Secure Tenancies (Victims of Domestic Abuse) Bill — Clause 1 — Victims of Domestic Abuse — Benefit Reduction in Respect of Excess Bedrooms — 8 May 2018 at 18:15

The majority of MPs voted not to give local councils the freedom to decide if benefits to cover housing costs should be reduced in respect of excess bedrooms in cases of new local council secure tenancies offered to victims of domestic abuse.

MPs were considering the Secure Tenancies (Victims of Domestic Abuse) Bill[1].

The amendment rejected in this vote was:

Had it not been rejected this amendment would have resulted in the additional subsection being added to Clause 1 of the Bill[2]. The Bill sought to amend Section 81B of the Housing Act 1985, Section 81B was added via Schedule 7, Paragraph 4 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016. Section 81A generally abolished new permanent secure tenancies, Section 81B set out circumstances in which old-style secure tenancies may be granted.

Before the amendment the Bill sought to ensure[3]:

  • lifetime tenants of social homes who are victims of domestic abuse are granted a further lifetime tenancy where a) they either need to leave or have left their home to escape domestic abuse and are being re-housed by a local authority, or (b) where they are a joint tenant and wish to remain a tenant of their social home after the perpetrator has left or been removed and the local authority decides to grant them a further sole tenancy in their current home.

Regulation B13, referred to in the rejected amendment, provides for benefits relating to housing to be reduced in respect of bedrooms deemed in excess of the tenant's requirements.

During the debate prior to the vote the intent of the amendment was explained[4]:

  • Amendment 2 would ensure that victims of domestic abuse do not have to pay extra charges as a result of the bedroom tax if they are provided with a secure tenancy that incorporates a spare room.


Debate in Parliament |

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
Con292 (+2 tell) 0093.0%
DUP9 0090.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent1 50100.0%
Lab0 231 (+2 tell)090.3%
LDem0 9075.0%
Total:302 246091.5%

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