Division · No. 449Wednesday, 11 March 2026Commons Taxation

Finance (No. 2) Bill: Third Reading

292
Ayes
161
Noes
Passed · Government won
196 did not vote
Analysis
Commons

**What happened**: On 11 March 2026, the House of Commons passed the Finance (No. 2) Bill at Third Reading -- the final parliamentary stage before a bill passes to the House of Lords. Third Reading is the last opportunity MPs have to accept or reject a bill in its entirety, after all amendments have been debated and decided. The bill passed by 292 votes to 161, a government majority of 131. **Why it matters**: The Finance (No. 2) Bill is the legislation that puts the government's autumn 2025 Budget into law. Passing it means the tax and spending measures announced by the Chancellor in November 2025 -- including changes to National Insurance, public service funding commitments, and increases to Air Passenger Duty -- now have legal effect. Media coverage in the weeks following the vote highlighted the practical impact for ordinary citizens, particularly the rise in Air Passenger Duty from April 2026, which will increase the cost of flights to popular holiday destinations including Spain, Greece and Turkey. **The politics**: The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 286 Labour and Labour Co-operative MPs who voted backed the bill, while Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Reform UK, the DUP and the Ulster Unionist Party all voted against. Four Green MPs voted with the government. The passage of the bill was not without drama -- the Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, issued a public reprimand the following day over the behaviour of around half a dozen government members, including the Chief Whip and Deputy Chief Whip, who caused significant delays in the voting lobbies during this division.

Voting Aye meant
Support passing the government's Finance Bill into law, backing the Budget measures it contains
Voting No meant
Oppose the Finance Bill and its Budget measures, or object to the irregular parliamentary procedure used
§ 01Who voted how.453 voting members · 196 absent
Aye293No161DID NOT VOTE · 196

453 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 196 who did not vote.

Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
256
0
106
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
94
22
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
53
19
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
30
0
12
Independent
3
3
7
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped No
0
7
1
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
0
2
3
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4
0
1
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
1
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
Your Party
0
0
1
§ 02From the debate.6 principal speakers
Dan TomlinsonSupportiveChipping Barnet
Government minister defending amendments as technical clarifications and necessary measures to deliver economic stability, support public services, and control borrowing without raising main income tax rates or VAT.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (5,922 words)
James WildOpposedNorth West Norfolk
Opposes Bill's £66 billion tax rises, frozen thresholds affecting 1 million higher-rate taxpayers, inheritance tax on farms/businesses breaking PM pledge, and pension inheritance tax; argues measures stifle growth and break manifesto commitments.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (2,967 words)
Sir Ashley FoxOpposedBridgwater
Challenges Government on £66 billion tax discrepancy versus manifesto promise of £7 billion; argues tax rises penalise hard-working people creating wealth while benefits spending rises to £406 billion.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (220 words)
Chris VinceSupportiveHarlow
Supports Government tax decisions as enabling NHS investment and reducing A&E waits; sees fiscal responsibility and public service investment as justifying measures.Labour · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (69 words)
Ms Stella CreasySupportiveWalthamstow
Strongly supports new clause 4 cracking down on tax avoidance finfluencers; argues online tax misinformation causes real financial harm to constituents, particularly vulnerable low-income groups following false advice.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (745 words)
Mr Joshua ReynoldsQuestioningMaidenhead
Questions whether loan charge settlement excludes those who already settled, arguing retrospective application would simplify tax system and preserve future settlement credibility.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (258 words)
§ 03Related divisions.Same topic · recent
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0