Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [Lords] Report Stage: New Clause 1
168Ayes
302Noes
Defeated · majority 134 · Government won174 did not vote
644 Members · Aye 168 · No 302 · DNV 174 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
On 31 March 2025, the House of Commons voted on New Clause 1 during the Report Stage of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [Lords]. The new clause, which sought to add enhanced parliamentary scrutiny and stakeholder consultation requirements to the bill, was defeated by 302 votes to 168. The bill transfers the functions of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) to the Secretary of State and other bodies, effectively reshaping how apprenticeship standards and technical education qualifications are developed and overseen in England. New Clause 1 would have imposed additional requirements on how that transfer was conducted, giving Parliament and stakeholders a greater formal role in the process. Its defeat means the government can proceed with its streamlined approach to absorbing IfATE's responsibilities without those extra procedural obligations, affecting employers, training providers, and the millions of people who participate in apprenticeship and technical education programmes. The vote split along clear party lines. All 301 Labour and Labour Co-operative MPs who voted did so against the clause, while Conservatives (94), Liberal Democrats (64), Reform UK (4), the DUP (4), the Greens (3), and the Traditional Unionist Voice (1) all voted in favour. There were no notable cross-party rebels. This division was one of several on the same day during Report Stage, with related votes on Amendment 6 and New Clause 4 producing nearly identical results, suggesting a coordinated opposition push that the government comfortably repelled using its Commons majority. The bill subsequently passed its Third Reading by 304 votes to 62.
Voting Aye meant
Support making Skills England an independent statutory body outside any single government department, to improve cross-departmental authority and parliamentary accountability
Voting No meant
Oppose the amendment, preferring Skills England to remain as an executive agency within a government department as originally planned
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
64
0
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
36
6
Independent
—
0
4
9
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
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
Your Party
—
0
0
1
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0