Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill: Committee: Amendment 4
143Ayes
318Noes
Defeated · majority 175 · Government won186 did not vote
647 Members · Aye 143 · No 318 · DNV 186 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
On 17 November 2025, the House of Commons voted on Amendment 4 to the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill during its committee stage. The amendment, which sought to strengthen environmental protections relating to international waters, was defeated by 318 votes to 143. The Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill is designed to implement international commitments on protecting marine biodiversity in areas outside any single nation's territorial control. Amendment 4 would have introduced enhanced requirements for environmental protection within that framework. Its defeat means the bill proceeds without those additional measures, leaving the legislation's environmental standards at the level the government considers sufficient rather than at the higher bar the amendment's supporters sought. The vote divided sharply along government-versus-opposition lines. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously against the amendment, in line with the government's position. The Conservatives (82 ayes) and Liberal Democrats (55 ayes) formed the core of the amendment's support, with small contributions from the DUP, Traditional Unionist Voice, and one Reform UK MP. Notably, the Greens and Plaid Cymru voted with the government against the amendment, suggesting those parties either accepted the bill's existing provisions as adequate or had strategic reasons not to back the opposition-led proposal. The vote follows a similar pattern to other recent environmental amendments, including Amendment 5 to the same bill, also defeated on the same day by an almost identical margin.
Voting Aye meant
Support allowing a single report to fulfil dual reporting requirements under the Bill, reducing administrative burden
Voting No meant
Oppose merging the two reporting requirements into a single report, preferring to keep them separate as drafted
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
276
85
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
82
0
34
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
55
0
17
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
31
11
Independent
—
2
6
5
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
—
1
0
7
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
—
2
0
3
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
3
1
Plaid Cymru
—
0
2
2
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
—
0
1
0
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Minister opening debate; supports Bill as essential to protect two-thirds of world's ocean, enable UK ratification of BBNJ agreement, and maintain UK leadership in marine conservation and scientific research.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (4,363 words) →
Shadow Minister; supports Bill's core purpose but tabled four amendments to strengthen parliamentary scrutiny: simplified reporting (Amendment 4), Secretary of State powers review (New Clause 1), affirmative procedure for fee-setting (Amendment 5), and biennial implementation reporting (New Clause 2).Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,405 words) →
Welcomes Bill as overdue step protecting high seas; emphasises ocean's critical role in climate regulation; calls for coherence between international commitments and domestic protections; supports strong enforcement and continued cross-party collaboration.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,468 words) →
Supports Bill; raises concern about sufficient resourcing for enforcement against powerful commercial interests in overfishing and pollution; emphasises need for resources to monitor and protect oceans effectively.Independent · Voted no · Read full speech (714 words) →
Seeks assurance that fishing sector viability and food security remain priorities despite Bill's creation of marine protected areas and environmental assessments.DUP · Voted aye · Read full speech (118 words) →
Member for coastal community; supports Bill and Government amendments as demonstrating leadership and accountability in embedding stronger ocean protections in law.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (551 words) →
Notes 94% of UK biodiversity in overseas territories; sees BBNJ ratification as potential tool to address illegal fishing in unregulated areas through international cooperation.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (125 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0