A divisionDivision No. 129 · Tuesday, 18 March 2025· Commons· Schools

Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill Report Stage: Amendment 209

107Ayes
324Noes
Defeated · majority 217 · Government won
214 did not vote
Aye109No325DID NOT VOTE · 214

645 Members · Aye 107 · No 324 · DNV 214 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 18 March 2025 on Amendment 209 to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill at Report Stage, which would have repealed the existing legal duty on the Secretary of State to issue academy orders for schools placed in a category of concern. The amendment was defeated by 324 votes to 107. The amendment sought to give ministers greater discretion over how to intervene when a school is judged to be underperforming, rather than requiring automatic conversion to academy status. Under the current framework, schools placed in a category of concern must receive an academy order. Removing that duty would allow the Secretary of State to consider a broader range of responses. The change would affect how failing schools in England are treated, potentially altering the pace and shape of academy expansion. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 317 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted opposed the amendment, providing the government's majority. The 95 Conservatives who voted supported it, joined by all five Reform UK members who voted, four Democratic Unionist Party members, one Ulster Unionist, one Traditional Unionist Voice member, and three independents. No Conservative MP voted against the amendment, and no Labour MP voted for it. The result reflects a clear government position against retaining mandatory academisation, with the opposition seeking to preserve the existing automatic academy order mechanism.

Voting Aye meant
Support removing the automatic requirement to issue academy orders for underperforming schools, giving ministers more discretion over intervention options
Voting No meant
Oppose removing the automatic academy order duty, preferring to retain the existing requirement to academise schools placed in a category of concern
§ 01Who voted how.431 voting Members · 214 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
286
75
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
95
0
21
Liberal Democrats
0
0
71
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
31
11
Independent
3
4
6
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
5
0
2
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
4
0
1
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
3
1
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
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
1
0
0

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
Catherine McKinnellSupportiveNewcastle upon Tyne North
Bill prioritizes child safety, education standards, and opportunity; government amendments strengthen data protection and extend provisions to Wales while respecting home education parents doing right thingLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (4,425 words)
Neil O'BrienOpposedHarborough, Oadby and Wigston
Bill strips freedoms from academies on curriculum and recruitment, removes accountability via automatic academy conversion, and gives local authorities power to restrict popular schools, undermining 40 years of cross-party education reformConservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,082 words)
Wendy MortonOpposedAldridge-Brownhills
Schools in her area (Walsall) have improved significantly under Conservative governance; questions whether government amendments represent real progressConservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (118 words)
Graham StuartOpposedBeverley and Holderness
Bill removes curriculum flexibility that allows schools like Michaela to tailor provision for disadvantaged pupils; curriculum freedoms are essential; home education registration requirements risk being disproportionately onerousConservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,399 words)
Helen HayesSupportiveDulwich and West Norwood
Bill restores coherence to admissions planning, reduces school uniform costs, introduces home education register to prevent child safeguarding failures, and expands breakfast provision; welcomes free school meals auto-enrolment measuresLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,688 words)
Tim FarronQuestioningWestmorland and Lonsdale
Calls for investment in outdoor education as part of mental health response and curriculum enrichmentLiberal Democrat · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (158 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