Planning and Infrastructure Bill Report Stage: New Clause 85
107Ayes
314Noes
Defeated · majority 207 · Government won229 did not vote
650 Members · Aye 107 · No 314 · DNV 229 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 10 June 2025 to reject New Clause 85 to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which would have increased compensation payments for people whose homes or land are taken through compulsory purchase orders (CPOs). The amendment was defeated by 314 votes to 107. The amendment would have changed the Land Compensation Act 1973 to remove the existing caps on home loss payments, which currently stand at 10 per cent of the property's value subject to a maximum of £15,000 and a minimum of £1,500, and to replace the basic loss payment formula with the full market value of the claimant's interest in the property. Supporters argued this would bring compensation closer to the actual financial and personal cost of being forced to leave a home. The government opposed the change on the grounds that loss payments are an additional payment on top of market value compensation already available under separate legislation, meaning the amendment would allow claimants to receive the market value of their property twice. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 94 Conservative MPs who voted backed the amendment, as did six Reform UK MPs, four Democratic Unionist Party MPs, and a small number of others from smaller parties. Every Labour and Labour and Co-operative MP who voted opposed it, joined by the four Green MPs and three independents. No Labour MP voted in favour.
Voting Aye meant
Support raising compensation for people displaced by compulsory purchase to reflect the full market value of their property interest, arguing current caps are arbitrary and fail to reflect true losses
Voting No meant
Reject the amendment as causing over-compensation by effectively paying market value twice, contrary to the established legal principle of equivalence in compulsory purchase law
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
274
87
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
94
0
22
Liberal Democrats
—
0
0
71
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
29
13
Independent
—
3
3
7
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
6
0
2
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
4
0
1
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
4
0
Plaid Cymru
—
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
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
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 insufficientLiberal Democrats · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,076 words) →
Supports development corporation powers as critical for delivery but warns against forcing behaviour change through CPOs; emphasis needed on working with communities and sustainabilityLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (212 words) →
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 landownersConservatives · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,377 words) →
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 approachLiberal Democrats · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,915 words) →
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 supplyConservative · Voted no · Read full speech (783 words) →
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 infrastructureConservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (810 words) →
Amendments 88/89 should extend hope value disregard to recreational facilities; New Clause 107 should allow discounted disposal of public land for public good purposesLiberal Democrats · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,454 words) →
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 retentionLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (800 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0