Armed Forces Bill — Clause 8 — Armed Forces Covenant — 6 Dec 2021 at 20:50

The majority of MPs voted not to require the Government to have due regard to the special circumstances of current and former members of the armed services when exercising certain functions in relation to England.

MPs were considering the Bill Armed Forces Bill.[1][2][3]

The motion rejected in this vote was:

  • That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 2.

Lords amendment 2[4] stated:

  • Page 9, line 18, at end insert—
  • “(za) the Secretary of State;”

Had it not been rejected this would have impacted Clause 8 of the Bill[2] titled: Armed forces covenant which set out a requirement for specified persons and public bodies, when carrying out certain specified functions to "have due regard to":

  • (a) the unique obligations of, and sacrifices made by, the armed forces,
  • (b) the principle that it is desirable to remove disadvantages arising for service people from membership, or former membership, of the armed forces, and
  • (c) the principle that special provision for service people may be justified by the effects on such people of membership, or former membership, of the armed forces.

The Lords amendment would have added the Secretary of State to the list required to have due regard to the matters set out.

Schedule 1 of the Interpretation Act 1978 provides that Secretary of State means "one of Her Majesty’s Principal Secretaries of State".[7]

The Armed Forces Covenant[6] states:

  • ...the whole nation has a moral obligation to the members of the Naval Service, the Army and the Royal Air Force, together with their families. They deserve our respect and support, and fair treatment
  • Those who serve in the Armed Forces, whether regular or Reserve, those who have served in the past, and their families, should face no disadvantage compared to other citizens in the provision of public and commercial services. Special consideration is appropriate in some cases, especially for those who have given most such as the injured and the bereaved.


Debate in Parliament |

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 (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Con302 (+2 tell) 0084.0%
DUP0 5062.5%
Independent1 3080.0%
Lab0 166 (+2 tell)084.4%
LDem0 5041.7%
PC0 30100.0%
SNP0 30066.7%
Total:303 212081.9%

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.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive