A divisionDivision No. 191 · Monday, 12 May 2025· Commons· Immigration

Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill Report Stage: New Clause 3

90Ayes
318Noes
Defeated · majority 228 · Government won
238 did not vote
Aye91No320DID NOT VOTE · 238

646 Members · Aye 90 · No 318 · DNV 238 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

The House of Commons voted on 12 May 2025 on New Clause 3, a proposed amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill during its Report Stage (the stage at which MPs debate and vote on changes to a bill after it has been examined in committee). The clause, which sought to soften or modify the government's approach to asylum and immigration policy, was defeated by 318 votes to 90. The defeat of New Clause 3 means the government's original provisions in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill remain intact on this point. The amendment had sought to advance protections or alter procedures relating to asylum seekers, and its rejection signals that the government's tougher stance on immigration control will proceed through the legislation. The bill as a whole affects how the UK processes asylum claims, manages its borders, and treats those who arrive seeking protection, making these votes significant for anyone affected by or working within the asylum system. The amendment attracted support from a cross-party bloc of liberal and smaller parties, including 62 Liberal Democrats, 7 SNP members, 4 Greens, 3 Plaid Cymru members, 2 Democratic Unionists, and 5 Labour MPs who broke with their party to vote in favour. The government whipped Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs firmly against, with 314 voting no. Reform UK, despite its hardline immigration rhetoric, also voted against the amendment alongside the government. The vote sits within a busy day of Report Stage divisions on the same bill, all of which the government won comfortably, culminating in the bill passing its Third Reading by 316 to 95.

Voting Aye meant
Support stronger removals deterrents and stricter immigration controls, as proposed by the Conservative opposition via New Clause 3
Voting No meant
Oppose the Conservative amendment, backing the government's existing approach to border security and asylum in the Bill
§ 01Who voted how.408 voting Members · 238 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
5
282
74
Conservative and Unionist Party
0
0
116
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
62
0
10
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
32
10
Independent
5
1
7
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
7
0
2
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
4
4
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
2
0
3
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
3
0
1
Social Democratic and Labour Party
1
0
1
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
Your 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.7 principal speakers
Dame Angela EagleSupportiveWallasey
Government must balance security with humanity; repealing failed Conservative legislation while introducing robust immigration controls; strengthening enforcement against people-smuggling gangs; each asylum case must be judged on meritsLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (5,291 words)
Jeremy CorbynOpposedIslington North
Asylum seekers are victims of conflict and human rights abuse; the world must address root causes of displacement rather than treating migrants as threatsIndependent · Voted aye · Read full speech (139 words)
Lee AndersonOpposedAshfield
All illegal migrants should be immediately detained and deported; treats asylum seekers as security threatsReform · Voted no · Read full speech (94 words)
Luke TaylorQuestioningSutton and Cheam
Asylum seekers should be allowed to work after 3 months rather than 12 to enable integration and reduce public costsLabour · Voted aye · Read full speech (205 words)
Jim ShannonQuestioningStrangford
Border security cooperation between UK, Ireland and Northern Ireland authorities must be strengthened to prevent illegal immigration via the Irish borderDUP · Voted aye · Read full speech (263 words)
Chris VinceSupportiveHarlow
Previous Government's delays to asylum processing created huge backlogs; current Government must untangle this inherited chaosLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (98 words)
Sir John HayesOpposedSouth Holland and The Deepings
System is being gamed for economic migration; tough enforcement is necessary to prevent abuse of asylum claimsConservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (99 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