Victims and Courts Bill Report Stage: New Clause 4
152Ayes
337Noes
Defeated · majority 185 · Government won157 did not vote
646 Members · Aye 152 · No 337 · DNV 157 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
New Clause 4 to the Victims and Courts Bill was defeated on 27 October 2025 by 337 votes to 152. The clause, tabled by the Conservative opposition, would have reformed victim personal statements to give victims and bereaved families greater freedom to express in court how a crime affected them, without having parts of their statements removed or restricted. The vote matters because victim personal statements are one of the few opportunities for victims to speak directly to a court in their own words. Dr Kieran Mullan, who moved the new clause, argued that many victims are currently told to remove parts of their statements or avoid expressing their true feelings, which he said undermines the purpose of the process. The Government did not reject the underlying principle but opposed this specific drafting, with minister Alex Davies-Jones indicating the changes sought would be better addressed through guidance or differently worded legislation rather than this amendment. Labour MPs voted unanimously against the new clause, providing the numbers for its defeat, while Conservatives voted unanimously in favour. The Liberal Democrats also voted solidly for the clause, with 62 of their MPs supporting it, making this a clear government-versus-opposition division rather than one with significant cross-party complexity. Four Reform UK and three Democratic Unionist Party MPs also voted in favour. No notable rebels were recorded on either side.
Voting Aye meant
Support giving victims and bereaved families greater freedom in what they can say in victim personal statements in court, arguing the current restrictions are unfair and undermine victims' voices
Voting No meant
Oppose this specific amendment on victim personal statements, likely on grounds that the drafting is flawed or the issue is better addressed through guidance rather than legislation, while not necessarily opposing the principle
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
286
75
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
81
0
35
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
61
0
10
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
37
5
Independent
—
3
6
4
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
4
0
4
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
3
0
2
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
3
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
1
1
Your Party
—
0
1
1
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
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Bill delivers real, tangible victim protection measures including restricting parental responsibility for rapists, voiding NDAs that silence victims, and improving court processes; opposes widening some provisions (e.g. removing sentencing threshold) to avoid overwhelming family courts and to test the approach carefully before expansion.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (9,106 words) →
Welcomes the Bill's victim-centred approach but identifies gaps: victim contact scheme should extend to offenders serving less than 12 months, all victims need free court transcripts, government should make statements on victim reviews within two weeks, and local authorities must prepare victim support strategies to prevent postcode lotteries.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,628 words) →
New clause 2 should require courts to identify children affected by parental imprisonment at sentencing; existing statutory guidance is non-binding and children remain unsupported; 190,000 children affected annually but no clear timeline for government delivery on manifesto commitment.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,891 words) →
New clause 12 essential to end anomaly where families of murder victims killed abroad receive no structured statutory support while domestic victims do; bereaved families navigate foreign legal systems alone and deserve same baseline victim code protections as domestic cases.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,449 words) →
Government new clause 14 corrects historic injustice by preventing rapists from exercising parental responsibility over children conceived through rape; law change validates survivor testimony and uses law to protect women and children.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (134 words) →
Amendment on parental responsibility corrects injustice where children are protected from convicted sex offenders but their own children are not; government taking steps to protect both children and parents from vile sex offenders.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (122 words) →
Victim impact statements currently too restrictive; Violet-Grace Youens' parents felt silenced by court limitations on what could be said; victim statements are important for victims to be heard and acknowledged.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (82 words) →
Bill's domestic abuse support welcome but incomplete without concrete measures improving court capacity; victims arriving for trial only to have case pulled due to lack of capacity demonstrates systemic failure that legislation alone cannot fix.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (137 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0