Division · No. 213Wednesday, 4 June 2025Commons Business

Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] Report Stage: Amendment 24

164
Ayes
273
Noes
Defeated · Government won
209 did not vote
Analysis
Commons

**What happened:** The House of Commons voted on Amendment 24 to the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill at Report Stage on 4 June 2025. The amendment, which sought to strengthen regulatory oversight or modify compliance requirements for businesses under the Bill, was defeated by 273 votes to 164. The government opposed the amendment, and its majority held comfortably. **Why it matters:** The Product Regulation and Metrology Bill sets the framework for how goods sold in the UK are regulated after Brexit, covering product safety standards, measurement rules, and business compliance obligations. Amendment 24 would have imposed additional oversight requirements on businesses, pushing for stronger regulatory controls. Its defeat means the government's preferred, lighter-touch approach to product regulation remains intact, with businesses facing fewer additional compliance burdens than the amendment's supporters wanted. **The politics:** The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted backed the No lobby, while Conservatives and Liberal Democrats voted unanimously for the amendment, joined by Reform UK, both Ulster unionist parties, the DUP, and several independents. This unusual cross-party alliance of opposition parties, spanning from the Liberal Democrats on the centre-left to Reform UK on the right, reflects shared, if differently motivated, concerns about the Bill's regulatory framework. The government's large majority meant the opposition could not overcome the arithmetic, and the defeat was not especially close.

Voting Aye meant
Support adding protections against imprisonment for businesses that inadvertently stock non-compliant products under an opaque regulatory alignment process, arguing the criminal sanctions in the Bill are disproportionate
Voting No meant
Oppose the amendment, defending the Bill's enforcement and criminal liability framework as necessary and proportionate for product regulation
§ 01Who voted how.437 voting members · 209 absent
Aye167No273DID NOT VOTE · 209

437 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 209 who did not vote.

Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
0
243
119
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
91
0
25
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
62
0
10
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0
27
15
Independent
4
2
7
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped Aye
6
0
2
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
2
0
3
Green Party of England and Wales
0
0
4
Plaid Cymru
0
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
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
1
0
Your Party
0
0
1
§ 02From the debate.6 principal speakers
Gareth SnellSupportiveStoke-on-Trent Central
Supports New Clause 1 to assess country-of-origin marking for ceramics to protect UK manufacturers from counterfeit products and unfair competition, particularly from Chinese copies.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,601 words)
Jim AllisterOpposedNorth Antrim
Opposed to the Bill's core structure; argues clause 2(7) enables unconstitutional dynamic alignment with EU law without parliamentary oversight, effectively sabotaging Brexit and reducing the Commons to a rubber-stamp body.DUP · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,283 words)
Adam ThompsonSupportiveErewash
Defends the Bill's grant of Henry VIII powers as necessary for the UK to maintain scientific and regulatory leadership; rejects concerns about EU alignment as stemming from misunderstanding metrology and standards frameworks.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,685 words)
Stella CreasySupportiveWalthamstow
Supports the Bill as salvage operation post-Brexit but backs New Clause 15 to establish a parliamentary committee to scrutinise EU-derived regulations, arguing the volume of technical complexity requires dedicated expert oversight.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,013 words)
Richard HoldenQuestioningBasildon and Billericay
Questions the Bill's concentration of power in the Executive; supports Opposition amendments (including amendment 13) requiring parliamentary statements before alignment with foreign law, to protect SMEs from rapid regulatory change.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (490 words)
Dr Allison GardnerSupportiveStoke-on-Trent South
Strongly supports New Clause 1 to protect Staffordshire ceramics industry from cheap imports falsely marketed as British-made, citing the sector's heritage and need for fair competition.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (799 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