Data (Use and Access) Bill CCLM: motion to insist Commons Amendment 32
371
Ayes
—
98
Noes
Passed · Government won
180 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 14 May 2025 to insist on the Commons' position regarding Amendment 32 of the Data (Use and Access) Bill, rejecting modifications proposed by the House of Lords. The motion passed by 371 votes to 98, a comfortable majority for the government. The vote was part of the parliamentary "ping-pong" process, in which a bill passes back and forth between the two chambers until both agree on its final text. The Data (Use and Access) Bill governs how personal and public data can be collected, shared and used across government and private sectors. Amendment 32 specifically concerned rules around data access, and the Commons voted to maintain its own version of those rules rather than accept the Lords' revised wording. The practical effect is that the government's preferred framework for data access will be preserved, shaping how individuals, businesses and public bodies interact with data systems in the United Kingdom. The vote revealed a broad coalition in favour of the government's position. Labour MPs, Liberal Democrats, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Greens all voted with the government, producing the large majority. Conservative MPs were the main bloc in opposition, with 90 voting against, joined by Reform UK's seven MPs and two independents. The absence of any Labour rebels and the alignment of several smaller parties with the government reflects the broadly cross-party consensus that the bill, while contested in detail, should proceed broadly on the Commons' terms. The vote sits within a longer legislative tussle, with subsequent ping-pong divisions on related amendments continuing into June 2025.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government's position on the Data (Use and Access) Bill, insisting on Commons amendments and rejecting the Lords' alternative amendments to the Bill
Voting No meant
Support the Lords' amendments to the Bill, opposing the government's approach and preferring the changes made in the upper chamber
469 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 180 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
268
0
94
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
90
26
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
54
0
18
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
29
0
13
Independent
5
2
6
Scottish National PartyWhipped Aye
5
0
4
Reform UKWhipped No
0
7
1
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
0
1
4
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
4
0
—
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
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
1
0
—
Government Minister defending rejection of copyright transparency amendments, arguing the Bill is not the right vehicle and comprehensive work is needed across multiple policy areas before legislating on AI and copyright.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (8,437 words) →
Shadow Minister supporting Lords amendment 49B as a proportionate transparency measure, criticising the Government for creating panic in the creative sector through earlier consultation language on copyright opt-outs.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,402 words) →
Strongly supporting Lords amendment 49B, arguing the creative sector faces imminent threat from data scraping and transparency could be implemented immediately without waiting for technical solutions or impact assessments.SNP · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,848 words) →
Supporting Lords amendment 49B, emphasising the £126 billion creative sector contribution to the economy and the threat of unprotected data scraping by large tech companies.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (728 words) →
Pressing the Minister on transparency and copyright protection, noting the Government's earlier messaging about opt-outs created panic in the creative sector, and calling for clarity on solutions.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (407 words) →
Accepting Minister's reassurance that scientific research exemptions will not enable blanket AI training, but advocating for transparent engagement with tech companies to develop appropriate technical solutions.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (744 words) →
Questioning whether the Bill will deliver on content credentials and digital fingerprinting to verify AI use, arguing technical standards should be part of the solution.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (161 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0