Are free votes the best way to change British society?

In the space of a few days, two of the biggest social changes in a generation have been voted through by MPs in free votes, calling into question the legitimacy of the practice when it comes to so-called "matters of conscience".

On Tuesday, the House of Commons voted to decriminalise abortion in England and Wales, and today, MPs voted to legalise assisted dying. In both cases, MPs were told they can vote however they wanted, free from the usual pressure to follow the party line through the whips.

While "idealists might say these votes are the perfect example of what MPs used to be: free-thinking independent decision makers", said The Times, "the truth is a little murkier".

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

What did the commentators say?

Votes of conscience are a "quasi-religious hangover" and "one of the most unthinkingly overrated elements of the British constitution", said Lewis Goodall on his Substack. "If a change is worth doing, it’s worth the government driving the change itself and arguing for it accordingly." It is not clear either why topics such as abortion and assisted dying are "any more or less inherently a matter of morality than any other sphere of political decision making".

Free votes on issues of conscience, while uncommon, "have defined our society", said Simon Griffiths on The Constitution Society. The late 1960s is "often seen as a golden age of social reform, and free votes were instrumental to this". Male homosexuality was legalised, capital punishment abolished, and laws relating to censorship, divorce and abortion all liberalised.

But on nearly all the main "conscience votes", party affiliation "remains the strongest indicator of how a representative will vote". In November, during the first vote on assisted dying, Labour MPs largely voted in favour while the Conservatives voted overwhelmingly against reform.

And in reality, both the changes voted on this week "would not have been possible without tacit support from the top of government", said The Times. "Parliament is geared to work around whatever the government wants, and mostly whenever the government wants it."

What next?

Keir Starmer has "done his best to stay out of these debates to avoid influencing his colleagues, and yet his support for both policies is still pretty well known", said the BBC. A free vote puts "some distance between the government and the legislation, meaning any political heat focuses on those debating the changes", said The Times.

In that way it "could be claimed the use of free votes demonstrates not a respect for issues of conscience, but rather a strategic decision by governments to free themselves of accountability", said Griffiths.

But Starmer will know that "however distant he seeks to be from the action in parliament", said The Times, these moments in social history "will form a central part of his legacy".