Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendments 15B, 15C, 15D, 15E
302
Ayes
—
167
Noes
Passed · Government won
176 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** On 31 March 2025, the House of Commons voted by 302 to 167 to reject four amendments (15B, 15C, 15D, and 15E) that the House of Lords had made to the Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill. The Lords amendments would have weakened or delayed the bill's provisions increasing business rates for private schools. By voting to disagree with these amendments, the Commons insisted on the government's original approach. **Why it matters:** The bill removes the business rates relief that independent schools in England have historically received as charitable organisations. By rejecting the Lords amendments, the Commons cleared the way for private schools to pay the full standard business rates multiplier, effectively increasing their property tax burden. The government has argued this raises revenue for state education. Private schools and their supporters contend the costs will be passed on to parents through fee increases, potentially pushing some pupils into the state sector. **The politics:** The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 299 Labour and Labour-Co-operative MPs who voted supported the government, joined by all three Greens and three independents. All 92 Conservatives, all 63 Liberal Democrats, all five Reform UK members, and the four Democratic Unionist Party members who voted opposed it, supporting the Lords amendments. This is a notable instance of the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives voting together to protect private school tax relief, a position the government has sought to frame as defending privilege. The Lords' resistance represents one of the more prominent uses of the revising chamber's powers against this government's tax agenda.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government rejecting the Lords amendments, keeping the Bill as the Commons originally passed it — including permanent lower rates for retail, hospitality and leisure and removing private school business rates relief
Voting No meant
Support the Lords amendments, opposing the government's approach to business rates — particularly the removal of relief from private schools and the structure of the new multiplier system
469 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 176 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
264
0
98
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
92
24
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
63
9
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
35
0
7
Independent
3
2
8
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped No
0
5
2
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
4
1
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
—
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
—
Your Party
0
0
1
Government must reject Lords amendments as they duplicate existing powers and undermine the funding mechanism for permanent RHL relief; the higher multiplier on 1% of properties is necessary and sustainable.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,990 words) →
Lords amendments should be accepted; the £500,000 threshold is a blunt instrument that punishes aspiration, harms healthcare, retailers and high streets, and creates unfair cliff-edge effects for growing businesses.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (927 words) →
Support business rates reform but concerned about hospitals and businesses near the threshold being caught; private schools should not be taxed on education.Liberal Democrats · Voted no · Read full speech (575 words) →
Opposes removal of charitable relief from private and faith schools as it unfairly disadvantages parents seeking faith-based education and disproportionately affects faith communities.DUP · Voted no · Read full speech (1,130 words) →
Questions the disjointed approach of funding NHS while simultaneously taxing health services through business rates.Unknown · Voted no · Read full speech (62 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0