
Why the ‘individual conscience vote' of MPs had its own assisted death last week
Two votes in the Commons split by four days laid the ground for a seismic shift in British social policy making last week one of the most significant in the modern history of Parliament.
But while the votes on abortion (Tuesday) and assisted dying (Friday) were officially matters of individual conscience the evidence from both suggests that the UK is now closer than ever to a US-style party politicisation of moral issues.
If you vote Labour or Lib Dem you are much more likely to get a pro-choice MP, if you vote Conservative or Reform you are more likely to get a pro-life MP. This is not an accident, it is increasingly by design.
How parties voted on life and death
On Tuesday the decriminalisation of abortion up to birth amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill laid down by Labour Gower MP Tonia Antoniazzi won by 379 to 137.
Of this 291 Labour MPs voted in favour and just 25 against while 63 Lib Dems were in favour and just two against.
On the other side 92 Tory MPs voted against and just four in favour. Another four abstained by voting in both lobbies. No Reform MPs supported and four voted against.
The split is not as stark on Friday's assisted dying vote but nevertheless reveals a trend.
Kim Leadbeater 's bill had the support of 224 fellow Labour MPs with 160 against and 56 Lib Dems with 15 against.
On the other side the Tories split 92 against to 20 in favour while Reform were three against and two in favour.
Kemi Badenoch put a two line whip on the abortion vote rather than allowing a completely free vote. This indicated a party position without the threat of disciplinary action which would come with a three line whip. But, remarkably, after the abortion vote senior Tories were complaining that Ms Badenoch had not withdrawn the whip of the four MPs who voted for decriminalisation.
It was different in 1967
The last time the UK saw Parliament vote on such seismic social change was back in 1967 with Liberal MP David Steel 's abortion legislation and Labour MP Leo Abse's Sexual Offences Act which decriminalised homosexuality.
In both those cases parties split down the middle on conscience votes which saw the odd alliance of rightwing Tory MP Enoch Powell and leftwing Labour MP Tony Benn coming together to support legalising homosexuality.
The Ed Miliband effect
The erosion of the conscience vote in the UK has actually come more from a hardening of positions from progressive leftwing parties in Britain and exacerbated by the so-called culture wars.
In 2012 Ed Miliband imposed a three-line whip on gay marriage on Labour MPs. LGBTQ+ matters ended there as something of individual conscience for the first time.
Then in 2019 former MP Roger Godsiff was dropped as a Labour candidate for supporting parents in his Birmingham constituency who were protesting over primary school children being taught about same-sex relationships.
This year we see Reform UK banning LGBTQ+ flags from county halls where they have taken control of the council and attempting to purge councils of diversity, equity and inclusion officers and policies.
While abortion officially remained a matter of conscience a comment by the now home secretary Yvette Cooper in 2017 about Jacob Rees-Mogg being unfit to be a party leader because of his views on abortion was enlightening.
What has happened over a number of years is that the majority of socially conservative, mostly Catholic tradition in Labour has been removed through selection processes.
David Campanale versus the Lib Dems
An ongoing legal case involving the Liberal Democrats and one of its former candidates has highlighted an apparent major shift in British politics to the party politicisation of conscience issues.
Former BBC journalist David Campanale was kicked out as the candidate for Sutton ahead of the last election because, he claims, of his Christian beliefs.
According to documents presented in the case, Luke Taylor, who replaced him as the candidate, is alleged to have claimed that 'the party of past prominent Liberal Democrats with Christian beliefs, such as Shirley Williams and Charles Kennedy, was 'over', and that he and others were building a 'secular party' which would have no place for Christians expecting to 'hold to their religious or conscientious opinions'.
Mr Taylor was the teller for the votes in favour of the abortion amendment on Tuesday, who also described the assisted dying vote, which he supported, as a good way to 'neatly bookend the week.'
If Mr Campanale wins his case it will for the first time provide evidence that selection is taking place on conscience issues as well as other matters.
The Lib Dems have denied the claims and pointed out that their leader Sr Ed Davey goes to church. But the Christian Lib Dems including former deputy leader Simon Hughes have voiced concerns and the party has been condemned by two bishops. and a former Archbishop of Canterbury. Added to that Tim Farron, who voted against abortion and assisted dying last week, was ousted as leader over his Christian beliefs in 2017.
During the assisted dying vote a number of supporters of the bill suggested that religious belief had no place in deciding such issues. A real departure from conscience.
But a brand of conservatism is emerging in the UK which openly embraces traditional Christian values.
Reflecting on the assisted dying vote, Tory MP Danny Kruger, a leading opponent of the bill, said: 'If we are to withstand our enemies, bring our society together, and tame the technium (somehow ensure that human values govern the new age of machines), we are going to need values that are up to the job.
'I don't think humanist atheism or progressive liberalism or whatever the new religion should be called, is up to it. Christianity is. Only Christianity is.'
A warning from America
In America, the conscience vote rapidly became more party-politicised as a result of the Roe vs Wade abortion ruling in in 1973. Social conservatives gradually began to take over the Republicans on the right and social progressives the Democrats.
It has played out ferociously in the selection of Supreme Court justices, who recently in effect overturned Roe v Wade with a conservative majority.
The most interesting US development is the way that a man like Donald Trump, previously ambiguous over abortion, has adopted a strong anti-abortion line to please his base.
This played out in the 2022 midterms to the detriment of the Republicans with the Democrats using the threat to abortion rights to great effect. But it did little to help Kamala Harris in 2024.
What that shows though is that parties with very strong views one way or the other can be elected largely on economic grounds but bring with them a great deal of baggage on conscience issues. After this week some would argue the same thing has happened in the opposite direction in the UK.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
8 minutes ago
- The Independent
Keir Starmer must end the injustice of indefinite sentences today
It is scarcely believable that there are still 2,614 people in prison in Britain serving indefinite sentences under legislation that was repealed 13 years ago – at a time when other prisoners are being released early because the jails are full. The government is now being given the chance to end this monstrous injustice – and to ease prison overcrowding – by adopting a plan drawn up by Lord Thomas, the former lord chief justice. Indeterminate sentences were brought in under the last Labour government as an exceptional measure for prisoners considered too dangerous to release without special safeguards. But Labour peer David Blunkett, who introduced the legislation, said that many more such sentences were handed out than he had intended, and the policy was the ' biggest regret ' of his career. The sentence was abolished by the coalition government, but existing prisoners continued to be subject to the stringent rules, not knowing whether they would ever be released and, if they were, being recalled to prison for minor offences. Thus, there have been a succession of terrible cases reported by The Independent, including those of Leroy Douglas, who has served almost 20 years for stealing a mobile phone, and Abdullahi Suleman, who is still inside 19 years after he was jailed for stealing a laptop. Plainly, there is more to their stories than this, and the Parole Board does need to be sure that those who are released are unlikely to be a danger to the public. But it cannot be right that, had they committed their crime a day after indeterminate sentences were abolished, they would have long been freed. What makes it worse is that other prisoners, some of whom pose a greater risk to the public than they do, are being let out early to free up prison places. As we report today, Lord Thomas has led a panel of experts in drawing up proposals to give every prisoner serving an imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentence a release date within two years, and to recall them only as a last resort. James Timpson, the prisons minister and Labour peer, should accept this workable and detailed plan and seek to close this shameful chapter in the history of British criminal justice. Presumably, the only reason that he has not acted to end this scandal already is that Shabana Mahmood, the justice secretary, is reluctant. Having been forced to order the early release of prisoners to avoid the police having to let criminals go because there is nowhere to put them, she does not want to hand further ammunition to ignorant critics who accuse her of being soft on crime. She has shown courage in taking the difficult measures forced on her by the irresponsibility of Conservative ministers, who allowed prisons to reach crisis point. She should show some more bravery in doing the right thing, which can even be sold, in part, as another emergency measure to free up prison places. If she will not do it, Sir Keir Starmer should instruct her to. He is the law and order prime minister, the former director of public prosecutions, who understands the criminal justice system better than any minister. He cannot allow this injustice to continue and must act on Lord Thomas's recommendations. We understand that the prime minister has taken to asking officials with increasing frequency, as he gets to grips with the frustrations of trying to deliver change: 'Why not today?' Why, we should ask him, not put an end to this scandal today?


Sky News
29 minutes ago
- Sky News
Latest polling says if an election was held tomorrow Reform UK would win a majority
Since the local elections Reform UK has had no shortage of good polls. But a new one suggests Nigel Farage's party has a chance not only of winning the next election, but of claiming a decent Commons majority, too. In February, Reform topped a Sky News/YouGov poll for the first time, with Nigel Farage's party edging in front on 25%, Labour pushed into second on 24%, with the Tories on 21%. But a fresh one from Ipsos puts Reform on 34%, nine points ahead of Labour on 25%, with the Conservatives a distant third on 15%. 16:03 While the other parties are flatlining, Reform appears to be pushing boundaries. Were these figures to be replicated across the country at a general election, with every constituency behaving the same way, then Reform could win as many as 340 seats, giving it a majority of 30, Sky News analysis suggests. Labour could be reduced to 176 seats, down 236 on last year's election, while the Tories would hit a record low of 12 seats. But polling should always be taken with a pinch of salt and with the firm acknowledgement that there is not an election coming any time soon. Conservative backbenchers might also tell you publicly that opinion polls are notoriously difficult to translate into seat numbers because voting percentages in individual constituencies can vary hugely from the overall average. But the truth is that the symbolism of Reform UK topping another poll is likely to be noticed by MPs from all parties, especially backbench Conservatives who have actively been hoping their leader, Kemi Badenoch, can help them climb the polls and bring the party back into public favour. Politics is a brutal game and when it comes to toppling underwhelming party leaders, the Tories are more ruthless than most. One wonders how many of these polls Mrs Badenoch's party will allow her to endure. 3:25 This poll is also a warning to Labour. As the party approaches a year since its major victory, it will not have much to celebrate if these numbers are anything to go by. According to this survey, only 19% are satisfied with the job Sir Keir Starmer is doing as prime minister, with 73% dissatisfied. And the figure of 25% of voters intending to vote Labour is a level not seen since October 2019. While abstract to much of the public, polling can often shape not only the chatter inside Westminster but how and when plots by MPs begin. For Reform UK, this is a much-needed morale boost after a surprise resignation by their former Chairman Zia Yusuf, and then an almost immediate U-turn back into the party. And Kemi Badenoch - who said during her leadership campaign that the Conservatives needed to go back to first principles and that this would take time - will be wondering, seven-and-a-half months after winning the leadership, how much time she really has left.


Telegraph
43 minutes ago
- Telegraph
EU rules that push up car insurance to be scrapped in Brexit bonus
EU rules that force law-abiding British motorists to stump up for compensation claims made by uninsured drivers will be scrapped by ministers. Heidi Alexander, the Transport Secretary, will use Brexit powers to rip up the Brussels regulations and return to a 'common-sense' approach. The UK was forced to apply the law by Eurocrats, despite ministers branding it 'morally questionable' and warning it rewarded criminal behaviour. Car insurance firms pay into a pot, known as the fund of last resort, which pays out to drivers who have been hit by an uninsured or unidentified driver. The cash pot means that, where costs cannot be reclaimed from the driver at fault, victims of crashes are still compensated for damage to their vehicle. Originally, the fund was not open to claims from uninsured drivers, but in 2017, ministers were warned that their exclusion was illegal under EU rules. As a result, the Government said it 'had no choice' but to change the law or run the risk of facing limitless daily fines from the EU Commission. Since then, uninsured drivers who are either hit by another uninsured motorist or involved in a hit-and-run have been eligible for compensation. The money for the fund of last resort is raised by a levy on insurance firms, which pass the cost onto their customers in higher premiums. A Government source told The Telegraph: 'We are reintroducing the exclusion of property damage compensation for uninsured drivers. 'Uninsured drivers should not be able to benefit in the same way as those driving lawfully. 'The Transport Secretary will restore this common-sense agreement because this Labour government is tackling criminal behaviour and backing all road users to the hilt.' Plans to repeal the EU law were drawn up by the last Tory government, which launched a consultation just before Rishi Sunak called the general election. At the time, Guy Opperman, the then roads minister, said the EU rule was 'morally questionable at best, and a cost carried by all legal motorists'. 'When we were members of the European Union, we were obliged to allow this. Now we have left, we can determine our own course of action,' he said. It has now been picked up by Labour, which will introduce the change. The feedback showed there was 'overwhelming support' for changing the rules to demonstrate that 'uninsured driving is unacceptable'. 'The vast majority of law-abiding motorists pay for claims from uninsured drivers for property damage through their motor insurance premiums,' the Government said. 'Removing this right for uninsured drivers demonstrates that the government is focused on tackling criminal behaviour and sensitive to regulations that impact negatively on the general public. 'It will send a message that uninsured drivers should not benefit from being compensated by the fund of last resort for property damage.' The Motor Insurers' Bureau, which oversees the fund of last resort, said it had been 'working closely' with ministers to reintroduce the exclusion. 'This will ensure uninsured drivers aren't able to claim compensation for property damage following collisions involving other uninsured or hit-and-run drivers,' it said. 'Uninsured drivers are not just breaking the law, but they make roads more dangerous and increase the cost of motor insurance for the honest majority.' The change can be introduced quickly because it does not require new legislation. Instead, the requirement to compensate uninsured drivers can be removed by amending agreements between Ms Alexander and the MIB.