A divisionDivision No. 187 · Wednesday, 7 May 2025· Commons· Digital and Technology

Data (Use and Access) Bill Report Stage: New Clause 1

76Ayes
295Noes
Defeated · majority 219 · Government won
275 did not vote
Aye78No296DID NOT VOTE · 275

646 Members · Aye 76 · No 295 · DNV 275 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted down a Liberal Democrat proposal to raise the age at which children can consent to social media platforms processing their personal data, from 13 to 16. The division took place on 7 May 2025 during the Report Stage of the Data (Use and Access) Bill, with the amendment defeated by 295 votes to 76 (Division 187). The amendment, New Clause 1, would have written into UK GDPR a requirement that social networking services obtain parental consent before processing the personal data of under-16s for purposes including targeted advertising and algorithmically curated content recommendations. In practical terms, it would have obliged platforms to treat teenagers under 16 as children requiring parental authorisation for the data processing that drives personalised feeds and commercial advertising, rather than treating 13 as the threshold for self-consent as current law allows. The Liberal Democrats voted almost unanimously in favour, joined by the SNP, Plaid Cymru, most independents who voted, two Reform UK MPs, both Green MPs, and one Democratic Unionist and one SDLP member. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted against in their entirety, providing the 295 no votes. The Conservatives had no votes recorded in this division; the shadow minister indicated they preferred their own New Clause 19, which would have required a government review of implementation barriers before raising the age, rather than legislating the change directly. The vote sits within a broader and continuing legislative debate over the Bill, which went on to see several further contested divisions in the Lords amendment ping-pong process during May and June 2025.

Voting Aye meant
Support raising the age of data consent for social media from 13 to 16, requiring platforms to treat under-16s' data with greater protection to reduce algorithmic harm to children
Voting No meant
Oppose this specific amendment, either preferring a prior review of implementation barriers (Conservative position) or arguing the measure needs more careful scoping before legislating (government position)
§ 01Who voted how.371 voting Members · 275 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
267
94
Conservative and Unionist Party
0
0
116
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
55
0
16
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
26
16
Independent
7
3
3
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
6
0
3
Reform UK
2
0
6
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
1
0
4
Green Party of England and Wales
2
0
2
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
1
0
1
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
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist 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.7 principal speakers
Chris BryantOpposedRhondda and Ogmore
Government will not legislate piecemeal on AI copyright but will conduct full consultation review and establish taskforce on technical solutions; existing copyright law is robust and does not need clarification.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (7,168 words)
Dr Ben SpencerSupportiveRunnymede and Weybridge
New clauses 20 and 21 needed for certainty on copyright protection and sex data accuracy; Government should formally restate that copyright law applies to AI models and correct public authority data collection.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (3,841 words)
Victoria CollinsSupportiveHarpenden and Berkhamsted
Tech companies should lead opt-in systems for creatives rather than expecting creatives to opt-out; technical solutions must be implemented immediately, not delayed.Liberal Democrats · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,180 words)
Pete WishartSupportivePerth and Kinross-shire
Generative AI is actively ingesting creative content now; Parliament must act immediately with amendments rather than wait for reports and future legislation.SNP · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,235 words)
Stella CreasySupportiveWalthamstow
Government must make clear commitment that copyright protections benefiting creatives remain unchanged; existing law should be preserved rather than weakened.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,330 words)
Alice MacdonaldQuestioningNorwich North
Reports required within 12 months may be too slow given urgency; Government should expedite timelines for reassurance while accepting need for consultation.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (126 words)
Samantha NiblettQuestioningSouth Derbyshire
Sex data recording must consider impact on trans people and not make them feel forgotten; digital verification services must be inclusive.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,118 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