A divisionDivision No. 312 · Wednesday, 15 October 2025· Commons· Aviation

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill Remaining Stages: Amendment 8

151Ayes
319Noes
Defeated · majority 168 · Government won
180 did not vote
Aye152No317DID NOT VOTE · 180

650 Members · Aye 151 · No 319 · DNV 180 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

On 15 October 2025, MPs voted on Amendment 8 to the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill, which would have required the government-designated counterparty to publish a report on how the revenue certainty mechanism affects passenger air fares. The amendment was defeated by 319 votes to 151 (Division 312). The vote concerned whether the scheme's cost impact on ordinary passengers should be formally reported on. The Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill creates a mechanism under which a government-owned company guarantees a strike price to SAF producers, with costs funded through a levy on aviation fuel suppliers. Proponents of the amendment argued that this levy would ultimately feed through to ticket prices, and that the public deserved an official accounting of that effect. The government had previously stated the scheme would affect fares by no more than plus or minus £1.50, and the amendment would have locked that claim into a formal reporting obligation. The vote divided sharply along party lines. All 87 voting Conservative MPs backed the amendment, as did all 60 voting Liberal Democrats. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously against, providing the bulk of the 319 noes. A handful of independents split, with two voting aye and three voting no. One DUP MP, one Reform UK MP, and one Ulster Unionist MP also voted in favour. There were no notable cross-party rebels on the Labour side.

Voting Aye meant
Support requiring an official report on how the SAF levy affects passenger air fares, holding the government to account on its cost claims
Voting No meant
Oppose the reporting requirement, arguing existing transparency measures are sufficient and the cost impact on passengers is already accounted for
§ 01Who voted how.470 voting Members · 180 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 No
0
279
82
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
87
0
29
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
59
0
12
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
32
10
Independent
3
3
7
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
1
0
7
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
1
0
4
Green Party of England and Wales
0
2
2
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
1
1
Your Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
0
1
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

§ 02From the debate.8 principal speakers
Olly GloverSupportiveDidcot and Wantage
Supports new clauses 1-5 to strengthen SAF targets, reporting, and accountability; criticises EU outpacing UK with 32% vs 22% target by 2040; urges clauses requiring conversion of disused refineries and bioethanol supply assessment.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,222 words)
Greg SmithSupportiveMid Buckinghamshire
Backs amendments 8-11 requiring cost transparency on passenger fares, standardised levy on invoices, and prioritisation of UK technology; opposes new clause 1 but supports power-to-liquid focus; emphasises consumer protection and practical implementation.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,454 words)
Brian LeishmanQuestioningAlloa and Grangemouth
Advocates for public ownership and government investment to re-industrialise Grangemouth following Petroineos refinery closure; calls for government-led industrial strategy rather than relying on private capital.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (896 words)
Sarah OlneySupportiveRichmond Park
Supports new clause 2 on bioethanol supply assessment; argues SAF targets are unrealistic given 90% import dependency on China and Vivergo plant closure; criticises Heathrow expansion relying on unproven SAF deployment.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (470 words)
Tom CollinsOpposedWorcester
Opposes new clause 1; defends government flexibility on SAF technology deployment; warns against oversimplifying fuel pathways and overly burdensome reporting that could drive airlines away from SAF.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,026 words)
Luke TaylorSupportiveSutton and Cheam
Strongly supportive of Bill and new clauses 1-7; emphasises aviation's 2.5% global emissions share and SAF's 70% lifecycle emissions reduction; backs innovation in zero-carbon alternatives and employment growth projections.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (354 words)
Iqbal MohamedSupportiveDewsbury and Batley
Tables new clause 7 and amendment 12 prioritising power-to-liquid SAF; argues PTL is cleanest option without food/environmental trade-offs; calls for revenue certainty contracts to de-risk first-mover projects by 2026.Labour · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (1,123 words)
John CooperOpposedDumfries and Galloway
Strongly opposed; argues SAF is unaffordable (requiring $19-45bn globally), will massively raise passenger costs, and diverts resources from more efficient engine/airframe improvements; supports new clause 6 economic impact assessment.SNP · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,060 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