Data Use and Access Bill: motion to disagree to Lords Amendment 49D
195
Ayes
—
124
Noes
Passed · Government won
328 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** The House of Commons voted on 22 May 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 49D to the Data Use and Access Bill, by 195 votes to 124. This was a "motion to disagree," meaning MPs voted to send the amendment back to the House of Lords rather than accept the change peers had made to the Bill. The vote was part of the parliamentary process known as "ping-pong," in which a Bill passes back and forth between the two chambers until both agree on the same text. **Why it matters:** Amendment 49D concerned the balance between enabling government and public bodies to access and share data, and protecting individuals' privacy. By rejecting the Lords' version, the Commons maintained the government's preferred approach to data access powers in the Bill. The Data Use and Access Bill is a significant piece of legislation intended to update the UK's data governance framework following Brexit, affecting how public services, businesses, and researchers can use personal and public data. The outcome of this vote determined which version of those provisions would continue through the legislative process. **The politics:** The vote divided along clear party lines. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs provided the government's majority, voting 194 to 2 in favour of rejecting the Lords amendment. All 57 voting Conservatives, all 51 voting Liberal Democrats, and smaller parties including Plaid Cymru, the Greens, the SNP, and Reform UK voted against the government, backing the Lords amendment instead. Two Labour MPs broke with their party to vote with the opposition. The vote reflects a recurring pattern in this Bill's passage, with subsequent divisions in June 2025 showing the same broad coalition holding as the Bill continued through further rounds of ping-pong.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government's position by rejecting the Lords' amendment to the Data Use and Access Bill, deferring to the elected Commons over the unelected Lords on this data legislation provision
Voting No meant
Support retaining the Lords' amendment, backing the change the upper house made to the Bill against the government's wishes
319 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 328 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
175
2
185
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
57
59
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
51
21
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
19
0
23
Independent
1
2
10
Scottish National Party
0
2
7
Reform UK
0
2
6
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
0
1
4
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped No
0
3
1
Plaid CymruWhipped No
0
4
—
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
1
1
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
—
Rejects Lords amendment 49D as not comprehensive enough; commits to establishing working groups on transparency, licensing and technical standards, and to bring forward dedicated AI/copyright legislation, but opposes adding provisions to this Data Bill.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,059 words) →
Criticises the Bill as a missed opportunity; welcomes the Secretary of State's tone but argues the Government have run out of excuses for not accepting amendment 49D, which provides necessary certainty to both creative and AI sectors.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (905 words) →
Strongly supports amendment 49D as a necessary backstop to ensure transparency of copyright work use in AI; warns that material is already being scraped and further delays will harm the 2.4 million creative workers in the UK.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (898 words) →
Supports Lords amendment 49D as a balanced, proportionate measure focused on transparency; calls for cross-party support to establish a fair playing field between creatives and tech companies.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (885 words) →
Backs amendment 49D and expresses frustration that this is the second consideration of the same issue; warns the Lords will not give up and urges Labour backbenchers to vote against the Government.SNP · Voted no · Read full speech (728 words) →
Challenges the Government's framing of copyright uncertainty; argues current law already prohibits commercial AI training on UK copyright work, so what creatives need is transparency provisions now via this amendment, not delayed future legislation.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (193 words) →
Supportive of finding a workable tech solution; asks the Secretary of State to meet with companies that may have technical solutions to the transparency problem.Labour · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (94 words) →
Welcomes the Secretary of State's tone but pushes for backstop powers to be included in the Bill itself to give the creative industries confidence while awaiting full legislation.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (261 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0