence, resourcing, parliamentary scrutiny, and minority groups to ensure meaningful change for armed forces community.Liberal Democrats · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,029 words) →
Chair of Defence Committee; seeks clarification on how committee scrutiny should exceed current process and assurance that implementation planning accommodates possibility of rejecting a commissioner candidate.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (870 words) →
Veterans commissioners should be placed on statutory footing like the Armed Forces Commissioner to give them genuine independence and resources; supports new clause 2.DUP · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,268 words) →
Amendments well-intentioned but unnecessary; public sector equality duty already applies; prescriptive lists risk omitting groups like disabled personnel; Bill already addresses concerns.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (852 words) →
Bill should pass unamended; overly prescriptive amendments risk compromising commissioner independence and flexibility; implementation timescales should not be artificial; devolved administrations should engage pragmatically.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,610 words) →
Amendments 9 and 10 unnecessary and risk narrowing focus; commissioner must have independence to determine priorities; trust the legislation's expansive remit.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,049 words) →
New clause 1 would overwhelm office with 150,000 applicants; new clause 2 narrows focus appropriately to serving personnel; amendments risk undermining commissioner's core mission.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,472 words) →
Supports amendment 8 on independence from chain of command; concerned Bill could expand unchecked like German model; welfare responsibility belongs to chain of command.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (991 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0