A divisionDivision No. 250 · Wednesday, 2 July 2025· Commons· Crime & Policing

Draft Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Suitability for Fixed Term Recall) Order 2025

333Ayes
168Noes
Carried · majority 165 · Government won
149 did not vote
Aye332No168DID NOT VOTE · 149

650 Members · Aye 333 · No 168 · DNV 149 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 2 July 2025 to approve the Draft Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Suitability for Fixed Term Recall) Order 2025, passing it by 333 ayes to 168 noes. The order changes the rules for recalled prisoners, meaning that most offenders serving sentences of under four years who are recalled to custody will now be automatically released after 28 days, rather than waiting for a Parole Board hearing. The government moved the measure; all opposition came from across the chamber. The order addresses the sharply rising recall population, which the Prisons Minister Sir Nicholas Dakin noted had grown from 6,000 in 2018 to 13,600, placing severe strain on an already overcrowded prison estate. By automating release after 28 days for the majority of recalled short-sentence offenders, the government aims to free up prison places for what it describes as the most dangerous offenders. The main exceptions to automatic release are offenders managed under the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) at levels 2 or 3, those charged with a new offence, and those linked to terrorism or national security. The vote divided sharply along party lines. All 326 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted backed the order; all 87 Conservative MPs who voted opposed it, as did all 62 Liberal Democrats, all five Reform UK members, all four Plaid Cymru members, and all four Democratic Unionist Party members who voted. Three Green MPs and three independents voted with the government; three independents voted against. There were no notable cross-party rebellions in either direction.

Voting Aye meant
Support automatic 28-day fixed-term recall releases for most short-sentence offenders as a necessary emergency measure to ease prison overcrowding and prevent system collapse
Voting No meant
Oppose the order as a dangerous and short-sighted policy that bypasses individual risk assessment, potentially releasing tens of thousands of sex offenders and other serious criminals automatically without proper Parole Board scrutiny
§ 01Who voted how.501 voting Members · 149 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 Aye
291
0
70
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
87
29
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
61
10
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
35
0
7
Independent
3
4
6
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
5
3
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
4
1
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Your Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
0
1
0
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
0

Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed

§ 02From the debate.3 principal speakers
Sir Nicholas DakinSupportiveScunthorpe
The draft order is a necessary, carefully targeted emergency measure to prevent prison collapse in November by freeing 1,400 places through fixed-term recalls, with proper safeguards for high-risk offenders and victim protections in place.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,943 words)
Dr Kieran MullanOpposedBexhill and Battle
The draft order is short-sighted and dangerous, stripping away Parole Board assessment for 63,000+ registered sex offenders on MAPPA level 1, creating bounce-back effects, burdening probation and police, and undermining victim safety without addressing underlying causes like remand reform.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,522 words)
Josh BabarindeOpposedEastbourne
The draft order is a blunt, reactive tool that bypasses individual risk assessment and leaves vulnerable victims exposed, particularly survivors of domestic abuse, when the real solution lies in investing in rehabilitation, mental health services, and a properly funded Probation Service.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (595 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