A divisionDivision No. 126 · Monday, 17 March 2025· Commons· Schools

Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill Report Stage: Amendment 171

65Ayes
317Noes
Defeated · majority 252 · Government won
269 did not vote
Aye63No317DID NOT VOTE · 269

651 Members · Aye 65 · No 317 · DNV 269 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 17 March 2025 on Amendment 171 to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill at Report Stage. The amendment, tabled by the Liberal Democrats, proposed extending the profit-capping powers contained in Clause 15 of the Bill to independent special schools. Clause 15 creates a reserve power for the Secretary of State to cap profits made by registered children's home and fostering agency providers; the amendment sought to bring independent special schools serving pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) within the same framework. The amendment was defeated by 317 votes to 65. The vote matters because independent special schools occupy a significant role in SEND provision in England. Local authorities are often legally required to place children with complex needs in these settings when no suitable state alternative exists, and campaigners and MPs have argued this creates a captive market in which providers can charge very high fees. The amendment's supporters argued that extending the profit cap would relieve pressure on local authority budgets and protect children with SEND from a market they say is not functioning properly. By defeating the amendment, Parliament left independent special schools outside the profit-regulation framework for now. The Liberal Democrats led the Aye side, providing 55 of the 65 votes in favour. The Greens contributed 3 votes, Reform UK 2, and 2 independents voted Aye. Labour, including its Co-operative members, voted entirely against, providing all 317 Noes between them, joined by 2 independents and 1 SDLP member. There were no Conservative votes recorded on either side. The government's position was that SEND reform should be comprehensive, whole-system and expert-led rather than addressed through individual amendments, and the minister said plans would be set out in due course.

Voting Aye meant
Support applying the profit cap on children's social care providers to independent special schools now, arguing an unregulated market is allowing profiteering at the expense of local authorities and children with SEND.
Voting No meant
Oppose extending the profit cap to independent special schools at this stage, preferring to address it through comprehensive, whole-system SEND reform rather than an isolated amendment.
§ 01Who voted how.382 voting Members · 269 absent

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
282
79
Conservative and Unionist Party
0
0
116
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
55
0
16
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
31
11
Independent
2
2
10
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
2
0
5
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
0
0
5
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
1
1
Your Party
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
1
0
0
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

§ 02From the debate.6 principal speakers
Stephen MorganSupportivePortsmouth South
Government Minister defending new clauses on corporate parenting duties (18-22) and explaining amendments on information sharing and financial oversight; emphasises landmark reforms to children's social care and keeping families together where appropriate.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (4,409 words)
Neil O'BrienOpposedHarborough, Oadby and Wigston
Opposes government's approach to phone bans in schools, arguing new clause 36 for full statutory ban is essential; criticises Education Secretary for contradictory messaging and claims guidance alone is failing; pushes government to support phone ban amendment.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,693 words)
Helen HayesSupportiveDulwich and West Norwood
Supports new clauses 3 and 4 on national care offer and mental health assessments in care; emphasises poor outcomes for care leavers and postcode lottery in support; calls for stronger accountability and consistency.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,291 words)
Munira WilsonQuestioningTwickenham
Advocates for new clauses 25-28 on kinship care leave, allowances, pupil premium extension, and school admissions; argues kinship carers need parity with foster carers and that current proposals fall short of ambition.Liberal Democrats · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,253 words)
Jim ShannonQuestioningStrangford
Raises concern about support for children with dyslexia, autism and behavioural challenges in the context of corporate parenting duties.DUP · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (194 words)
Chris VinceQuestioningHarlow
Raises importance of supporting young carers and notes need for mobile phone carve-outs for health devices and those in caring roles.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (180 words)
§ 03Related divisions.Same topic · recent
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0