Sentencing Bill Committee: Amendment 24
182Ayes
307Noes
Defeated · majority 125 · Government won157 did not vote
646 Members · Aye 182 · No 307 · DNV 157 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
The House of Commons voted on Amendment 24 to the Sentencing Bill at committee stage on 21 October 2025. The amendment, which proposed changes to criminal sentencing guidelines or procedures in a direction broadly associated with reform and rehabilitation rather than punitive approaches, was defeated by 307 votes to 182. The defeat of Amendment 24 means the Sentencing Bill continues on its current trajectory without the modifications this amendment sought to introduce. The vote represents a decision by Parliament to maintain the government's preferred approach to sentencing rather than incorporating changes that supporters argued would have moved the framework toward greater rehabilitation. The outcome directly affects how courts will approach sentencing decisions, with implications for offenders, victims, and the prison and probation systems. The vote produced a striking cross-party coalition in favour of the amendment, with Conservatives (90 ayes), Liberal Democrats (65 ayes), the Democratic Unionist Party (5 ayes), Plaid Cymru (4 ayes), Reform UK (4 ayes), Greens (3 ayes), and a number of independents all voting in support. Labour overwhelmingly opposed it, with 279 Labour MPs and 26 Labour and Co-operative MPs voting no, and only a single Labour MP breaking ranks to back the amendment. This placed the government in the unusual position of being opposed by parties spanning from the Greens and Plaid Cymru on the left to Reform UK and the Conservatives on the right, yet prevailing comfortably on the strength of its parliamentary majority.
Voting Aye meant
Support the Conservative opposition's Amendment 24 to the Sentencing Bill, seeking to modify the government's sentencing reform proposals
Voting No meant
Reject the Conservative amendment and support the government's Sentencing Bill as drafted, opposing the opposition's changes to suspended sentence and recall provisions
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
1
279
81
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
90
0
26
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
65
0
7
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
26
16
Independent
—
9
3
1
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
4
0
4
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
5
0
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
0
0
1
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
1
0
0
Ulster Unionist Party
—
1
0
0
Your Party
—
1
0
0
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Opposes the Bill as fundamentally undermining law and order by forcing suspended sentences when imprisonment is appropriate; advocates for narrower application of presumption and tougher exclusions for serious offences including knife crime.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,517 words) →
Defends the Bill against accusations that it undermines law and order; argues the previous Conservative government nearly collapsed the prison system through poor management.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (255 words) →
Supports McVey's position that the Bill is worse than the previous approach; argues active prison management was preferable to reducing incarceration.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (186 words) →
Concerned that the Bill removes deterrent effect for knife crime; argues sentencing must be carried out and deterrents maintained, citing tragic family impacts in constituencies.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (95 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0