Non Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 3
316Ayes
180Noes
Carried · majority 136 · Government won149 did not vote
645 Members · Aye 316 · No 180 · DNV 149 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
The Commons voted 316 to 180 on 25 March 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 3 to the Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill. The government put forward a motion to disagree with the amendment, which the Commons passed, removing the Lords change and restoring the government's original text. The bill removes the business rates relief that private schools have long held as registered charities, meaning independent schools will pay full non-domestic rates on their premises. Lords Amendment 3 sought to modify this provision in some way; the detailed content of the amendment is not fully set out in the available record, but the Commons vote restores the government's original approach. The practical effect is that the path toward ending charitable rate relief for private schools continues without the Lords' modification. Labour MPs voted unanimously in favour, with 284 Labour and 30 Labour and Co-operative members backing the government. Conservatives (101), Liberal Democrats (64), the DUP (5), the Greens (4), and Reform UK (4) all voted against. This vote sits within a wider pattern of parliamentary ping-pong on this bill: further related divisions on 31 March 2025 show the Commons disagreeing with multiple other Lords amendments by similar margins, indicating persistent Lords resistance and repeated government defeats of those changes in the Commons.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government's position by overturning the Lords amendment to the Non Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill
Voting No meant
Defend the Lords amendment and oppose the government's attempt to remove it from the bill
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
284
0
77
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
101
15
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
63
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
30
0
12
Independent
—
2
3
8
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
4
3
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
5
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
4
0
Plaid Cymru
—
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Your Party
—
1
0
1
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
Government opposes all Lords amendments; higher multiplier on £500k+ properties is fairest, sustainable way to fund permanent retail/hospitality/leisure relief; removing charitable relief from private schools is necessary to fund state education.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,467 words) →
Lords amendments should be retained; Bill breaks Labour's manifesto promise to replace business rates; higher multiplier will hit anchor stores, hospitals, GPs, and manufacturers unfairly; cliff edge at £500k threshold stifles investment; private school relief removal is ideologically driven.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (2,479 words) →
Support some Lords amendments (healthcare, manufacturing, threshold review) for fundamental business rates reform; oppose taxation of education on principle; concerned about unintended consequences for NHS hospitals and manufacturing; question whether raised revenue will actually reach state schools.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (1,981 words) →
Bill rightly supports small high street businesses; amendments would reduce revenue and dilute support; anchor store exemptions impractical to define; removing private school relief justified as funding 94% of children in state education.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,320 words) →
Pubs and community businesses face cumulative burden from multiple tax rises; private school measures will push children into already-full state schools, harming education for all; Government policies show anti-business stance.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (349 words) →
Question whether supporting manufacturing through business rates exemptions is the right approach; other mechanisms may be more appropriate.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (76 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0