Health and Care Bill — Clause 35 — Report on Assessing and Meeting Workforce Needs — 25 Apr 2022 at 19:45
The majority of MPs voted not to make reporting on the workforce needs of the health service in England three-yearly rather than five-yearly, and not to cover the social care and public health workforce in the reports.
MPs were considering the Health and Care Bill.[1][2][3]
The motion supported by a majority of MPs in this vote was:
- That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 29B in lieu.
Lords amendment 29B began[4]:
- Page 42, leave out lines 14 to 19 and insert—
- “(1) The Secretary of State must, at least once every three years, lay a report before Parliament describing the system in place for assessing and meeting the workforce needs of the health, social care and public health services in England.
- ...
The clause went on to detail the required content of the report and who should be consulted.
The section of the Bill the amendment would have removed was in Clause 35[2] and stated:
- (1) The Secretary of State must, at least once every five years, publish a report describing the system in place for assessing and meeting the workforce needs of the health service in England.
- (2) NHS England and Health Education England must assist in the preparation of a report under this section, if requested to do so by the Secretary of State.”
--
- [1] Parliament's webpage on the Health and Care Bill, Parliament.uk
- [2] Health and Care Bill as brought from the Commons, 24 November 2021, Parliament.uk
- [3] Explanatory notes to the Health and Care Bill as brought from the Commons, 24 November 2021, Parliament.uk
- [4] Lords amendments to the Health and Care Bill, 25 April 2022, Parliament.uk
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.
| Party | Majority (Aye) | Minority (No) | Both | Turnout |
| Alliance | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Con | 276 (+2 tell) | 11 | 0 | 79.8% |
| DUP | 0 | 2 | 0 | 25.0% |
| Green | 0 | 1 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Independent | 0 | 1 | 0 | 20.0% |
| Lab | 0 | 150 (+2 tell) | 0 | 76.0% |
| LDem | 0 | 12 | 0 | 92.3% |
| PC | 0 | 3 | 0 | 100.0% |
| SDLP | 0 | 1 | 0 | 50.0% |
| Total: | 276 | 182 | 0 | 77.6% |
Rebel Voters - sorted by name
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
| Name | Constituency | Party | Vote |
| Peter Aldous | Waveney | Con | no |
| Harriett Baldwin | West Worcestershire | Con (front bench) | no |
| Steve Brine | Winchester | Con (front bench) | no |
| Philip Davies | Shipley | Con (front bench) | no |
| Philip Hollobone | Kettering | Con (front bench) | no |
| Jeremy Hunt | South West Surrey | Con (front bench) | no |
| Jonathan Lord | Woking | Con | no |
| Esther McVey | Tatton | Con (front bench) | no |
| Andrew Mitchell | Sutton Coldfield | Con | no |
| Bob Neill | Bromley and Chislehurst | Con (front bench) | no |
| Daniel Poulter | Central Suffolk and North Ipswich | Con (front bench) | no |