Data (Use and Access) Bill CCLM: motion to insist Commons Amendment 52
366
Ayes
—
98
Noes
Passed · Government won
187 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 14 May 2025 to insist on Commons Amendment 52 to the Data (Use and Access) Bill, rejecting the House of Lords' attempt to remove or modify that provision. The motion passed by 366 votes to 98, with the government's position prevailing comfortably. The vote took place during the "ping-pong" stage of the Bill, the process by which the two Houses of Parliament exchange amendments until they reach agreement. Amendment 52 expands the powers available to government or institutions to access and use data. The Lords had objected to this expansion, raising concerns about data privacy and the scope of surveillance or data-sharing powers. By insisting on the amendment, the Commons confirmed its intention to retain these wider data access provisions as part of the final legislation. The practical effect is that, if the Bill passes in this form, bodies covered by the legislation will have broader legal authority to access or share data than existed under the original text. The vote divided sharply along party lines. Labour MPs, including those sitting under the Labour and Co-operative Party label, voted unanimously in favour, as did the Liberal Democrats, the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru, the Green Party, and most smaller groupings. Conservative MPs voted unanimously against, joined by all seven Reform UK members present and two independents. There were no notable cross-party rebels on the government side. This division sits within a wider legislative contest over the Data (Use and Access) Bill, which saw repeated exchanges between the Commons and Lords throughout May and June 2025 on related provisions, including disputes over Lords Amendments 43B, 49B, 49D, and 49F.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government asserting the Commons' will over the Lords by appointing a committee to formally explain why the Commons is insisting on its own amendments and rejecting the Lords' changes to the Data (Use and Access) Bill.
Voting No meant
Oppose overriding the Lords on these amendments, preferring the Lords' versions of the contested clauses — including concerns about AI and copyright protections championed by peers and backed by the opposition.
464 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 187 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
266
0
96
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
89
27
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
50
0
22
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
33
0
9
Independent
2
2
9
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
3
0
1
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 no_vote_recorded · 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