Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill Committee: Amendment 45
175Ayes
401Noes
Defeated · majority 226 · Government won76 did not vote
652 Members · Aye 175 · No 401 · DNV 76 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 9 July 2025 to reject Amendment 45 to the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill, which would have required more face-to-face PIP (Personal Independence Payment) assessments to be written into law. The amendment was defeated by 401 votes to 175. The result has limited immediate practical effect because the government was simultaneously removing all PIP-related provisions from the Bill through its own Amendment 4. The minister, Sir Stephen Timms, argued that Amendment 45 therefore no longer had a place in the legislation. He did, however, accept the underlying principle, telling the House that the government intends to increase face-to-face assessments outside of legislation, and noting that this should have happened after the pandemic but did not. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 339 Labour MPs and 40 Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted came down against the amendment. The 95 Conservatives, 65 Liberal Democrats, 5 Reform UK members, and 4 Democratic Unionist Party members who voted all supported it. Five independents backed the amendment while six voted against. The Greens and Plaid Cymru voted with the government. The result sits in a broader context in which Labour MPs had earlier pushed the government to strip PIP changes from the Bill, with Conservative MP Danny Kruger paying tribute to those Labour rebels on the day of the vote.
Voting Aye meant
Support requiring face-to-face PIP assessments to be written into law, arguing the government needs to be held to account on assessment quality for disabled claimants.
Voting No meant
Oppose the amendment as procedurally redundant given PIP changes are being stripped from the Bill, while accepting the principle of more face-to-face assessments outside legislation.
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
339
22
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
95
0
21
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
64
0
7
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
40
2
Independent
—
6
6
1
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
5
0
3
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
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
2
0
Your Party
—
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
1
0
Restore Britain
—
0
0
1
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
The Bill is fundamentally flawed and should be substantially amended or withdrawn; government should fund improvements through wealth tax rather than cutting disabled support; clause 2 cuts are unjustified and clause 3 freezes are harmful.Green · Voted no · Read full speech (2,306 words) →
While welcoming recent government concessions protecting existing claimants, supports delay of UC health changes from April to November 2026 to allow NHS and labour market reforms to take effect; amendments 2(b) and associated amendments are necessary compromises.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (955 words) →
Bill is unaffordable, locks in unfunded spending commitments, fails to address fraud or tie uplifts to employment support, and will ultimately result in higher taxes on working families; amendments 41 and new clause 9 needed for parliamentary control and fraud accountability.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,443 words) →
Bill breaches UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities; £2 billion in cuts will devastate those with fluctuating conditions; clauses 2 and 3 should be withdrawn; amendment 38 essential to protect people with remitting conditions.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (917 words) →
Government should clarify Timms review aims, ensure co-production with dignity at centre, and fix severe conditions criteria wording discrepancy; Bill represents wrong approach given better fiscal options available.SNP · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,083 words) →
Health element cuts will harm vulnerable people with additional medical costs; system needs compassion and expert input in decision-making.DUP · Voted aye · Read full speech (220 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0