A divisionDivision No. 212 · Wednesday, 4 June 2025· Commons· Business

Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] Report Stage: Amendment 16

100Ayes
339Noes
Defeated · majority 239 · Government won
204 did not vote
Aye103No342DID NOT VOTE · 204

643 Members · Aye 100 · No 339 · DNV 204 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

On 4 June 2025, the House of Commons voted on Amendment 16 to the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill at Report Stage. The amendment sought to remove a power in the Bill that would allow product requirements to be satisfied by complying with equivalent EU law. The amendment was defeated by 339 votes to 100, with the government's position prevailing. The power in question, contained in clause 2(7) of the Bill, allows UK product regulations to specify that compliance with relevant EU law counts as meeting UK requirements. Supporters of the amendment argued the UK should set fully independent product standards without automatic reference to EU rules. The government maintained that removing this power would undermine the UK's ability to manage its own regulatory framework flexibly, would leave consumers unprotected, and would cut across obligations under the Windsor Framework, the agreement governing trade arrangements in Northern Ireland. The vote divided sharply along party lines. All 89 Conservative MPs who voted backed the amendment, as did all 7 Reform UK MPs who voted and 2 Democratic Unionist Party MPs. On the opposing side, 243 Labour MPs, 29 Labour and Co-operative MPs, 60 Liberal Democrats, 4 Green MPs, 2 Plaid Cymru MPs and 1 SDLP MP all voted against. One Liberal Democrat MP voted with the ayes, representing the only cross-party movement of note. The result sits within a broader pattern of Conservative and Reform opposition to provisions in the Bill that they characterise as facilitating closer alignment with EU product rules following Brexit.

Voting Aye meant
Support removing the ability for UK product regulations to recognise EU law compliance, insisting the UK should set fully independent standards not automatically aligned with EU rules.
Voting No meant
Oppose the amendment, arguing the Bill gives the UK flexibility to manage its own framework while allowing it to respond to EU developments — and that removing this power would leave consumers unprotected.
§ 01Who voted how.439 voting Members · 204 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
243
118
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
89
0
27
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
60
11
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
29
13
Independent
2
3
8
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
7
0
1
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
2
0
3
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
4
0
Plaid Cymru
0
2
2
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
1
1
Your Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
1
0
0
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
1
0
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.6 principal speakers
Gareth SnellSupportiveStoke-on-Trent Central
Supports New Clause 1 to assess country-of-origin marking for ceramics to protect UK manufacturers from counterfeit products and unfair competition, particularly from Chinese copies.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,601 words)
Jim AllisterOpposedNorth Antrim
Opposed to the Bill's core structure; argues clause 2(7) enables unconstitutional dynamic alignment with EU law without parliamentary oversight, effectively sabotaging Brexit and reducing the Commons to a rubber-stamp body.DUP · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,283 words)
Adam ThompsonSupportiveErewash
Defends the Bill's grant of Henry VIII powers as necessary for the UK to maintain scientific and regulatory leadership; rejects concerns about EU alignment as stemming from misunderstanding metrology and standards frameworks.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,685 words)
Stella CreasySupportiveWalthamstow
Supports the Bill as salvage operation post-Brexit but backs New Clause 15 to establish a parliamentary committee to scrutinise EU-derived regulations, arguing the volume of technical complexity requires dedicated expert oversight.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,013 words)
Richard HoldenQuestioningBasildon and Billericay
Questions the Bill's concentration of power in the Executive; supports Opposition amendments (including amendment 13) requiring parliamentary statements before alignment with foreign law, to protect SMEs from rapid regulatory change.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (490 words)
Dr Allison GardnerSupportiveStoke-on-Trent South
Strongly supports New Clause 1 to protect Staffordshire ceramics industry from cheap imports falsely marketed as British-made, citing the sector's heritage and need for fair competition.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (799 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