Childcare Payments Bill — New Clause 1 — Require Report on Proposed Additional Childcare Support and Early Education — Three and Four Year Olds — 17 Nov 2014 at 18:30

The majority of MPs voted not to require a report on the impact of proposed additional state help with childcare costs, and additional free early education and childcare, on those responsible for children aged three or four.

MPs were considering the Childcare Payments Bill[1]. The proposed new clause, rejected in this vote was titled: Proposals relating to three and four year olds and stated:

  • (1) The Chancellor of the Exchequer shall within three months of this Act coming into force lay a report before the House of Commons setting out—
  • (a) an assessment of the benefits of top-up payments to people responsible for a child or children aged three to four years since the Act came into force; and
  • (b) an assessment of those benefits in addition to the likely benefits of funding 25 hours per week free childcare for working persons responsible for a child or children aged three and four.

The top-up payments referred to in the rejected new clause are the state payments of 25% of childcare costs, capped at £2,000 per child each year, for those responsible for children and in work as provided for in the Childcare Payments Bill[1]. The explanatory notes to the Bill[2] state an intent to make the payments in relation children under 12,(under 17 for disabled children) as well as an intent to make the payments available to those earning up to £150,000 per year. These top-up payments were announced in the 2013 Budget when they were described as "tax-free childcare"[2]. The scheme has been publicised and has a start date of Autumn 2015[3].

At the time of the vote all 3 and 4-year-olds in England were entitled to 570 hours of free early education or childcare a year (typically taken as 15 hours each week for 38 weeks of the year).[4] The debate prior to this vote, and the Labour website[5], make clear that Labour are proposing increasing the amount of publicly funded early education or childcare to 25 hours per week for working people. The rejected new clause would have required an assessment to be made of the impact of both the Government's scheme and the Labour policy.

Debate in Parliament | Source |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con235 (+1 tell) 0077.9%
Independent0 1050.0%
Lab0 196 (+2 tell)076.7%
LDem38 (+1 tell) 0069.6%
PC0 2066.7%
SDLP0 2066.7%
SNP0 5083.3%
Total:273 206076.5%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive