Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 311

Tuesday, 14 April 2026 · Division No. 470 · Commons

300Ayes
101Noes
Passed

246 MPs did not vote

cross-cuttingGovernment wonPro Government Override Of Lords(Yes)Lords Scrutiny Respected(No)Vawg Protection(Yes)Parliamentary Scrutiny(No)

Voting Yes means

Support the government's rejection of the Lords' amendment 311, backing the government's preferred alternative approach to the underlying issue in the Crime and Policing Bill

Voting No means

Support retaining the Lords' amendment 311, opposing the government overriding the Lords' change to the Bill

What happened: On 14 April 2026, the House of Commons voted 300 to 101 to reject Lords Amendment 311 to the Crime and Policing Bill, backing the government's position to remove this particular change made by the House of Lords. The government argued it was offering its own alternative approach to the underlying issue rather than accepting the Lords' version of the provision.

Why it matters: The Crime and Policing Bill is described by ministers as the largest criminal justice bill in a generation, covering knife crime, violence against women and girls, antisocial behaviour, sexual violence, terrorism and online harms. By rejecting Lords Amendment 311, the Commons cleared the way for the government's preferred legislative approach to the relevant area of policy. The wider Bill includes significant measures on non-consensual intimate imagery, AI chatbot regulation, image deletion orders, and protest powers, all of which affect millions of people across England and Wales and, in some provisions, the United Kingdom more broadly.

The politics: The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously for the government position, joined by most Greens, Plaid Cymru members and a majority of independents voting. All 91 Conservative MPs who voted backed the Lords amendment, as did the Democratic Unionist Party, Reform UK, Traditional Unionist Voice and Ulster Unionist Party. This was one of several related votes on the same day, with the Commons also rejecting Lords Amendments 2, 11, 333 and 334 by comparable margins. The session was marked by some internal Labour tension, with backbenchers raising concerns about protest powers and the pace of scrutiny, though none voted against the government on this specific division.

How They Voted

Government position: Aye

Labour PartyWhipped Aye
261 Aye/0 No
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/91 No
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
26 Aye/0 No
Independent
6 Aye/2 No
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0 Aye/5 No
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4 Aye/0 No
Reform UKWhipped No
0 Aye/3 No
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
3 Aye/0 No
Traditional Unionist Voice
0 Aye/1 No
Ulster Unionist Party
0 Aye/1 No
Your Party
1 Aye/0 No

What They Said in the Debate

Apsana Begum

Labour · Poplar and Limehouse

Opposed

Opposes the Bill as a fundamental assault on democratic freedoms, particularly Lords amendment 312 on cumulative disruption and identity concealment at protests, calling it a direct response to Palestine demonstrations.

Voted Aye

Wendy Morton

Conservative · Aldridge-Brownhills

Opposed

Urges Government to accept Lords amendments 6, 10, 11 on fly-tipping, emphasizing need for penalty points and vehicle seizure to deter criminal gangs and protect communities.

Voted No

Dame Caroline Dinenage

Conservative · Gosport

Questioning

Challenges Government for not adopting safety-by-design approach to AI chatbots; argues regulation should prevent harms rather than respond to them after the fact, like aircraft safety design.

Voted No

Matt Vickers

Conservative · Stockton West

Neutral

Welcomes Government U-turns on fly-tipping and weapon possession penalties, but regrets rejection of amendments on closure order extensions, proscribing extreme protest groups, and abolishing non-crime hate incidents.

Voted No

Max Wilkinson

Liberal Democrat · Cheltenham

Neutral

Supports online safety and violence against women measures, but strongly opposes cumulative disruption amendment as an assault on protest rights and calls for ban on fixed penalty notices for profit.

Andy McDonald

Labour · Middlesbrough and Thornaby East

Neutral

Welcomes most of Bill but strongly opposes Lords amendment 312 on cumulative disruption as continuation of restricting protest rights that undermine the labour movement's democratic tradition.

Voted Aye

Sarah Jones

Labour · Croydon West

Supportive

Government will accept Lords amendments on intimate image abuse, strangulation pornography, and hate crime extensions, but reject amendments restricting fixed penalty notices for profit, banning AI chatbots by design, and abolishing non-crime hate incidents recording.

Voted Aye

Tonia Antoniazzi

Labour · Gower

Supportive

Strongly supports Lords amendment 361 and Government amendments providing automatic pardons and record expungement for women convicted or investigated for illegal abortion under outdated law.

Voted Aye

Related Votes