A divisionDivision No. 163 · Monday, 31 March 2025· Commons· Skills and Training

Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [Lords] Report Stage: Amendment 6

166Ayes
305Noes
Defeated · majority 139 · Government won
175 did not vote
Aye166No308DID NOT VOTE · 175

646 Members · Aye 166 · No 305 · DNV 175 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 31 March 2025 on Amendment 6 to the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill at Report Stage. The amendment would have required Skills England to operate for one year before absorbing the functions of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE). The amendment was defeated by 305 votes to 166. The vote determined whether the government's timetable for transferring IfATE's responsibilities to Skills England would face a mandatory one-year delay. Skills England is the new body intended to identify and address skills gaps across the economy. IfATE currently oversees more than 600 occupational standards for apprenticeships, T-levels, and higher technical qualifications, and transferring that workload is a significant undertaking. Defeating the amendment means the government can proceed with the transfer on its own schedule rather than a timetable set in law. The vote split almost entirely along party lines. All 301 Labour and Labour Co-operative MPs who voted opposed the amendment. Conservatives (95), Liberal Democrats (62), the Democratic Unionist Party (4), Reform UK (3), the Ulster Unionist Party (1), and Traditional Unionist Voice (1) all voted in favour. The Lords had previously inserted a one-year bedding-in period into the Bill, and this amendment sought to reinstate it after the government removed it. The same day, closely related New Clause 1 and New Clause 4, which also proposed transition arrangements, were defeated by similar margins, and the Bill passed its Third Reading 304 to 62.

Voting Aye meant
Support requiring a one-year transition period before Skills England takes on IfATE's functions, arguing the organisation needs time to bed in before absorbing a large and complex body.
Voting No meant
Oppose the delay, arguing that the government should move quickly to establish Skills England and begin addressing skills gaps, and that further waiting would undermine economic growth.
§ 01Who voted how.471 voting Members · 175 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
265
96
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
95
0
21
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
61
0
10
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
36
6
Independent
1
4
8
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
3
0
4
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
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
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.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