English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill: Motion relating to Lords Amendments 85, 86, 97 to 116, 120, 121 and 123 etc
271Ayes
171Noes
Carried · majority 100 · Government won206 did not vote
648 Members · Aye 271 · No 171 · DNV 206 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
MPs voted on 27 April 2026 to back the government's position on a large group of Lords amendments to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, covering Lords Amendments 85, 86, 97 to 116, 120, 121 and 123. The motion passed by 271 votes to 171. Rather than accepting the Lords' amendments as they stood, the Commons proposed its own amendments to the Bill in lieu of those changes. The English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill restructures devolution in England by establishing a new framework of strategic authorities at three levels, standardising devolved powers and ending the previous approach of bespoke deals. This vote was part of the final "ping-pong" stage, in which the two chambers exchange amendments until they agree. The outcome determines which version of the devolution and local government framework becomes law, affecting strategic authorities, mayors, local councils and communities across England. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously in favour, providing the winning margin. Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and several smaller parties and independents voted against. The debate touched on concerns including brownfield housing priorities, the mandatory shift to leader-and-cabinet governance in local councils, and the recognition of rural and coastal communities within the Bill's framework. This was one of several divisions held on the same day as part of the same ping-pong process, with parallel votes on related groups of amendments producing similar results.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government's position: reject the Lords' specific amendments on brownfield prioritisation and council governance, accepting the government's own alternative wording in their place, while agreeing to add rural and coastal community recognition to the Bill.
Voting No meant
Back the Lords' amendments as passed, including stronger brownfield site protections and greater local flexibility over council governance models, opposing what the Conservatives characterised as centralising control from Whitehall over town halls.
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 party-line column is inferred from how cohesively each party voted, not a published whip: a clear one-way majority of a party’s voters reads as a line, a close division reads as “Split”.
Party
Party line
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Voted Aye
246
0
115
Conservative and Unionist Party
Voted No
0
98
18
Liberal Democrats
Voted No
0
57
14
Labour and Co-operative Party
Voted Aye
25
0
17
Independent
—
1
4
8
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
—
0
0
8
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Voted No
0
4
1
Green Party of England and Wales
Voted No
0
5
0
Plaid Cymru
—
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Your Party
—
0
1
1
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
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · party line inferred from voting cohesion, not a published whip; “Split” = a close within-party division
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 aye · 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