A divisionDivision No. 130 · Tuesday, 18 March 2025· Commons· Schools

Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill Report Stage: Amendment 210

167Ayes
324Noes
Defeated · majority 157 · Government won
157 did not vote
Aye168No323DID NOT VOTE · 157

648 Members · Aye 167 · No 324 · DNV 157 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Amendment 210 to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill was defeated on 18 March 2025 by 324 votes to 167. The amendment would have created an independent dispute-resolution process for setting a school's published admission number (PAN), the maximum number of pupils a school is permitted to take, when local agreement between schools and local authorities cannot be reached. The vote concerns how decisions about school capacity are made and who has the final say when local parties disagree. Clause 51 of the bill already makes changes in this area, but Amendment 210 would have gone further by establishing a formal independent route for resolving such disputes. Proponents argued this would ensure school places reflect actual community need, giving parents greater confidence that their child can attend a suitable school. The government opposed the amendment, preferring the existing clause 51 framework without the additional independent mechanism. The division fell almost entirely along party lines. All 314 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted did so against the amendment. The Conservatives (95 votes), Liberal Democrats (60 votes), and Reform UK (5 votes) all voted in favour, as did the Democratic Unionist Party (4 votes) and the Ulster Unionist Party (1 vote). The Green Party voted with the government against it. There were no notable cross-party rebels on either side.

Voting Aye meant
Support introducing an independent dispute-resolution mechanism for school admission numbers to ensure local communities have adequate school places
Voting No meant
Oppose this particular mechanism for setting school admission numbers, whether on grounds of local autonomy, process concerns, or preference for a different approach
§ 01Who voted how.491 voting Members · 157 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
283
78
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
95
0
21
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
60
0
11
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
31
11
Independent
2
5
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 aye · 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