A divisionDivision No. 213 · Wednesday, 4 June 2025· Commons· Business

Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] Report Stage: Amendment 24

164Ayes
273Noes
Defeated · majority 109 · Government won
209 did not vote
Aye167No273DID NOT VOTE · 209

646 Members · Aye 164 · No 273 · DNV 209 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

MPs defeated Amendment 24 to the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill at Report Stage on 4 June 2025, by 273 votes to 164. The amendment would have restricted the government's power to create new enforcement functions and criminal sanctions through secondary legislation, that is, regulations made by ministers without a full parliamentary vote on each measure. The vote matters because it determines how enforceable the Bill's product regulations will be in practice. Supporters of the amendment argued that allowing ministers to create criminal penalties through secondary legislation, rather than through primary legislation subject to full parliamentary scrutiny, risks imprisoning people who inadvertently stock non-compliant products without adequate democratic oversight. The government and its supporters countered that without enforcement powers, businesses that follow the rules will be undercut by those who ignore them, and that comparable primary legislation such as the Building Safety Act 2022 already grants similar powers. The division split almost entirely along party lines. All 243 Labour MPs and 27 Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted opposed the amendment, while all 91 voting Conservatives, 62 Liberal Democrats, and 6 Reform UK MPs supported it. Two independents voted on each side. No notable cross-party rebellion was recorded. The amendment reflects a broader Conservative critique of the Bill as a so-called "Trojan horse" that gives ministers wide powers to reshape product regulation post-Brexit with limited parliamentary scrutiny.

Voting Aye meant
Support limiting the government's ability to create enforcement functions and criminal sanctions through regulations, arguing that such powers should require full parliamentary scrutiny and that the Bill gives ministers too much unchecked authority.
Voting No meant
Oppose restricting enforcement powers, arguing that without them new product regulations cannot be effectively enforced and law-abiding businesses will be undercut by those who ignore their legal duties.
§ 01Who voted how.437 voting Members · 209 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
91
0
25
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
61
0
10
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
27
15
Independent
4
2
7
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
6
0
2
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
2
0
3
Green Party of England and Wales
0
0
4
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
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