Division · No. 504Wednesday, 22 April 2026Commons Crime and Policing

Crime and Policing Bill: Government motion in relation to LA439

253
Ayes
143
Noes
Passed · Government won
252 did not vote
Analysis
Commons

I need to work with the information provided. The division relates to a government motion on the Crime and Policing Bill concerning amendment LA439. The vote passed 253 to 143. Let me construct the summaries from the available data. **What happened**: MPs voted on a government motion relating to amendment LA439 of the Crime and Policing Bill on 22 April 2026. The motion passed by 253 votes to 143. This vote is part of the parliamentary ping-pong process (the exchange of amendments between the Commons and the Lords as both chambers seek to agree a final version of the bill). **Why it matters**: The Crime and Policing Bill is major legislation covering policing powers, criminal justice processes, and related enforcement matters. Government motions in relation to Lords amendments at this stage typically represent the government's position on whether to accept, reject, or propose alternatives to changes the House of Lords has made to the bill. By passing this motion, the Commons affirmed the government's stance on amendment LA439, advancing the bill toward its final form. **The politics**: The vote divided along clear party lines. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted solidly in favour (228 and 23 respectively, with no votes against from either group), while Conservatives (85 no votes), Liberal Democrats (52 no votes), and Greens (4 no votes) opposed. This follows the pattern of earlier divisions on the same bill in late April 2026, where similar government motions passed with comparable margins.

Voting Aye meant
Support the government's position on amendment LA439 to the Crime and Policing Bill
Voting No meant
Oppose the government's position on amendment LA439, backing the alternative approach proposed in or against LA439
§ 01Who voted how.396 voting members · 252 absent
Aye253No145DID NOT VOTE · 252

396 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 252 who did not vote.

Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
228
0
134
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
85
31
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
53
19
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
23
0
19
Independent
1
2
10
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
0
0
8
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
0
1
4
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped No
0
4
1
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
1
0
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
0
0
1
Your Party
0
0
1
§ 02From the debate.4 principal speakers
Sarah JonesOpposedCroydon West
Government will not accept Lords amendments requiring mandatory review of IRGC proscription; proscription decisions must remain executive prerogative and cannot be subject to parliamentary running commentary.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,325 words)
Joy MorrisseySupportiveBeaconsfield
Lords amendments should be accepted; IRGC proscription is essential given documented terrorist threats to UK, funding of extremist groups, and threats to Jewish community security.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (479 words)
Jim ShannonSupportiveStrangford
Government should proscribe the IRGC immediately without delay, citing executions in Iran and the moral imperative to act.DUP · Voted no · Read full speech (123 words)
Max WilkinsonSupportiveCheltenham
Welcomes government concessions on youth diversion orders; disappointed on fixed penalty notices; supports Lords amendments on IRGC proscription given antisemitic sentiment and Iranian-funded activities.Liberal Democrats · Voted no · Read full speech (216 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