English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill: Reasoned Amendment
167Ayes
367Noes
Defeated · majority 200 · Government won113 did not vote
647 Members · Aye 167 · No 367 · DNV 113 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 2 September 2025 to reject a Conservative reasoned amendment that would have blocked the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill at Second Reading (the stage at which the Commons debates a bill's general principles). The amendment was defeated by 367 votes to 167, allowing the Bill to proceed to its next parliamentary stage. The Bill, introduced by Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, restructures how devolution works in England. It creates a new framework of "strategic authorities" at three tiers, standardises the powers devolved to each level, gives ministers the ability to impose mayors and combined authority structures where local agreement cannot be reached, requires English councils to adopt cabinet-style governance, restores the supplementary vote system for mayoral elections, creates a community right to buy assets of community value, establishes a Local Audit Office, and bans upwards-only rent review clauses in commercial leases. The Conservative amendment argued that the Bill lacked sufficient local accountability and risked imposing centralising structures without genuine local consent; supporters of the Bill argued it would deepen devolution and empower communities after what they described as years of excessive centralisation. Opposition parties united behind the blocking amendment while the government commanded a comfortable majority. All 322 Labour MPs and 37 Labour and Co-operative MPs voted against the amendment, with 39 and 5 no votes recorded respectively. All 88 voting Conservatives and all 71 voting Liberal Democrats backed the amendment, as did three Democratic Unionist Party MPs, two Reform UK MPs, and one each from Traditional Unionist Voice, Ulster Unionist Party, and one independent. The Bill's passage at Second Reading set the stage for further contested votes at Report Stage in November 2025, where amendments on related provisions were also defeated before the Bill passed Third Reading 322 votes to 179.
Voting Aye meant
Support blocking the Bill, arguing it lacks sufficient local accountability and risks imposing centralising structures on communities without genuine consent
Voting No meant
Support the Bill proceeding, backing Labour's agenda to deepen English devolution, empower metro mayors, and give communities greater control over local assets and governance
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
322
39
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
88
0
28
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
70
0
1
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
37
5
Independent
—
2
7
4
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
—
2
0
6
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
3
0
2
Green Party of England and Wales
—
0
0
4
Plaid Cymru
—
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Your Party
—
0
2
0
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
1
0
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
Bill delivers biggest transfer of power in a generation, ending begging-bowl culture, empowering mayors with planning/housing/transport powers, and strengthening communities through neighbourhood governance and asset protection.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,851 words) →
Bill is centralisation disguised as devolution, imposing restructuring without consent, raising taxes through mayoral precepts, weakening councils, and failing five tests: genuine choice, consensus, public support, bill control, and social care protection.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,471 words) →
Devolution principle supported but Bill centralises control, leaves areas unequally treated, weakens local accountability through appointed commissioners, and misses opportunity for genuine community empowerment or proportional representation.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,306 words) →
Questions where accountability and scrutiny will come from and how local people's voices will truly be heard under the mayor-led model.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,264 words) →
Points to Scotland as cautionary tale of centralised powers taken away from communities; warns against replicating that mistake south of the border.SNP · Voted aye · Read full speech (82 words) →
Generally supportive of devolution ambition but seeks protection for Sheffield's existing committee governance system, which was chosen by local referendum and should be respected.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (676 words) →
Mayor-led devolution is inappropriate for diverse areas like Devon; reorganisation costs money without saving it; parish councils and national park authorities are overlooked; statutory duty to cooperate needed.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (900 words) →
London lacks sufficient accountability for its devolved powers; Assembly's two-thirds majority requirement needs abolition; boroughs should have voice in decision-making; Mayor Khan's ULEZ and tax increases show need for stronger scrutiny.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (711 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0