Planning and Infrastructure Bill Report Stage: Amendment 15

Monday, 9 June 2025 · Division No. 217 · Commons

73Ayes
323Noes
Defeated

251 MPs did not vote

cross-cuttingGovernment defeatedPro Environment(Yes)Pro Planning Reform(No)Pro Biodiversity Protection(Yes)Pro Compulsory Purchase Rights(Yes)

Voting Yes means

Support adding additional requirements or constraints to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, as proposed in this amendment — likely relating to environmental protections, compensation rights, or planning safeguards based on the grouped debate

Voting No means

Reject the amendment, backing the government's existing approach in the Bill without the additional provisions proposed

What happened: The House of Commons voted on Amendment 15 to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill during its Report Stage on 9 June 2025. The amendment was defeated by 323 votes to 73. The Bill itself is the Labour government's flagship legislation to overhaul England's planning system, with the stated aim of accelerating housing delivery and major infrastructure projects.

Why it matters: The amendment formed part of a broader set of opposition proposals seeking to modify how the Bill handles compulsory purchase orders (CPOs), development corporations, and environmental protections. Those voting in favour argued the Bill as drafted would weaken safeguards for communities, nature, and agricultural land. Those voting against, principally the Labour and Labour and Co-operative parliamentary parties, were defending the Bill's existing provisions, which the government argues are necessary to cut through planning delays and meet housing targets. The outcome means the Bill proceeds without the changes the amendment proposed.

The politics: The vote divided almost entirely along government-versus-opposition lines. All 285 Labour MPs and 34 Labour and Co-operative MPs present voted no. The 73 ayes came chiefly from the Liberal Democrats (56 votes), with smaller contributions from Independents, Reform UK, the Greens, the Democratic Unionist Party, and a single Conservative. The Conservatives, with 115 MPs absent, largely abstained rather than voted aye, reflecting their ambivalent position: rhetorically critical of the Bill but not uniformly willing to vote with other opposition parties. The vote sits within a wider pattern of the government defeating a series of opposition amendments across the Report Stage, with the Bill subsequently passing its Third Reading the following day by 306 votes to 174.

How They Voted

Government position: No

Labour PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/285 No
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
56 Aye/0 No
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/34 No
Independent
7 Aye/3 No
Reform UKWhipped Aye
4 Aye/0 No
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4 Aye/0 No
Democratic Unionist Party
2 Aye/0 No
Conservative and Unionist Party
1 Aye/0 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

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

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

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