Planning and Infrastructure Bill Report Stage: New Clause 43

Monday, 9 June 2025 · Division No. 216 · Commons

167Ayes
334Noes
Defeated

146 MPs did not vote

rightGovernment defeatedPro Local Planning Control(Yes)Pro Housing Delivery(No)Rural Community Protection(Yes)Anti Centralist Planning(Yes)

Voting Yes means

Support giving villages statutory protection from overdevelopment, preserving their rural identity and preventing them from merging with neighbouring settlements

Voting No means

Oppose adding village protection clauses to the Bill, prioritising housing delivery targets over local character and resisting restrictions that could limit new home building

What happened: Parliament voted on New Clause 43 to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill during its Report Stage on 9 June 2025. The new clause concerned compulsory purchase order (CPO) compensation arrangements, specifically seeking to strengthen protections for landowners and occupiers facing compulsory acquisition. The motion was defeated by 334 votes to 167.

Why it matters: The Planning and Infrastructure Bill is a major piece of legislation designed to accelerate housing delivery and infrastructure development across England. New Clause 43 touched on the compensation framework under which people can be forced to give up their land or homes through CPO powers. Its defeat means the existing compensation arrangements remain in place, and the additional protections sought for farmers, homeowners and business owners facing compulsory acquisition were not added to the Bill. The outcome reinforces the government's preference for a streamlined planning system centred on national targets and development speed rather than enhanced individual compensation rights.

The politics: The vote divided sharply along party lines. All 328 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted did so against the new clause, while Conservatives (95), Liberal Democrats (55), Reform UK (6), most independents (8), and the Democratic Unionist Party (2) all voted in favour. There were no rebels on either side. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, despite differing on many issues, united in opposing what they characterised as excessive centralisation and inadequate community and environmental protections in the Bill. The government went on to pass the Bill at Third Reading the following day, 306 to 174, with opposition parties continuing to argue the legislation failed rural communities, farmers and environmental standards.

How They Voted

Government position: No

Labour PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/293 No
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
95 Aye/0 No
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
55 Aye/0 No
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/35 No
Independent
8 Aye/3 No
Reform UKWhipped Aye
6 Aye/0 No
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped No
0 Aye/3 No
Democratic Unionist Party
2 Aye/0 No
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0 Aye/1 No
Traditional Unionist Voice
1 Aye/0 No
Ulster Unionist Party
1 Aye/0 No

What They Said in the Debate

Paul Holmes

Conservatives · Hamble Valley

Opposed

Bill represents over-centralisation by Minister and Deputy PM; opposes most new clauses as they extend CPO powers; calls for improved compensation (New Clause 85) and fairness to farmers and landowners

Voted Aye

Mike Reader

Labour · Northampton South

Neutral

Supports development corporation powers as critical for delivery but warns against forcing behaviour change through CPOs; emphasis needed on working with communities and sustainability

Voted No

Freddie van Mierlo

Liberal Democrats · Henley and Thame

Supportive

New Clause 22 should require statutory guidance on using CPOs for active travel routes to match existing CPO use for roads, citing Welsh precedent and evidence that current guidance is insufficient

Gideon Amos

Liberal Democrats · Taunton and Wellington

Supportive

Supports amendments 88/89 on recreational land and New Clause 107 on public land disposal; opposes New Clause 85 as it would double-pay landowners and reduce council housing; backs community-led infrastructure approach

Voted Aye

Chris Hinchliff

Conservative · North East Hertfordshire

Supportive

Amendment 68 would allow councils to acquire land at current use value without hope value to deliver council homes; argues developer-led model has failed to produce affordable housing despite high supply

Voted No

John Lamont

Conservative · Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk

Supportive

New Clause 128 should establish community benefit scheme requiring 20% of CPO value paid into local community funds; CPO powers need stronger checks and balances to protect rural communities from industrial energy infrastructure

Voted Aye

Munira Wilson

Liberal Democrats · Twickenham

Supportive

Amendments 88/89 should extend hope value disregard to recreational facilities; New Clause 107 should allow discounted disposal of public land for public good purposes

Voted Aye

David Smith

Labour · North Northumberland

Supportive

Bill addresses false dichotomy between development and nature; smaller 'little and often' developments vital for rural communities; supports streamlining to enable local projects like affordable housing for school retention

Voted No

Related Votes