Children's School and Wellbeing Bill: Motion relating to Lords Amendments 38V to 38X
272
Ayes
—
64
Noes
Passed · Government won
311 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted 272 to 64 on 27 April 2026 to insist on the Commons' disagreement with Lords Amendments 38V to 38X to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, while proposing a set of replacement amendments in lieu. The motion was moved by Minister Olivia Bailey and passed comfortably, with the government securing its preferred text on provisions relating to restricting children's access to social media online services. The vote advances a government commitment to impose age or functionality restrictions on social media use by under-16s. The replacement amendments require the government to take action rather than merely permitting it to do so, with regulations to be laid before Parliament within 12 months of the Bill passing. The provisions affect internet service providers, children, parents, and technology companies, and sit alongside separate consultation work on the precise mechanism for any restrictions, including possible curfews. Labour MPs voted unanimously for the government motion, with the Green Party and Scottish National Party joining them in support. The Liberal Democrats, with 56 votes against, formed the bulk of the opposition, joined by the Democratic Unionist Party, Ulster Unionist Party, Traditional Unionist Voice, and several independents. The Conservative Party did not vote against; shadow Secretary of State Laura Trott welcomed the government's movement as a significant concession won through the Bill's passage, describing it as a commitment to ban under-16s from social media. The result continues a pattern of government victories in the Bill's ping-pong (the back-and-forth between Commons and Lords), with similar motions passing on 15 April 2026.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government's position on Lords Amendments 38V to 38X, whether accepting or rejecting specific Lords changes to the Bill
Voting No meant
Oppose the government's position on Lords Amendments 38V to 38X, backing an alternative approach to the provisions in question
336 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 311 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
238
0
123
Conservative and Unionist Party
0
0
116
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
56
16
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
26
0
16
Independent
1
5
7
Scottish National PartyWhipped Aye
4
0
5
Reform UK
0
0
8
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
3
2
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4
0
1
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
—
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
—
Your Party
0
0
1
Defending the government's amended timeline as swift and firm, emphasizing mandatory action within 21 months and a real intention to move faster by end of year, whilst consulting on mechanism rather than whether to act.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,921 words) →
Welcoming the government's movement on age restrictions as a major victory after sustained opposition pressure, but cautioning that the 21-month timeline is acceptable only if the government acts faster in practice.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (752 words) →
Questioning whether 21 months can credibly be called swift action when parents expect faster intervention.Unknown · Voted no · Read full speech (72 words) →
Disappointed by the 21-month timeline, favouring Baroness Kidron's alternative (eight months to lay, 12 months total) and pressing for urgent cross-party action to protect children from online harms.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (825 words) →
Praising the government for consulting carefully before acting, contrasting this rigour with Opposition opportunism; noting Australian Labour's success with age restrictions.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (552 words) →
Welcoming the government's commitment but pressing for the shortest possible timeframe, warning that delay past 2026 will leave children vulnerable and benefit only tech companies.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (531 words) →
Supporting the decision to raise the social media age limit to 16 and commending cross-party collaboration, but signalling that parents will hold the government accountable for delivery.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (485 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0