A divisionDivision No. 418 · Tuesday, 27 January 2026· Commons· Health

Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill: Amendment 9

91Ayes
378Noes
Defeated · majority 287 · Government won
177 did not vote
Aye93No379DID NOT VOTE · 177

646 Members · Aye 91 · No 378 · DNV 177 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

On 27 January 2026, MPs voted on Amendment 9 to the Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill. The amendment, tabled by the Conservative opposition, would have required that from 2027 British citizens on UK foundation programmes be given priority for interviews and places on specialty training programmes. The amendment was defeated by 378 votes to 91 -- a margin of 287. The Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill is designed to give doctors who trained in UK and Irish medical schools priority access to foundation and specialty training places in the NHS. Amendment 9 sought to go further than the government's Bill by specifying that British citizenship, not just where a person trained, should be the qualifying criterion for prioritisation from 2027 onwards. The defeat of the amendment means the Bill proceeds on the basis of where a doctor trained rather than their nationality. In practical terms, this affects thousands of doctors -- in 2025, around 12,000 UK-trained doctors competed for training places alongside approximately 21,000 internationally trained applicants. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 84 Conservative MPs who voted backed the amendment, and they were joined by 4 Democratic Unionist Party MPs, 2 Reform UK MPs and 2 independents. Labour, Labour Co-operative, the Liberal Democrats, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Green Party all voted against. The Liberal Democrats backed the government's Bill in general terms but opposed several Conservative amendments on different grounds, including concerns about ministerial powers to change eligibility without parliamentary scrutiny. Health Secretary Wes Streeting signalled scepticism about the Conservative amendment, suggesting its shift in position -- from earlier criticism of his approach to resident doctors' pay -- was cynically motivated.

Voting Aye meant
Support prioritising British citizens for NHS specialty training interviews and places from 2027, even if they trained outside the UK
Voting No meant
Oppose using citizenship as the primary criterion for training priority, preferring to prioritise those with UK medical qualifications and NHS experience regardless of nationality
§ 01Who voted how.469 voting Members · 177 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
278
83
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
84
0
32
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
53
19
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
28
14
Independent
2
5
6
Scottish National Party
Whipped No
0
8
1
Reform UK
2
0
6
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
4
0
1
Green Party of England and Wales
0
2
2
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
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
0
1
0
Your Party
0
0
1

Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed

§ 02From the debate.5 principal speakers
Karin SmythSupportiveBristol South
Supports the Bill as drafted; opposes most amendments as they would widen the priority pool, undermine workforce planning, or create loopholes; defends the discretionary commencement clause as necessary for effective NHS implementation.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,610 words)
Dr Caroline JohnsonNeutralSleaford and North Hykeham
Supports the Bill's principles but tables amendments to protect British citizens trained overseas, safeguard armed forces medics, require annual reporting on international student impacts, and ensure merit-based allocation of specific training places.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,984 words)
Helen MorganNeutralNorth Shropshire
Supports the Bill but tables amendments to replace negative with affirmative procedure for future regulations, protect 2026 applicants mid-cycle, require annual impact reporting by medical specialty, and ensure devolved consent on regulatory changes.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (734 words)
Dr Ben SpencerQuestioningRunnymede and Weybridge
Strongly opposes the current preference informed allocation system as meritless and dehumanising; supports new clause 2 requiring merit-based allocation of candidates to specific training places after prioritisation requirements are met.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (469 words)
Helen MaguireQuestioningEpsom and Ewell
Intervenes to support new clause 1, raising concerns that the Bill could exacerbate workforce shortages in specialties like oncology and radiology without specialty-specific impact assessment.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (100 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