A divisionDivision No. 172 · Wednesday, 23 April 2025· Commons· Environment

Opposition Day: Sewage: Lib Dem motion

77Ayes
302Noes
Defeated · majority 225 · Government won
265 did not vote
Aye79No304DID NOT VOTE · 265

644 Members · Aye 77 · No 302 · DNV 265 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

On 23 April 2025, the House of Commons voted on a Liberal Democrat motion calling for immediate and comprehensive action to tackle sewage pollution in rivers and coastal waters. The motion was defeated by 302 votes to 77. The Liberal Democrats used an Opposition Day (a parliamentary session reserved for parties other than the government to set the agenda) to press for stronger measures against water companies and sewage discharges. The vote concerned one of the most politically contentious environmental issues in Britain: the routine discharge of raw or partially treated sewage into rivers, lakes, and coastal waters by water companies. The Liberal Democrat motion demanded action beyond what the government had already committed to. Had it passed, it would have put pressure on ministers to go further than the recently enacted Water (Special Measures) Act and the government's own amendment, which was passed separately on the same day. The outcome leaves the government's existing framework in place, without the additional requirements the Liberal Democrats sought. The Liberal Democrats were joined by Plaid Cymru, the Greens, three independents, and one MP each from Reform UK and the Democratic Unionist Party, totalling 77 votes in favour. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously against, providing the 302 noes that defeated the motion. The Conservatives, despite being in opposition, were entirely absent from this division, neither supporting the Liberal Democrat push nor the government's alternative. The vote followed a pattern established during earlier stages of the Water (Special Measures) Bill, where the government consistently defeated opposition amendments seeking more stringent measures.

Voting Aye meant
Support stronger action on water companies dumping sewage into rivers and seas, backing the Lib Dem motion calling for tougher regulation or accountability measures
Voting No meant
Reject the Lib Dem motion on sewage, likely arguing existing government plans are sufficient or opposing the specific measures proposed in the motion
§ 01Who voted how.379 voting Members · 265 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
274
87
Conservative and Unionist Party
0
0
116
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
66
0
6
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
30
12
Independent
3
0
10
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
1
0
6
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
1
0
4
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
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
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
0
0
1
Your Party
0
0
1

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
Tim FarronSupportiveWestmorland and Lonsdale
Called for radical transformation including new 'blue flag' status for rivers, stronger regulator replacing Ofwat, and potential public benefit company models for water companies; praised government's Water Act as a step but insufficient without bolder changes.Liberal Democrats · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,240 words)
Steve ReedSupportiveStreatham and Croydon North
Defended Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 as landmark legislation delivering tough new powers, £104bn private investment, and criminal penalties for water bosses; acknowledged inherited broken system but argued government moving decisively to reset sector through Cunliffe review.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,514 words)
Victoria AtkinsNeutralLouth and Horncastle
Credited Conservatives with establishing 100% storm overflow monitoring (from 7% in 2010) and Thames tideway tunnel; argued data collection is essential foundation; acknowledged more needed but criticized Labour for lack of clear plan beyond reviews and existing measures.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,659 words)
Julia BuckleySupportiveShrewsbury
Stated government has already delivered all three Liberal Democrat demands through the Water Act: urgent action, protection against sewage dumping, and public transparency; criticized Liberal Democrats for voting against the Act.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (732 words)
Suella BravermanOpposedFareham and Waterlooville
Raised concern about Southern Water's repeated failures and proposed controversial recycled water scheme; questioned government's willingness to hold water companies truly accountable.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (147 words)
Catherine FookesSupportiveMonmouthshire
Praised government action on River Wye and Usk, highlighting £1m joint investment with Welsh Government; credited Labour with achieving more in nine months than Conservatives in 14 years.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (564 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