Armed Forces Commissioner Bill Report Stage: Amendment 2

Tuesday, 21 January 2025 · Division No. 89 · Commons

76Ayes
349Noes
Defeated

222 MPs did not vote

cross-cuttingGovernment defeatedPro Armed Forces Welfare(Yes)Pro Veterans Equality(Yes)Pro Statutory Accountability(Yes)Pro Gurkha Rights(Yes)

Voting Yes means

Support requiring the Armed Forces Commissioner to report annually on inequalities faced by specific groups within the armed forces community, including historically disadvantaged groups like Gurkha veterans, and to engage with those communities directly.

Voting No means

Oppose adding this specific reporting and engagement requirement to the Bill, likely preferring to keep the Commissioner's remit as already defined without additional statutory obligations.

What happened: On 21 January 2025, the House of Commons voted on Amendment 2 to the Armed Forces Commissioner Bill at Report Stage. The amendment, tabled by Liberal Democrat MP Helen Maguire, would have required the Commissioner to publish annual reports outlining steps being taken to support minority groups within the armed forces. The amendment was defeated by 349 votes to 76.

Why it matters: The Armed Forces Commissioner Bill creates a new independent role to advocate for the welfare of service personnel and their families, replacing the existing Service Complaints Ombudsman with a broader remit. Amendment 2 sought to build in a specific accountability mechanism on equality and diversity, with proponents arguing it would help the armed forces meet targets such as women making up 30% of recruits by 2030. The Government and its supporters opposed making the Commissioner's reporting requirements prescriptive, arguing that the Commissioner should have full independence to determine their own priorities rather than having Parliament dictate the focus of their work. A public sector equality duty under the Equality Act 2010 already applies to the Commissioner, which opponents of the amendment cited as sufficient existing protection.

The politics: The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously against the amendment, providing the large majority needed to defeat it. The Liberal Democrats voted unanimously in favour, with 63 of their MPs supporting the change. Plaid Cymru and the Green Party also backed the amendment, while the Democratic Unionist Party, Traditional Unionist Voice, and one independent MP voted against. The Conservative Party did not vote on this specific amendment, reflecting their stance as a self-described "critical friend" to the Bill rather than outright opponents. The Bill itself commands cross-party support in principle, but the Liberal Democrats used Report Stage to press for a more expansive and structurally independent Commissioner than the Government proposed.

How They Voted

Government position: No

Labour PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/305 No
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
63 Aye/0 No
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/34 No
Independent
4 Aye/4 No
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/5 No
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4 Aye/0 No
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
4 Aye/0 No
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
1 Aye/0 No
Traditional Unionist Voice
0 Aye/1 No
Ulster Unionist Party
1 Aye/0 No
Your Party
0 Aye/1 No

What They Said in the Debate

Luke Akehurst

Labour · North Durham

Opposed

Amendments well-intentioned but unnecessary; public sector equality duty already applies; prescriptive lists risk omitting groups like disabled personnel; Bill already addresses concerns.

Voted No

Graeme Downie

Labour · Dunfermline and Dollar

Opposed

Bill should pass unamended; overly prescriptive amendments risk compromising commissioner independence and flexibility; implementation timescales should not be artificial; devolved administrations should engage pragmatically.

Voted No

Jacob Collier

Labour · Burton and Uttoxeter

Opposed

Amendments 9 and 10 unnecessary and risk narrowing focus; commissioner must have independence to determine priorities; trust the legislation's expansive remit.

Voted No

Calvin Bailey

Labour · Leyton and Wanstead

Opposed

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.

Voted No

Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi

Labour · Slough

Questioning

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.

Voted No

Lincoln Jopp

Conservative · Spelthorne

Neutral

Supports amendment 8 on independence from chain of command; concerned Bill could expand unchecked like German model; welfare responsibility belongs to chain of command.

Helen Maguire

Liberal Democrats · Epsom and Ewell

Supportive

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.

Voted Aye

Jim Allister

DUP · North Antrim

Supportive

Veterans commissioners should be placed on statutory footing like the Armed Forces Commissioner to give them genuine independence and resources; supports new clause 2.

Voted No

Related Votes