English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill: Motion relating to Lords Amendments 94B and 94C
269Ayes
170Noes
Carried · majority 99 · Government won208 did not vote
647 Members · Aye 269 · No 170 · DNV 208 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
The House of Commons voted 269 to 170 to disagree with Lords Amendments 94B and 94C to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill on 27 April 2026. The government's position prevailed, meaning the Commons rejected changes the House of Lords had proposed regarding the "agent of change" principle, a planning rule that would require developers building near existing venues to take responsibility for managing the noise impact of those venues, rather than placing that burden on the venues themselves. The practical effect is that the agent of change principle will not be placed on the face of the Bill in the form the Lords proposed. MPs speaking in favour of Lords Amendments 94B and 94C argued that grassroots music venues, which the Music Venue Trust estimates have fallen in number from around 1,150 to 800 in recent years, face closure or ongoing legal costs when new residential developments are built nearby and new residents complain about noise. Without a statutory agent of change requirement, those venues remain exposed to planning challenges and nuisance complaints that can cost tens of thousands of pounds to defend. The vote divided entirely along government versus opposition lines. All 268 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted backed the government's position. All 97 Conservatives, all 58 Liberal Democrats, all 5 Greens, and the Democratic Unionist Party and other smaller parties voted against, supporting the Lords amendments. There were no government rebels. This was one of several votes held on the same day during the "ping-pong" (the back-and-forth exchange of amendments between the two Houses) stage of the Bill, with related divisions producing similar margins of roughly 270 to 170.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government's position on Lords Amendments 94B and 94C to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill
Voting No meant
Oppose the government's position, backing instead the changes proposed by the House of Lords in Amendments 94B and 94C
Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.
Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped Aye
244
0
117
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
97
19
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
58
14
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
24
0
18
Independent
—
2
4
7
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
—
0
0
8
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
4
1
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
5
0
Plaid Cymru
—
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
0
1
0
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
—
0
1
0
Your Party
—
0
1
0
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Government minister defending concessions on rural/coastal affairs and parish councils while resisting statutory protections for brownfield and music venues, arguing devolution works best through local flexibility not central mandates.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (6,531 words) →
Opposition challenges the Bill as centralizing despite its devolution title; calls for brownfield prioritization, local consent for authority mergers, and stronger parish council protections to genuinely empower communities.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,665 words) →
Welcomes rural and coastal amendments but criticizes forced governance model changes and brownfield rejection as false devolution; demands real local choice and environmental protection.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (901 words) →
Backs agent of change principle for music venues to prevent legal harassment; supports statutory protection to avoid £50k+ defence costs for cultural venues threatened by residential development.Labour · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (765 words) →
Argues for local consent on mayoral powers and highlights Cornwall's national minority status under European conventions; calls for consultative, not directive, approach to devolution.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,279 words) →
Criticizes two-year delay on Secretary of State powers over combined authorities; demands permanent protections for Cornwall's national minority status and meaningful devolution.Labour · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (905 words) →
Advocates statutory agent of change protection for grassroots music venues; documents 350 closures and argues planning guidance alone is insufficient without enforcement and stronger NPPF language.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,059 words) →
Demands mandatory rather than consultative parish council inclusion in neighbourhood governance; argues 20% of country lacks democratic structures and Government amendment leaves gap unresolved.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,363 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0