The topic lensIssue · 18 divisions tagged · 12 parties active
Planning.
Planning policy and development control
Divisions tagged
18
This parliament
Parties active
12
≥1 vote tagged
Most on-whip
Traditional Unionist Voice
86% aligned
Recent activity
10
Most-recent divisions
Each row is one party. The bar shows how its MPs voted relative to a neutral midpoint — to the right = on-side with the majority position, to the left = opposed. The percentage figure is the share of that party’s MPs who took the same side: higher = more whip-disciplined, closer to 50% = a freer vote.
| Party | Stance vs neutral midpoint | Net % | Discipline | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour Party | Lab | -3 | 47% on-whip · 352 MPs | |
| Conservative and Unionist Party | Con | -4 | 46% on-whip · 109 MPs | |
| Liberal Democrats | LD | 0 | 50% on-whip · 70 MPs | |
| Labour and Co-operative Party | Ind | -2 | 48% on-whip · 42 MPs | |
| Independent | Ind | +6 | 56% on-whip · 13 MPs | |
| Reform UK | Ref | -6 | 44% on-whip · 8 MPs | |
| Democratic Unionist Party | DUP | +23 | 73% on-whip · 5 MPs | |
| Plaid Cymru | Plaid | +10 | 60% on-whip · 4 MPs |
Source · Hansard · alignment is the share of party MPs who voted with the party majority on tagged divisions
| Date | Motion | Aye | No | Carried |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 Nov 2025 | Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 33 Aye: Support the government's rejection of the Lords amendment, accepting that existing consultation requirements are sufficient and that the affirmative parliamentary procedure is not needed for the national scheme of delegation · No: Support the Lords amendment, arguing that the Bill concentrates too much power in the Secretary of State and that Parliament should have a formal vote before a national scheme of delegation is introduced | 255 | 130 | Yes |
| 13 Nov 2025 | Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 40 Aye: Support rejecting the Lords amendment, backing the government's broader approach to environmental delivery plans under the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, trusting that EDPs can address a wide range of environmental impacts alongside development · No: Support the Lords amendment restricting the scope of environmental delivery plans, arguing tighter limits are needed to protect habitats and biodiversity from being traded off against development pressure | 244 | 134 | Yes |
| 13 Nov 2025 | Planning and Infrastructure Bill: Government amendment (a) to Lords Amendment 2 Aye: Support the Government's modified version of the Lords amendment, accepting its core intent on national policy statements but removing requirements for separate heritage and archaeological consents in dam/reservoir development applications. · No: Prefer the Lords amendment as originally passed, including the requirement for separate consents for listed buildings, conservation areas and archaeological sites in dam or reservoir development consent applications. | 262 | 125 | Yes |
| 13 Nov 2025 | Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 38 Aye: Support the government in rejecting statutory protections for chalk streams, arguing existing planning frameworks are sufficient · No: Back the Lords amendment to give chalk streams explicit statutory protection in planning law, preventing their destruction through development | 252 | 133 | Yes |
| 13 Nov 2025 | Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1 Aye: Support the government's position of removing the Lords-inserted requirement for enhanced parliamentary scrutiny of major infrastructure projects, prioritising faster delivery of infrastructure · No: Support the Lords amendment requiring stronger parliamentary oversight of major infrastructure decisions, arguing Parliament should have sufficient time to scrutinise projects like HS2 or Heathrow expansion | 253 | 137 | Yes |
All 18 divisions on this issue →
By party, the MPs whose voting record on planning is most closely tracking the party majority. A fuller “most active by speech volume + written questions” ranking is pending — needs per-issue speech aggregation.
LabLabour Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Apsana Begum | Poplar and Limehouse | 100% |
| Liam Byrne | Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North | 100% |
| Rosena Allin-Khan | Tooting | 100% |
ConConservative and Unionist Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Charlie Dewhirst | Bridlington and The Wolds | 100% |
| Sarah Bool | South Northamptonshire | 100% |
| Neil O'Brien | Harborough, Oadby and Wigston | 83% |
LDLiberal Democrats
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Max Wilkinson | Cheltenham | 100% |
| Alistair Carmichael | Orkney and Shetland | 75% |
| Tim Farron | Westmorland and Lonsdale | 71% |
IndLabour and Co-operative Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Gareth Thomas | Harrow West | 80% |
| Seema Malhotra | Feltham and Heston | 80% |
| Steve Reed | Streatham and Croydon North | 80% |
IndIndependent
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Ayoub Khan | Birmingham Perry Barr | 100% |
| Adnan Hussain | Blackburn | 75% |
| Alex Easton | North Down | 75% |
RefReform UK
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Suella Braverman | Fareham and Waterlooville | 100% |
| Lee Anderson | Ashfield | 63% |
| Richard Tice | Boston and Skegness | 50% |
Pending — issue-to-service mapping
Mapping each Westminster issue to the equivalent council service bucket (so “Planning” → the matching service line on council finance, with the ranked-spend table this section wants) is its own taxonomy job. Council service spend lives on the council pages today; cross-cut by issue here in a follow-on pass.
Sources, methods & last update
Issue taggingEach division is tagged to one or more issues by Claude classification, reviewed by topic admins.
VotingHansard division lists · Commons Votes API
AlignmentShare of party MPs voting with the party majority on tagged divisions
CohortThis parliament · 18 divisions