A divisionDivision No. 210 · Tuesday, 3 June 2025· Commons· Digital and Technology

Motion to Disagree with the Lords in their Amendment 49F (Data Use and Access Bill)

317Ayes
185Noes
Carried · majority 132 · Government won
143 did not vote
Aye318No188DID NOT VOTE · 143

645 Members · Aye 317 · No 185 · DNV 143 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

The House of Commons voted on 3 June 2025 to reject Amendment 49F, a change made by the House of Lords to the Data Use and Access Bill. The motion to disagree with the Lords passed by 317 votes to 185. The detailed content of Amendment 49F is not available in the record provided, but the vote formed part of the bill's passage between the two chambers, a back-and-forth process known as "ping-pong," in which each chamber seeks to finalise the bill's wording. The vote advances the government's preferred version of the Data Use and Access Bill by removing the Lords' Amendment 49F. Because the substance of that amendment is not documented in the available record, the precise policy consequence of overturning it cannot be stated with certainty. What is clear is that the Commons majority chose to restore the Commons' earlier position over the Lords' revision, continuing the legislative process toward a final agreed text. The division followed strict party lines. All 317 ayes came from Labour and Labour and Co-operative Party MPs, along with one independent. The 185 noes were cast by Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, the DUP, Reform UK, the Greens, Plaid Cymru, and the SNP, alongside four independents. There were no notable cross-party rebels from within the government's own benches.

Voting Aye meant
Support the government's rejection of Lords Amendment 49F to the Data Use and Access Bill, restoring the Commons' earlier position on whatever provision the Lords sought to alter
Voting No meant
Back the Lords' Amendment 49F and oppose the government's attempt to remove it, preferring the version of the bill as amended by the upper house
§ 01Who voted how.502 voting Members · 143 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 Aye
287
1
73
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
94
22
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
65
6
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
30
0
12
Independent
1
5
7
Scottish National Party
Whipped No
0
3
6
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
4
4
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
5
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
4
0
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
3
1
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Your Party
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
1
0
Restore Britain
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
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
Chris BryantOpposedRhondda and Ogmore
Opposes amendment 49F as unconstitutionally binding future parliaments and duplicating existing transparency commitments; argues the government must legislate comprehensively rather than piecemeal on copyright and AI.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,154 words)
Dame Caroline DinenageSupportiveGosport
Supports the amendment as a modest request to give creative industries reassurance within a clear timeframe; criticises government claims of listening while resisting concrete action.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (461 words)
Dr Ben SpencerSupportiveRunnymede and Weybridge
Opposes the government position, arguing Lords amendments are an opportunity not a nuisance; the government has lost the argument and must compromise to address creative industry concerns.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (736 words)
Victoria CollinsSupportiveHarpenden and Berkhamsted
Strongly supports amendment 49F to ensure transparency and protect creators from AI exploitation; argues time for reflection is over and real action must happen now.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (974 words)
Sir Julian SmithSupportiveSkipton and Ripon
Supports the amendment as a modest compromise that respects both chambers; argues creatives face existential threat and need guaranteed timely action from government.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (885 words)
Pete WishartSupportivePerth and Kinross-shire
Praises Lords persistence and supports the amendment; criticises government for inventing obstacles rather than compromising; advocates for swift, comprehensive action to protect cultural heritage.Scottish National Party · Voted no · Read full speech (846 words)
Polly BillingtonNeutralEast Thanet
Supports government but references historical precedent (Napster clause in Digital Economy Act) suggesting government should give itself power to act once evidence of problems emerges.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (223 words)
James FrithSupportiveBury North
Praises ministerial engagement and supports ensuring both creative and tech sectors participate equally in working groups to avoid breakdown.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (131 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