A divisionDivision No. 180 · Tuesday, 29 April 2025· Commons· Fraud

Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill Report Stage: New Clause 1

73Ayes
255Noes
Defeated · majority 182 · Government won
319 did not vote
Aye75No254DID NOT VOTE · 319

647 Members · Aye 73 · No 255 · DNV 319 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 29 April 2025 on New Clause 1 to the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill, which would have prevented the Secretary of State from using the Bill's new overpayment recovery powers against carer's allowance recipients until an independent review into how those overpayments arose had concluded, its report had been laid before Parliament, and all its recommendations had been fully implemented. The motion was defeated by 255 votes to 73, Division 180. The practical effect of the new clause, had it passed, would have been to freeze the use of the Bill's new direct recovery tools specifically for carer's allowance debts until the Liz Sayce-led independent review reports and its findings are acted upon. Carer's allowance overpayments have arisen in large numbers because carers who exceeded earnings thresholds while receiving the benefit were not always promptly notified, leaving them to accumulate debts sometimes worth thousands of pounds. The clause was designed to ensure that the new, more powerful recovery mechanisms in the Bill could not be turned against those carers before the systemic failures that generated the debts are fully understood and addressed. The new clause was tabled by the Liberal Democrats, whose 46 MPs voted unanimously for it. Support also came from the Scottish National Party (6 of 9 voting), Plaid Cymru (4), the Democratic Unionist Party (4), the Greens (3), and several independents. Only one Labour MP voted for the clause, while 222 Labour MPs and all 27 Labour and Co-operative members voted against. The vote sits alongside several other defeated amendments on the same day, including on financial exclusion and suspicion thresholds, reflecting sustained cross-party pressure on the Bill's welfare provisions that did not break through the government's large Commons majority.

Voting Aye meant
Support delaying recovery of carer's allowance overpayments until an independent review has concluded and its recommendations implemented, protecting carers from repayment demands before the systemic failures that caused overpayments are fully understood.
Voting No meant
Oppose the blanket pause on carer's allowance overpayment recovery, accepting the government's argument that existing safeguards protect carers and that suspending all recovery until recommendations are implemented goes too far.
§ 01Who voted how.328 voting Members · 319 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
1
222
138
Conservative and Unionist Party
0
0
116
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
45
0
26
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
27
15
Independent
8
3
2
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
6
1
2
Reform UK
1
0
6
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
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Your Party
2
0
0
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
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
Andrew WesternSupportiveStretford and Urmston
Bill is tough and fair, essential to tackle £7.4bn benefit fraud and £55bn public sector fraud; includes robust safeguards, independent oversight, and will recover £1.5bn; existing legislation already covers sickfluencers and similar offences.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (6,372 words)
David DavisOpposedGoole and Pocklington
Bill will only recover 1.8% of fraud losses (£1.5bn of £55bn); concerned that suspicionless financial surveillance may breach Human Rights Act articles 8 and 14; demanded legal advice be made public.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (429 words)
Rebecca SmithOpposedSouth West Devon
Bill has gaps where not tough enough and parts vaguely prepared; supports new clauses on sickfluencers (10-year sentences), arrest powers for DWP investigators, liability orders for asset seizure, and independent tribunal appeals instead of ministerial review.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,733 words)
Steve DarlingOpposedTorbay
Bill presents Orwellian mass surveillance risk; concerns about proportionality, impact on 136,000 carer's allowance claimants, and lack of fundamental DWP reform; fears powers will worsen situation for vulnerable people without independent oversight.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,014 words)
Gill GermanSupportiveClwyd North
Welcomes Bill as crackdown on £7.1m fraud in Wales; supports Government amendments on devolution, safeguards, and proportionality; Bill protects vulnerabilities and encourages early dialogue to prevent error escalation.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (913 words)
Dr Andrew MurrisonOpposedSouth West Wiltshire
Existing powers against sickfluencers are not being used effectively; supports new clauses 8 and 21 for targeted legislation; called for annual reporting of recovered amounts and assurances on Scottish Government fraud reporting.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (335 words)
Ian LaveryQuestioningBlyth and Ashington
Questioned whether Bill contravenes Human Rights Act 1998 secrecy provisions; sought assurance on legal compliance.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (51 words)
Joshua ReynoldsQuestioningMaidenhead
Expressed concerns about automated decision-making, AI, and algorithms; sought commitment to transparency to protect vulnerable people from unfair treatment.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (87 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