Opposition day: Conduct of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
90
Ayes
—
297
Noes
Defeated · Government won
261 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** On 10 December 2025, the House of Commons voted on a Conservative-led opposition day motion criticising the conduct of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The motion was defeated by 297 votes to 90. Opposition day motions are a parliamentary mechanism that allows parties not in government to set the agenda for debate and bring a formal vote on a topic of their choosing. **Why it matters:** The motion called for parliamentary accountability over the Chancellor's conduct, which relates to the government's broader economic leadership. Opposition day motions of this kind do not change the law, but they carry political weight as a formal expression of no-confidence in a minister's behaviour or decisions. A successful motion would have placed significant pressure on the Prime Minister to act; its defeat allows the Chancellor to continue without a formal parliamentary censure attached to their record. **The politics:** The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 86 Conservative MPs who voted backed the motion, joined by 2 Reform UK members and 1 Ulster Unionist Party representative, plus 3 independents. Every Labour and Labour-Co-operative MP who voted opposed it, totalling 293 no votes. Notably, the Liberal Democrats, with 72 members, were entirely absent from the division, as were all 5 DUP members and all 7 Sinn Fein members. This pattern of a strongly partisan opposition motion, backed only by right-leaning parties and rejected by the governing party, sits within a wider context of sustained Conservative and Reform pressure on the government's economic record, visible also in repeated opposition amendments to economic legislation in early 2026.
Voting Aye meant
Support the motion criticising the Chancellor's conduct, signalling concern or lack of confidence in her handling of her role
Voting No meant
Reject the motion, defending the Chancellor's conduct and opposing the opposition's attempt to censure her
387 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 261 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
0
268
94
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
86
0
30
Liberal Democrats
0
0
72
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0
25
17
Independent
3
3
7
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
2
0
6
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
0
0
5
Green Party of England and Wales
0
0
4
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
1
0
—
Your Party
0
0
1
The Chancellor deliberately misled the country on 4 November by highlighting a £16bn productivity downgrade while omitting a larger £32bn upgrade to tax receipts, rolled taxes to build false justification for £26bn increases, breached OBR confidence with leaks, and broke manifesto promises on taxation and welfare.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (5,438 words) →
The Chancellor set out honest circumstances and priorities on 4 November with £4.2bn inadequate headroom; the Budget delivers on all three priorities (NHS, cost of living, debt reduction); the OBR independently confirmed no misleading conduct; the Government is acting seriously on the EFO leak with inquiries and security reviews.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,088 words) →
The Budget process was messy with leaks and flip-flopping; both Conservatives and Labour have failed on transparency; a Swedish-style draft Budget system with pre-publication debate should be introduced; the jobs tax is damaging and business rates need reform; growth not just taxation is needed.Liberal Democrat · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (1,390 words) →
The core issue is loss of trust: the Chancellor knew on 4 November that tax receipts were £16bn higher but presented a misleading picture; this is deceit not spin; broken promises on freezing income tax thresholds contradict manifesto commitments; inflation and high borrowing costs are consequences of the Chancellor's tax decisions.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,435 words) →
The Budget is good for constituents with rail fare freezes, prescription freezes, NHS investment, and wage rises; the motion focuses unhelpfully on process and individuals rather than policy substance; the Chancellor did not mislead on 4 November per OBR confirmation; the two-child cap removal lifts over 1,000 young people out of poverty.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,251 words) →
The Chancellor has a revealed preference for tax hikes (£40bn then £26bn) despite election promises; authorised leaks caused economic damage through changed behaviour; the OBR resignation was justified but distracted from the deeper breach of trust; this pattern of saying one thing and doing another is damaging.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (609 words) →
The Opposition motion inappropriately focuses on process rather than substance; the Budget addresses existential crises (affordability, climate, military preparedness); the Chancellor made difficult choices to deliver affordability and investment; the Government's leadership on these challenges is what matters.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (665 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0