Planning and Infrastructure Bill Report Stage: New Clause 39
113
Ayes
—
335
Noes
Defeated · Government won
197 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** Parliament voted on New Clause 39 to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill during its Report Stage on 9 June 2025. The clause, tabled by the Conservative opposition, concerned compulsory purchase order (CPO) compensation arrangements, seeking stronger protections and fairer payments for those whose land or property is acquired by the state. The government and its Labour and Labour and Co-operative members voted against it, and the clause was defeated by 335 votes to 113. **Why it matters:** Compulsory purchase orders allow public bodies to acquire land and property without the owner's consent, typically for infrastructure, housing, or regeneration projects. New Clause 39 sought to strengthen the financial and procedural protections available to those subjected to such orders. Its defeat means the Bill proceeds without those additional safeguards, leaving the existing CPO compensation framework broadly unchanged for now. Farming communities, rural landowners, and homeowners facing displacement were among those whose representatives argued they would be left exposed by the Bill's current provisions. **The politics:** The vote divided sharply along party lines. All 293 voting Labour members and all 35 Labour and Co-operative members opposed the clause, while 95 Conservatives backed it. Reform UK, Plaid Cymru, the Democratic Unionist Party, and Traditional Unionist Voice also voted in favour, producing a cross-party grouping of opposition parties united against the government's position. The Greens, unusually, voted with the government against the clause. The debate formed part of a broader pattern in which the government rejected a series of Conservative and cross-party amendments across the Report Stage, with opposition members arguing that the government's refusal to accept any substantive changes had missed an opportunity to improve the legislation before it passes to the House of Lords.
Voting Aye meant
Support prohibiting solar farms on the best agricultural land to protect food security and farmland from irreversible development
Voting No meant
Oppose the blanket ban, arguing existing protections are sufficient and that restricting solar on agricultural land would hinder renewable energy targets
448 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 197 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
0
293
69
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
95
0
21
Liberal Democrats
0
0
72
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0
35
7
Independent
8
3
2
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 WalesWhipped No
0
3
1
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
4
0
—
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
0
1
—
Your Party
0
0
1
Moving New Clause 69 to require examiners of development consent applications to take procedural decisions in light of initial assessments under the Planning Act 2008.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (7,052 words) →
Tabling 92 new clauses that substantially expand planning protections for the environment, biodiversity, affordable housing, and agricultural land, and introduce stricter controls on developers and second homes.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (24,946 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0