No 10 says abortion law change must be ‘safe and workable'
The issue was treated as a matter of conscience, with MPs given a free vote and the Government remaining neutral.
But Downing Street said that now MPs had made that decision, the Government had a responsibility to ensure that if it makes it to the statute book it is in an effective form.
The Bill still has further stages to go through in Parliament and changes could be made to the measures in the House of Lords.
A No 10 spokesman said: 'We'll look at this in detail, considering whether any changes are necessary to make it workable and safe.
'But, of course, this would not change the intent of the amendment passed.'
The spokesman added: 'As with all laws, the Government has a responsibility to ensure it is safe and workable.'
Gower MP Ms Antoniazzi said the change will remove the threat of 'investigation, arrest, prosecution or imprisonment' of any woman who acts in relation to her own pregnancy.
She pushed for the change in the law after cases of women being investigated by police over suspected illegal abortions.
Medics or others who facilitate an abortion after the 24-week time limit could still face prosecution if the change becomes law.
Though the Government took a neutral stance on the vote, several Cabinet ministers were among the MPs who backed the amendment.
They included Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Defence Secretary John Healey, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, Environment Secretary Steve Reed, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn, Scotland Secretary Ian Murray, Wales Secretary Jo Stevens and Commons Leader Lucy Powell.
Kemi Badenoch and many members of the Conservative frontbench voted against it, but shadow education secretary Laura Trott voted in favour.
Abortion in England and Wales currently remains a criminal offence unless with an authorised provider up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy, with very limited circumstances allowing one after this time, such as when the mother's life is at risk or the child would be born with a severe disability.
It is also legal to take prescribed medication at home if a woman is less than 10 weeks pregnant.
Efforts to change the law to protect women from prosecution follow repeated calls to repeal sections of the 19th century law the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, after abortion was decriminalised in Northern Ireland in 2019.
Kate Ellis, joint head of litigation at the Centre for Women's Justice, said: 'It is high time that these outdated, Victorian laws were removed from the statute books.
'This proposed change in the law will only impact a relatively small number of women each year who find themselves – in already desperate circumstances – threatened with imprisonment for a criminal offence they probably didn't know existed.'
The changes do not cover Scotland, where a group is currently undertaking work to review the law as it stands there.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
10 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Labour's Civil Service proposals are unfair and misguided
That the Civil Service is in dire need of a shake-up is accepted, at this point, across much of Westminster. The frustrations are justified. The public sector is, as George Staunton found Imperial China, felt to be staffed by those who feel that 'everything is excellent' and 'proposals for improvement would be superfluous'. This agreement stretches only as far as the sense that something must change, however. The proposals on the table for reform are deeply contested, and potentially harmful. Labour's proposal to limit Civil Service internships to those from ' lower socio-economic backgrounds ' is a retrograde step which would impoverish the pool of talent available to ministers by restricting entry based on family circumstance, and would represent another blow to the idea that parents should work for their children's futures. The Government would be better advised to hark back to the Northcote-Trevelyan report, which attempted to address a Civil Service which attracted the 'unambitious', 'indolent' and 'incapable' who did not fancy 'the competition of their contemporaries', but were attracted by 'the comparative lightness of the work'. The solutions put forward included, among other things, entrance examinations open to all, merit-based promotion, and ensuring that civil servants were fully employed to the full extent of their abilities. Such an embrace of meritocracy would surely be morally and practically preferable to further clumsy attempts at social engineering.
The Independent
39 minutes ago
- The Independent
Kemi Badenoch says she no longer considers herself Nigerian
Kemi Badenoch has said she no longer identifies as Nigerian and has not renewed her Nigerian passport since the early 2000s. Speaking to Gyles Brandreth's Rosebud podcast, the Conservative leader, who was born in London and raised in Lagos and the United States, said: 'I'm Nigerian through ancestry, by birth, despite not being born there because of my parents, but by identity I'm not really." Ms Badenoch explained she felt "home is where my now family is'. The Tory politician was born in Wimbledon in 1980 before her parents took her home to Nigeria. She was one of the last people to receive birthright citizenship because she was born in the UK before these rules were abolished by Margaret Thatcher the following year.
North Wales Chronicle
3 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Fact check: Recognising a Palestinian state, misleading tsunami video and deportations vs returns
Is the Government on track with its pledge to recognise a Palestinian state? On July 29, the Prime Minister announced that the UK would recognise Palestine as a state in September, ahead of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly, unless Israel meets certain conditions. Labour's manifesto committed to formally recognising a Palestinian state 'as a contribution to a renewed peace process which results in a two-state solution'. A 'two-state solution' refers to a proposed framework to resolve the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which a sovereign Palestinian state is established alongside Israel. Previous efforts at a peace process did not result in a sovereign Palestinian state. UK governments have long been in favour of a two-state solution, as well as recognising a Palestinian state as part of a process towards that goal. All members of the G7 group of countries have pledged support for a two-state solution, as has the EU and China. Palestine is currently designated by the UN as a 'permanent observer state', a form of non-member state, meaning it cannot vote on decisions made by the UN's main organs and bodies, such as the General Assembly. However, the majority of UN member states have formally recognised Palestine. According to media reports, as of July 2025, some 147 UN member states formally recognised Palestinian statehood, not including France, which in the same month committed to recognising Palestine at the General Assembly in September. The UK is not included in this figure, although it does have a Consulate General in Jerusalem to assist British nationals in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It has been reported that a number of UK peers have questioned the legal basis for any recognition of a Palestinian state. Full Fact has contacted the Government for comment on this. How fact checkers helped set the record straight on PM's viral video When 31-year-old Abby Raworth first realised her photo and name were being shared online – falsely linked to a viral video involving the Prime Minister – she assumed it was a mix-up. Posts on social media claimed that the woman in the video was not mum-of-three Nicola but was really a 'paid actress' or 'actress and agent' named Abby Raworth. Full Fact's investigation brought to light how much was being written about her online 'without any regard for if it was correct or not.' Abby has spoken to Full Fact about her experience, telling us: 'What shocks me is how little people bothered to do regarding checks before they used someone's name and accused them of something. There is a lack of accountability for what comes out of peoples' mouths and if it had happened to any of those people they would have a different opinion on it.' We're grateful to Abby for sharing her story to help show exactly why Full Fact exists to counter the harm caused by misinformation. Old tsunami video circulates amid Pacific evacuations A video circulating online amid major evacuations across the Pacific is claimed to show a tsunami which has taken 'thousands of lives'. But this is misleading. The footage shows three people, including the person filming, narrowly escape huge waves that crash into some small boats on a shore. It was shared online following news of an 8.8 magnitude earthquake off the coast of Russia, which triggered the evacuation of almost two million people across Japan. Warnings were also put in place in other locations including Hawaii, Ecuador, Indonesia, Peru and China. A caption shared with the video said: 'Massive Earthquake triggers Tsunami taking thousands of lives in seconds with little to no warning.' But this footage is not current, or related to the earthquake in Russia or the subsequent tsunami warnings. It actually showed a tsunami which occurred on the west coast of Greenland in 2017, triggered by a landslide. That tsunami did not kill 'thousands', as stated in the social media posts. Four people were killed, and nine others were injured. The same footage has been wrongly shared in the wake of other earthquakes before. Has Labour carried out 'record deportations'? Labour MP Mike Tapp recently claimed that the Government has carried out 'record deportations'. We've frequently seen MPs and ministers using the word 'deportations' when referring to all immigration returns. Not all immigration returns are 'deportations'. We don't actually know how many meet the official definition of a deportation, which the Home Office defines as 'a specific subset of returns which are enforced either following a criminal conviction or when it is judged that a person's removal from the UK is conducive to the public good'. We do know, however, that enforced returns – the category of returns which includes deportations – account for a minority (26%) of all returns carried out under Labour during its first year in office. According to ad-hoc figures published by the Home Office, during Labour's first year in office a total of 35,052 returns were recorded. We don't have the data to compare this exact period to the same period in previous years, but official immigration statistics show that this figure is not a record for the number of immigration returns over a 12-month period, going back to 2004 when this data series began. These figures show that immigration returns over a 12-month period were consistently above 40,000 between 2010 and 2016, for example. It does appear, however, that the 35,052 returns in the first year of this Labour government represents the highest 12-month figure since 2017. While we don't know how many of these returns were official 'deportations', the figures show that the 9,115 enforced returns carried out between 5 July 2024 and 4 July 2025 also do not represent a record. While this figure is the highest number of enforced returns carried out over a 12-month period since 2018, prior to 2018 enforced returns were consistently above 10,000 over a 12-month period. MPs should use statistics transparently and with all relevant context and caveats, and quickly rectify oversights when they occur.
