Armed Forces Bill Committee: New Clause 5
170Ayes
301Noes
Defeated · majority 131 · Government won172 did not vote
643 Members · Aye 170 · No 301 · DNV 172 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament rejected New Clause 5 to the Armed Forces Bill on 2 June 2026 by 301 votes to 170. The clause was tabled by Conservative MP Ben Obese-Jecty, representing Huntingdon, and was debated alongside a range of other opposition amendments at committee stage. The available record does not set out in precise detail what the clause's specific provisions were, though it was grouped with other opposition new clauses during committee scrutiny of the Bill. The Armed Forces Bill is designed to update the legal framework governing the armed forces, and committee stage involves line-by-line scrutiny of its contents. New Clause 5 was one of several opposition additions sought by Conservative MPs who had conducted extensive pre-legislative work, including seven oral evidence sessions, 47 pieces of written evidence, and site visits to defence establishments. The government's position was to oppose the clause, and it fell by a comfortable margin. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 302 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted supported the No lobby, while all 93 voting Conservatives and all 57 voting Liberal Democrats supported the Ayes, as did the Democratic Unionist Party (five), the Green Party (five), Plaid Cymru (three), and smaller parties. The result mirrors other defeats suffered by opposition amendments on the same day, including New Clause 2 (lost 171-302) and New Clause 6 (lost 99-371), suggesting a consistent pattern of the government holding its majority against a cross-party but ultimately insufficient opposition coalition.
Voting Aye meant
Support a legal requirement ensuring children of serving personnel automatically retain their SEN support when their family is posted to a new base, preventing disruption to vulnerable children's education.
Voting No meant
Oppose a rigid statutory mechanism, preferring the government to address SEN continuity for armed forces families through practical cross-government working rather than legislating a specific process.
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 party-line column is inferred from how cohesively each party voted, not a published whip: a clear one-way majority of a party’s voters reads as a line, a close division reads as “Split”.
Party
Party line
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Voted No
0
273
87
Conservative and Unionist Party
Voted Aye
93
0
23
Liberal Democrats
Voted Aye
56
0
15
Labour and Co-operative Party
Voted No
0
29
13
Independent
—
5
2
6
Reform UK
—
0
0
8
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
7
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Voted Aye
5
0
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Voted Aye
5
0
0
Plaid Cymru
Voted Aye
3
0
1
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Your Party
—
1
0
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
1
0
0
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
1
0
0
Ulster Unionist Party
—
1
0
0
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · party line inferred from voting cohesion, not a published whip; “Split” = a close within-party division
Minister defending government amendments to expand covenant duty to regional authorities, modernise defence housing with 40,000 upgrades, and strengthen service justice protections including mandatory referral of sexual offences to civilian police.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (16,318 words) →
Intervened on lack of Reform MP attendance at material defence legislation, criticising 'plastic patriots' unwilling to show up for armed forces matters.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (12,648 words) →
Questioned why Northern Ireland district councils were excluded from covenant duty scope when all other local authorities across UK were included, pressing Minister on inconsistency.DUP · Voted aye · Read full speech (194 words) →
Supported government housing investment for veterans and emphasised importance of mental health support alongside housing provision, citing personal experience with homeless veterans.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (278 words) →
Praised East Sussex Veterans' Hub grant and innovative mental health support programmes, inviting Minister to visit constituency initiatives.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (344 words) →
Cautioned against portraying all veterans as homeless or mentally unwell, emphasising majority of personnel transition well to civilian life and that negative narratives deter recruitment.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,110 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0