Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill: motion relating to Lords Amendment 38
256Ayes
150Noes
Carried · majority 106 · Government won240 did not vote
646 Members · Aye 256 · No 150 · DNV 240 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
On 15 April 2026, the House of Commons voted to reject Lords Amendment 38 to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, restoring the original text passed by the Commons. The motion passed by 256 votes to 150, with the government securing a majority of 106. This was one of several votes held on the same day as part of the "ping-pong" process, in which the Commons and Lords exchange amendments until both chambers agree on a final text. The Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill covers a broad range of policy areas relating to child welfare and school reform in England. By voting to reject Amendment 38, MPs chose to restore the government's preferred version of this portion of the legislation. The practical effect depends on the specific content of that amendment, but the vote is part of a wider pattern on 15 April in which the government successfully reversed multiple Lords changes to the Bill, advancing its original legislative agenda on children's services and schools. The vote split almost entirely along party lines. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs provided 249 of the 256 Aye votes, alongside small contributions from the Green Party, the SNP, and two independents. All 86 Conservative MPs who voted, all 53 Liberal Democrats, all four Plaid Cymru members, and smaller unionist parties voted No, backing the Lords' version. Three Labour MPs broke with their party to vote No. The result is consistent with three other Commons victories for the government on the same bill the same day, each overturning Lords amendments with similar margins.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government's position of rejecting Lords Amendment 38, restoring the original Commons text of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill
Voting No meant
Support retaining Lords Amendment 38, backing the change made by the House of Lords to the Bill
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 Aye
220
3
138
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
86
30
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
53
19
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
29
0
13
Independent
—
2
4
7
Scottish National Party
Whipped Aye
3
0
6
Reform UK
—
0
0
8
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
—
0
1
4
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
4
0
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
0
0
1
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
—
0
0
1
Your Party
—
0
0
1
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Defending Government's consultation approach on social media and phones rather than accepting Lords amendments; committed to statutory guidance review and six-month reporting requirementLabour · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,372 words) →
Strongly pushing for immediate statutory ban on social media for under-16s and mobile phones in schools, citing US court rulings and bereaved parents' testimonyConservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,695 words) →
Supporting Lords amendments on phones and sibling contact; criticising Government's opt-in powers and lack of binding timeline; calling for film-style age ratings and statutory phone banLiberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (1,739 words) →
Advocating for immediate statutory bans on smartphones in schools and social media for under-16s; arguing Government is making excuses and lacking courageConservative · Voted no · Read full speech (2,683 words) →
Supporting Government's consultation while acknowledging genuine stakeholder disagreements; defending need for detailed evidence-gathering through Education CommitteeLabour · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (408 words) →
Describing public health crisis from social media; demanding immediate action rather than consultation; citing 2,600 constituent emails demanding bansConservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,137 words) →
Celebrating Government amendment 17B on sibling contact in care system after decade-long campaign; thanking colleagues and charitiesLabour · Voted aye · Read full speech (545 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0