English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill: Government motion to disagree to Lords Amendment 2 The government asked MPs to overturn a change made by the House of Lords to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. Without debate excerpts, the precise content of Lords Amendment 2 is unknown, but MPs voted on whether to reject the Lords' modification and restore the government's original text. Position: Support the government's position by rejecting the Lords' amendment to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill Devolution and Local PowersLocal Government Reformcross-cuttingwith govt | Yes | 21 Apr 2026 |
English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill: Government motion to disagree to Lords Amendment 13 The government asked MPs to reject a change made by the House of Lords to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. Without debate excerpts it is not possible to say exactly what Lords Amendment 13 proposed, but MPs were deciding whether to override the Lords and restore the government's original text on this aspect of English devolution. Position: Support the government's position by rejecting the Lords' amendment to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill Devolution and Local PowersLocal Government Reformcross-cuttingwith govt | Yes | 21 Apr 2026 |
English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill: Government motion to disagree to Lords Amendment 4 MPs voted on whether to reject a change made by the House of Lords to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. Without debate excerpts, the specific content of Lords Amendment 4 is unknown, but the government sought to overturn it, meaning the Lords' modification to this devolution legislation will not stand if the Aye side prevails. Position: Support the government's position by rejecting Lords Amendment 4 to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, restoring the Bill to its pre-Lords form on this point Devolution and Local PowersLocal Government Reformcross-cuttingwith govt | Yes | 21 Apr 2026 |
Opposition Day Motion: Defence The opposition brought forward a motion on defence policy for debate and a vote. Opposition Day motions allow the opposition to set the agenda and challenge the government's approach — in this case on defence, likely concerning spending commitments or military capability. Position: Reject the opposition's motion, backing the government's existing defence policy and spending plans Defence and Foreign AffairsDefence Spendingcross-cuttingwith govt | No | 24 Mar 2026 |
National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 2 The Lords had amended the National Insurance Bill to protect lower and middle earners from the impact of increased employer pension contribution taxes (including concerns about salary sacrifice arrangements). The Commons voted to reject that Lords amendment, allowing the original Bill to stand without those protections. Position: Support rejecting the Lords' amendment and keeping the original Bill, which increases employer national insurance on pension contributions without the additional safeguards for lower and middle earners that the Lords proposed. PensionsTaxationrightwith govt | Yes | 23 Mar 2026 |
National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1 The government voted to reject a change made by the House of Lords to a bill increasing National Insurance on employer pension contributions under salary sacrifice arrangements. The Lords had amended the bill, but the government moved to overturn that amendment and proceed with the original policy. Position: Support the government's plan to increase National Insurance on employer pension contributions made via salary sacrifice, rejecting the Lords' amendment PensionsTaxationleftwith govt | Yes | 23 Mar 2026 |
Finance (No. 2) Bill: Third Reading Vote to pass the Finance (No. 2) Bill at its final stage in the Commons, including a procedural Ways and Means motion moved after the Bill — an unusual departure from standard practice that drew criticism from the SNP, though the government acknowledged this and pledged to avoid it in future. Position: Support passing the government's Finance Bill into law, backing the Budget measures it contains EconomyTaxationleftwith govt | Yes | 11 Mar 2026 |
Courts and Tribunals Bill: Reasoned Amendment to Second Reading MPs voted on a Conservative reasoned amendment opposing the Courts and Tribunals Bill at Second Reading. The Bill, introduced by David Lammy, aims to modernise the criminal justice system, but the opposition attempted to block its progress, with concerns raised about the impact on jury trials and the effect on black and minority ethnic defendants. Position: Support allowing the Courts and Tribunals Bill to proceed, backing government reforms to modernise courts and tribunals while retaining jury trials as a cornerstone of justice Constitution and Democracyleftwith govt | No | 10 Mar 2026 |
Courts and Tribunals Bill: Second Reading MPs voted on whether to give initial approval to a Courts and Tribunals Bill, which proposes modernising the criminal justice system. Debate focused on whether reforms — including potential changes to when juries are used — are necessary to clear court backlogs, while critics raised concerns about protecting jury trial rights and disproportionate impacts on minority ethnic defendants. Position: Support modernising the courts and criminal justice system, including reforms to jury thresholds, to make it fit for the 21st century Constitution and Democracycentrewith govt | Yes | 10 Mar 2026 |
Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill: Third Reading MPs voted on the final passage of a Bill to abolish the two-child limit on Universal Credit, which currently restricts child elements of the benefit to the first two children in a family. Removing this limit aims to reduce child poverty by ensuring all children in low-income families receive equal support. Position: Support removing the two-child benefit cap so that all children in low-income families receive equal Universal Credit entitlements, reducing child poverty Universal CreditWelfare and Benefitsleftwith govt | Yes | 23 Feb 2026 |
Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill Committee: New Clause 2 Vote on opposition amendments to the Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill that would have restricted UK Export Finance support where goods might be re-exported to Russia or other sanctioned countries, and separately where exports involve modern slavery or human trafficking. The amendments sought to cap the Secretary of State's financial commitments to zero in such cases. Position: Oppose these restrictions, preferring the government retain flexibility in how UK Export Finance is used without these additional conditions BusinessEconomycross-cuttingwith govt | No | 23 Feb 2026 |
Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill Committee: New Clause 3 Vote on New Clause 3, an amendment to the bill removing the two-child benefit limit. Based on the debate, this related to additional reporting or consultation requirements around the removal of the limit, which the government was already supporting in principle but opposed this specific clause. Position: Oppose the additional requirements in New Clause 3, backing the government's approach to removing the two-child limit without extra conditions attached Universal CreditWelfare and Benefitsrightwith govt | No | 23 Feb 2026 |
Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill Committee: New Clause 3 Vote on New Clause 3, which would have required the government to report on UK Export Finance's impact on GDP and support for small and medium-sized businesses. The government opposed it on the grounds that existing reporting requirements already cover this information. Position: Oppose the new reporting clause as unnecessary, since the government argues existing legal reporting obligations already capture this information BusinessEconomycross-cuttingwith govt | No | 23 Feb 2026 |
Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill Committee: Amendment 1 Vote on whether to ban UK government export finance or insurance for goods where there is reason to believe they may be re-exported to Russia or other sanctioned countries, and separately to ban export finance where modern slavery or human trafficking is involved. This Opposition amendment would have set the financial assistance limit to zero in such cases. Position: Oppose this restriction, likely arguing existing sanctions law and due diligence requirements are sufficient without additional legislative constraints on export finance BusinessEconomycross-cuttingwith govt | No | 23 Feb 2026 |
Draft Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme (Amendment) Order 2026 Vote on a statutory instrument that amends the UK Emissions Trading Scheme from 2027, reducing the supply of free carbon allowances given to businesses — effectively increasing the carbon price they face. The opposition argued this would raise energy bills for households and businesses, while the government backed it as part of meeting climate targets. Position: Support reducing free carbon allowances in the UK ETS, accepting higher carbon costs as necessary to meet climate commitments Climate ChangeEnvironmentleftwith govt | Yes | 4 Feb 2026 |
Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill: Second Reading MPs voted on whether to pass a bill removing the two-child limit on Universal Credit, which currently restricts child welfare payments to the first two children in a family. The government argued the policy traps children in poverty and has failed to achieve its stated aims, while opponents defended it as encouraging personal responsibility. Position: Support removing the two-child limit on Universal Credit, allowing families to receive welfare support for all their children and reducing child poverty Universal CreditWelfare and Benefitsleftwith govt | Yes | 3 Feb 2026 |
Draft Public Order Act 2023 (Interference With Use or Operation of Key National Infrastructure) Regulations 2025 MPs voted on new regulations expanding the Public Order Act 2023 to criminalise interference with key national infrastructure, such as energy, transport, and water systems. This extends powers introduced to tackle disruptive protest tactics used by groups like Just Stop Oil. Position: Support extending criminal offences to cover interference with key national infrastructure, strengthening powers to deter and prosecute disruptive protest activity Constitution and DemocracyCrime & Policingrightwith govt | Yes | 14 Jan 2026 |
Finance (No. 2) Bill Committee: New Clause 12 Vote on a Conservative-proposed new clause requiring the government to review and report on how income tax increases on property income (landlords) might affect rent prices. The opposition wanted transparency on whether landlord tax rises would be passed on to tenants. Position: Oppose the review requirement, backing the government's tax changes on property income without mandating an impact assessment on rents EconomyTaxationleftwith govt | No | 12 Jan 2026 |
Finance (No. 2) Bill: Reasoned Amendment to Second Reading (Opposition) MPs voted on an opposition amendment to reject the Finance Bill implementing Labour's Autumn 2025 Budget, with Conservative MPs arguing the Budget's tax changes — including inheritance tax reforms affecting family farms — would harm the private sector and rural communities. Position: Support the Finance Bill and Labour's Budget choices, arguing they build strong economic foundations, avoid austerity, and protect public services without cutting capital spending EconomyTaxationleftwith govt | No | 16 Dec 2025 |
Finance (No. 2) Bill: Second Reading MPs voted on whether to approve the Finance (No. 2) Bill at Second Reading, which implements Labour's November 2025 Budget. The Budget includes measures described by the government as building 'strong foundations' while avoiding austerity, though critics raised concerns including the impact of inheritance tax changes on family farms. Position: Support the Finance Bill implementing Labour's Budget, including its tax and spending choices aimed at avoiding austerity and maintaining public services EconomyTaxationleftwith govt | Yes | 16 Dec 2025 |
Employment Rights Bill: Government motion to insist on disagreement to LA23 and LA106 to LA120, not to insist on Commons Amendment 120C, 120D and 120E but to propose Gov (a) to (f) in lieu of LA23 and LA106 to LA120 The House voted to reject Lords amendments that would have altered provisions on guaranteed hours and related worker protections in the Employment Rights Bill, instead substituting the Government's own alternative amendments. This is part of ongoing 'ping-pong' between the Commons and Lords over key elements of the Bill, with the Government seeking to pass its version of new employment rights rather than the Lords' preferred changes. Position: Support the Labour Government's version of the Employment Rights Bill, overriding Lords changes to provisions on guaranteed hours and related protections for workers EconomyEmploymentleftwith govt | Yes | 8 Dec 2025 |
Employment Rights Bill: Government motion to insist on disagreement to Lords Amendment 1B but to propose Government amendments (a) and (b) in lieu of Lords Amendment 1B The Lords had amended the Employment Rights Bill to shift the 'right to guaranteed hours' so that workers would have to request guaranteed hours from their employer, rather than employers being required to proactively offer them. The government rejected this Lords change and proposed its own alternative amendments, keeping the duty on employers to offer guaranteed hours to eligible workers. Position: Support keeping the employer duty to proactively offer guaranteed hours to workers, rejecting the Lords' weaker version that would have required workers to request them EconomyEmploymentleftwith govt | Yes | 8 Dec 2025 |
Employment Rights Bill: Government motion not to insist on Commons Amendment 72C but to disagree with LA72D to LA72H and to propose Gov (a) and (b) in lieu of LA72D to LA72H A Lords-Commons ping-pong vote on the Employment Rights Bill, where the government proposed its own compromise amendments (a) and (b) in place of Lords amendments 72D–72H, which the Commons had previously rejected. This is part of the ongoing negotiation between the two Houses over the final shape of the Bill's employment provisions. Position: Support the government's compromise wording on the disputed employment rights provisions, rejecting the Lords' alternative amendments 72D–72H in favour of the government's own substitute text EconomyEmploymentleftwith govt | Yes | 8 Dec 2025 |
Employment Rights Bill: Government motion to insist on disagreement to LA62 but not to insist on Commons Amendment 62C and to propose Gov (a) in lieu of LA62 MPs voted on the government's position regarding Lords Amendment 62 to the Employment Rights Bill, which relates to protections against unfair dismissal. The government proposed its own alternative amendment in lieu of the Lords' version, seeking to bring in unfair dismissal protections from 1 January 2027 for employees already having six months' service, rather than waiting the full qualifying period. Position: Support the government's compromise approach to unfair dismissal protections, bringing forward protections earlier for workers with existing service, while rejecting the Lords' specific amendment in favour of the government's own wording EconomyEmploymentleftwith govt | Yes | 8 Dec 2025 |
Employment Rights Bill: Government motion to insist on disagreement to Lords Amendment 48B but to propose Government amendment (a) and (b) in lieu of LA48B MPs voted to reject a Lords amendment (48B) to the Employment Rights Bill and replace it with a government compromise on zero-hours contracts and unfair dismissal protections, including bringing forward unfair dismissal protections to 1 January 2027 for workers with six months' service, rather than accepting the Lords' version. Position: Support the government's amended approach to zero-hours contracts and unfair dismissal protections, including earlier commencement of protections and seasonal work provisions, in place of the Lords' amendment EconomyEmploymentleftwith govt | Yes | 8 Dec 2025 |
Budget Resolution No. 4: Income tax (dividend rates) Vote on a Budget Resolution setting the rates of income tax applied to dividend income (money paid to shareholders). Budget Resolutions are the formal parliamentary approvals needed to implement measures announced in the Budget. Position: Support the government's proposed dividend tax rates as part of the 2025 Budget package EconomyTaxationleftwith govt | Yes | 2 Dec 2025 |
Budget Resolution No. 5: Income tax (savings rate for future years) Vote on a Budget Resolution setting the income tax savings rate for future years, which determines how interest and savings income is taxed for people on lower incomes. This is part of the formal parliamentary process to implement Budget measures into law. Position: Support approving the government's proposed savings income tax rate as set out in the Budget EconomyTaxationcentrewith govt | Yes | 2 Dec 2025 |
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill: Second Reading MPs voted on whether to give a second reading (proceed with) a new government Bill on addressing the legacy of the Troubles in Northern Ireland, which would replace the previous government's controversial immunity framework with a new approach to legacy investigations and acknowledgement for victims' families. Position: Support the new Labour government's approach to dealing with the legacy of the Northern Ireland Troubles, allowing the Bill to proceed to further scrutiny in Parliament Constitution and DemocracyDevolutioncross-cuttingwith govt | Yes | 18 Nov 2025 |
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill: Opposition Reasoned Amendment MPs voted on whether to block the second reading of the government's new Northern Ireland Troubles legacy bill, which aims to address how killings and atrocities from the Troubles (1966–1998) are investigated and dealt with. The opposition reasoned amendment was an attempt to prevent the bill progressing, reflecting concerns about its scope and whether it adequately covers victims like those of the Omagh bombing. Position: Support allowing the bill to proceed to further parliamentary scrutiny, backing the government's new approach to dealing with the legacy of the Troubles in Northern Ireland Constitution and DemocracyDevolutioncross-cuttingwith govt | No | 18 Nov 2025 |
Employment Rights Bill: motion relating to Lords Reason 72B The Commons voted to reject several Lords amendments to the Employment Rights Bill, including on unfair dismissal protections for young workers, and to substitute the government's own alternative proposals. This was part of the parliamentary back-and-forth (ping-pong) between the Commons and Lords on the Bill's employment protections. Position: Support the Labour government's version of employment rights reforms, overriding Lords changes and maintaining stronger protections for workers including young people against unfair dismissal Employmentleftwith govt | Yes | 5 Nov 2025 |
