A divisionDivision No. 420 · Tuesday, 27 January 2026· Commons· Health

Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill: Amendment 1

88Ayes
310Noes
Defeated · majority 222 · Government won
248 did not vote
Aye90No311DID NOT VOTE · 248

646 Members · Aye 88 · No 310 · DNV 248 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

On 27 January 2026, MPs voted on Amendment 1 to the Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill at committee stage. The amendment was defeated by 310 votes to 88. The amendment appears to have sought to widen the scope of who would receive priority for specialty training places in 2026, specifically by including doctors already working in the NHS or Health and Social Care Northern Ireland who had applied for a UK specialty training programme before the Bill came into force. The Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill is designed to give priority in foundation and specialty training places to graduates from UK and Irish medical schools, addressing a situation in which UK-trained doctors have faced intense competition from a much larger pool of internationally trained applicants. Amendment 1, if passed, would have extended that prioritisation to doctors already employed in the NHS who had applied for 2026 specialty training. By defeating the amendment, the government maintained its original framework for how prioritisation would operate, keeping the Bill focused on its core purpose without broadening eligibility in ways it argued would undermine the legislation's effectiveness. The vote divided along largely predictable party lines. All 305 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted backed the government's position with no votes in favour of the amendment. The 88 Aye votes came primarily from Conservatives (83), with smaller contributions from the Democratic Unionist Party (4), Ulster Unionist Party (1), Traditional Unionist Voice (1), and one Independent. Reform UK abstained entirely. The Conservatives stated support for the Bill in principle while tabling amendments they argued would improve it, though Health Secretary Wes Streeting dismissed their motives with some scepticism. The Liberal Democrats raised separate concerns about ministerial powers in the Bill but did not vote for this amendment in significant numbers. This vote was one of several amendments defeated on the same day, including Amendment 2 (defeated 311--61) and Amendment 9 (defeated 378--91).

Voting Aye meant
Support requiring that British citizens are given priority for foundation programme places and specialty training interviews from 2027 onwards
Voting No meant
Oppose this amendment, preferring the government's existing framework for prioritising UK medical graduates without a citizenship-based criterion
§ 01Who voted how.398 voting Members · 248 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
83
0
33
Liberal Democrats
0
0
72
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
26
16
Independent
1
6
6
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
0
0
8
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
4
0
1
Green Party of England and Wales
0
0
4
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
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
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_vote_recorded · 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_vote_recorded · 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