A divisionDivision No. 131 · Tuesday, 18 March 2025· Commons· Schools

Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill: Third Reading

382Ayes
104Noes
Carried · majority 278 · Government won
161 did not vote
Aye381No106DID NOT VOTE · 161

647 Members · Aye 382 · No 104 · DNV 161 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

On 18 March 2025, the House of Commons passed the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill at Third Reading (its final stage in the Commons) by 382 votes to 104. The bill now moves to the House of Lords for further scrutiny. The result was not in doubt given the government's majority, but the margin was nonetheless wide. The bill is one of the most substantial pieces of education and children's legislation in years. Its provisions span two broad areas: children's social care, where it introduces family group decision-making before care proceedings, strengthens child protection teams, creates a consistent identifier for sharing information about children, and introduces financial oversight of private care providers; and schools, where it requires free breakfast clubs in all state primary schools, compels academies to follow the National Curriculum and national teacher pay and conditions, extends Qualified Teacher Status requirements to academy teachers, and establishes local authority registers of home-educated children. The bill affects schools, local authorities, care providers, and families across England. The vote divided almost entirely on party lines. All 283 Labour MPs who voted backed the bill, as did all 57 Liberal Democrats and 31 Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted. All 95 Conservatives who voted opposed it, joined by 4 Reform UK members, 3 Democratic Unionist Party members, and 1 Traditional Unionist Voice member. There were no Conservative votes in favour and no Labour or Liberal Democrat votes against. Five independents supported the bill and two opposed it. The Conservatives have argued throughout the bill's passage that the academy provisions undermine school autonomy and that home education requirements are excessive, while the government has framed the legislation as central to its education mission.

Voting Aye meant
Support passing a Labour bill expanding state intervention in schools and children's social care, including free breakfast clubs, tighter academy regulation, and strengthened child protection duties
Voting No meant
Oppose the bill, primarily on Conservative grounds that academy freedoms are undermined, home education regulation is excessive, or that the legislation represents unnecessary centralisation of education
§ 01Who voted how.486 voting Members · 161 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 Aye
283
0
78
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
95
21
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
57
0
14
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
31
0
11
Independent
5
2
6
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
4
3
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
3
2
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Your Party
2
0
0
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
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 aye · 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 no · 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 no · 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 no · 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 aye · 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