Division · No. 199Wednesday, 14 May 2025Commons Digital and Technology

Data (Use and Access) Bill CCLM: motion to disagree Lords Amendment 43B

304
Ayes
68
Noes
Passed · Government won
279 did not vote
Analysis
Commons

**What happened:** The House of Commons voted on 14 May 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 43B to the Data (Use and Access) Bill, restoring the government's original position on data use and access policy. The motion passed by 304 votes to 68, with the government's approach upheld by a substantial majority. **Why it matters:** This vote is part of the parliamentary process known as "ping-pong," in which the Commons and Lords exchange amendments until both chambers agree on a final text. By rejecting Lords Amendment 43B, the Commons declined to accept changes the upper chamber had made to how data can be used and accessed under the Bill. The Data (Use and Access) Bill sets out a broad framework governing how personal and public data can be shared, processed, and used across public services and the wider economy, meaning the outcome affects citizens, public bodies, businesses, and anyone whose personal information is held in digital form. **The politics:** The vote followed sharp party lines. Labour MPs, including those sitting under the Labour and Co-operative Party label, voted overwhelmingly in favour of the government's position, contributing 298 of the 304 ayes. The Liberal Democrats provided the largest bloc of opposition, with 54 of their MPs voting no, alongside the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru, and the Green Party. The Conservatives, despite holding 116 seats, were entirely absent from the division. One Labour MP voted against the government's position, representing a rare but isolated act of dissent. This vote was one of several ping-pong divisions on the same day and in the weeks that followed, with related divisions on Lords Amendments 49B and 32 also taking place on 14 May, and further votes on Amendment 49 continuing into June 2025.

Voting Aye meant
Support the government's position of rejecting the Lords' additional safeguards on scientific research exemptions, trusting the existing Bill provisions are sufficient
Voting No meant
Back the Lords amendment to strengthen safeguards ensuring data exemptions are only used for genuine scientific research purposes
§ 01Who voted how.372 voting members · 279 absent
Aye303No67DID NOT VOTE · 279

372 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 279 who did not vote.

Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
267
1
94
Conservative and Unionist Party
0
0
116
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
54
18
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
31
0
11
Independent
5
0
8
Scottish National PartyWhipped No
0
5
4
Reform UK
0
0
8
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
0
0
5
Green Party of England and Wales
0
2
2
Plaid CymruWhipped No
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
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
0
0
1
Your Party
0
1
§ 02From the debate.7 principal speakers
Chris BryantOpposedRhondda and Ogmore
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)
Dr Ben SpencerSupportiveRunnymede and Weybridge
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_vote_recorded · Read full speech (1,402 words)
Pete WishartSupportivePerth and Kinross-shire
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 no · Read full speech (1,848 words)
Victoria CollinsSupportiveHarpenden and Berkhamsted
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 no · 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_vote_recorded · Read full speech (407 words)
Dame Chi OnwurahNeutralNewcastle upon Tyne Central and West
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 no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (744 words)
Steve BarclayQuestioningNorth East Cambridgeshire
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_vote_recorded · Read full speech (161 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