MPs have voted to renew the Coronavirus Act in parliament.

The motion to extend the act, which governs the laws around lockdowns, restrictions and enforcement, was voted for by 330MPs, with 24 against. 

More than 300 MPs did not take part in the vote. 

It comes after an afternoon of debate, with several MPs angered by the 90 minute time limit which had been put on the discussions.

Tory MP Sir Charles Walker said it was an “utter, utter disgrace”.

The former 1922 Committee chairman said: “Ninety minutes to debate the renewal of an Act that fundamentally has changed the nature of the relationship between the state and citizens is not good enough.

“I need at some stage more than three minutes to discuss the fundamental hardships that are going on in my constituency – the jobs that are being lost, the opportunities that are being lost, young people struggling to find work, to get back to university, to come back from university.

“Ninety minutes is an utter, utter disgrace. It is actually disrespectful to this House and it is disrespectful to colleagues. And I’m sorry, Secretary of State if I sound… actually, I’m not sorry that I’m angry because a lot of people in this place are angry."

Another MP, Sir Bernard Jenkin, Tory chairman of the Commons Liaison Committee, warned that Boris Johnson would need to ensure his own MPs were on side with his policies if he wanted to run the country effectively. As many as 80 conservative MPs were preparing to rebel on the vote as tension mounted over the lack of discussion on new regulations before they were implemented by ministers.

He said:" There should be some lessons learned from this that there is a fundamental principle in our politics – that the Government cannot govern without the consent of the House of Commons.

“I’d go further than that, a slightly more party political point, which is the Prime Minister cannot lead his parliamentary party unless he has their consent and therefore will find the act of governing very much more difficult and complicated if that consent of the party in office – amongst the Members of Parliament – is not gathered together and led.

“I think the Prime Minister has gone to some lengths to bring back some consultation with the parliamentary party in recent weeks, but let there be some lessons learned from the previous attitude which seemed to be coming from the team around the Prime Minister.”

Sir Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, said the act was disadvantaging disabled people.

He explained: "This legislation undermines the rights to care of disabled people. The rights to care of some of society’s most vulnerable people. The rights to care for children with special needs and disabilities, that is wrong and it breaks international law.”

Meanwhile Ian Blackford, SNP Westminster leader, said it was vital that MPs were given the chance to scrutinise government plans, adding: "The emergency and the extensive powers in this legislation have naturally and rightly raised questions and concerns. The nature and the imposition of measures that significantly alter individual liberties deserve full and frank scrutiny, no matter the context.

“And it is in that regard that it is really quite unhelpful that we have only been given a 90 minute debate today.

“My party has always made clear our serious concerns about the lack of scrutiny of the powers contained in the UK Government’s Coronavirus Act. That is exactly why during the passage of the second reading of the Bill we raised our concerns alongside others in this place.

“The UK Government needs to listen to those concerns, they were voiced long before Tory backbenchers started having trouble with the Government’s moves." 

Following the vote, renewing the act, Health Secretary Matt Hancock said: “I’m pleased the Coronavirus Act has been renewed with an overwhelming majority 306. The Act is crucial for our strategy: to suppress the virus, supporting the economy, education, and the NHS until a vaccine can keep us safe.”

Earlier in the day, the speaker Lindsay Hoyle said the government had shown "total disregard" for Parliament with its handling of the regulations to control the virus, with rules being imposed with little notice given to MPs and no opportunity for discussion in the House of Commons.