A divisionDivision No. 161 · Monday, 31 March 2025· Commons· Skills and Training

Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [Lords] Report Stage: New Clause 1

168Ayes
302Noes
Defeated · majority 134 · Government won
174 did not vote
Aye170No305DID NOT VOTE · 174

644 Members · Aye 168 · No 302 · DNV 174 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

MPs voted on 31 March 2025 to reject New Clause 1 to the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill at Report Stage. The clause, tabled by Liberal Democrat MP Ian Sollom, would have required the Secretary of State to bring forward proposals to establish Skills England as a statutory independent executive agency rather than keeping it under direct ministerial control. The vote fell 168 ayes to 302 noes, defeating the amendment. The practical effect of the vote is that Skills England, which will absorb the functions of the abolished Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education, will operate under the Secretary of State rather than as a free-standing statutory body. Supporters of the clause argued that statutory independence would strengthen accountability to Parliament and protect the integrity of skills standards, particularly for apprenticeships and technical qualifications. The government maintained that operating under ministerial control would allow reform to proceed faster, addressing what ministers and their supporters described as a damaging collapse in apprenticeship starts under the previous administration. The division followed strict party lines. All 300 Labour and Labour-Co-operative MPs who voted backed the government, while all 94 voting Conservatives, all 64 voting Liberal Democrats, four Reform UK MPs, four Democratic Unionist Party MPs, three Green MPs and one Traditional Unionist Voice MP voted for the clause. No Labour MP voted in favour. The vote took place on the same day as two closely related divisions: one on Amendment 6 and one on New Clause 4, both also defeated, which addressed related questions of independence and accountability for the new body.

Voting Aye meant
Support making Skills England a statutorily independent body, separate from direct ministerial control, to ensure greater accountability and protect the integrity of skills standards.
Voting No meant
Oppose statutory independence for Skills England, preferring it to operate under the Secretary of State to enable faster delivery and clearer government accountability for apprenticeship reform.
§ 01Who voted how.470 voting Members · 174 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
264
97
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
94
0
22
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
63
0
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
36
6
Independent
1
4
8
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
4
0
3
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
4
0
1
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
0
0
2
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
1
0

Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed

§ 02From the debate.8 principal speakers
Ian SollomOpposedSt Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire
Supports new clause 1 requiring parliamentary approval of Skills England proposals before establishment; argues the Bill centralises power without proper accountability mechanismsLiberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,508 words)
Damian HindsOpposedEast Hampshire
Supports new clause 4 to establish Skills England as independent statutory body; warns that independence from government protects standards from political interference and ensures guaranteed business voiceConservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,550 words)
Andrew PakesSupportivePeterborough
Opposes new clauses 1 and 4; argues independence of IfATE led to failure and that departmental control enables speed and responsiveness to employer needsLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,604 words)
Pam CoxSupportiveColchester
Opposes amendments and delay; argues preparatory work is complete and passing the Bill quickly is needed to train apprentices urgentlyLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (508 words)
Sarah OlneyOpposedRichmond Park
Supports new clause 1; argues government needs clear plan for Skills England and emphasises apprentices deserve adequate wages and proper career supportLiberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (714 words)
Toby PerkinsSupportiveChesterfield
Opposes amendments; acknowledges merit in concerns but argues direction of government policy on flexibility and coherence is sound and could succeed without structural independenceLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,954 words)
Peter SwallowSupportiveBracknell
Opposes amendment 6; argues delay is irresponsible given UK productivity gap and need to end skills system fragmentation quicklyLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (816 words)
Laurence TurnerSupportiveBirmingham Northfield
Opposes amendments; argues accepting them risks recreating IfATE under a new name and that the status quo skills system is not fit for purposeLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,315 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