§ 00 Issue18 named divisions1 bill
Planning
Planning policy and development control
Government alignment shows how often each party voted with the government's stated position. Issue-aligned direction shows agreement with the AI-identified supportive stance.
Voted with government positionVoted in issue-aligned direction
13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 33Aye = 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 introduced255 · 130Passed13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 40Aye = 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 pressure244 · 134Passed13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 37Aye = Support the government in removing the Lords amendment, trusting ministerial promises to consult on how assets of community value are handled in planning · No = Keep the Lords amendment to enshrine clarity on assets of community value in law, rather than relying on a government promise to consult255 · 131Passed13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 32Aye = Support the government's decision to reject Lords Amendment 32, backing the government's approach to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill over the Lords' proposed change · No = Oppose the government's rejection of Lords Amendment 32, believing the Lords' amendment should be retained in the Bill267 · 80Passed13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: Government amendment (a) to Lords Amendment 2Aye = 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 · 125Passed13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 3Aye = Support the government's rejection of the Lords amendment, keeping planning processes streamlined without the additional notification and representation requirements the Lords wanted to add. · No = Back the Lords amendment and its additional notification and representation requirements, arguing these provide important safeguards in the planning process.256 · 131Passed13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 38Aye = 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 development252 · 133Passed13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1Aye = 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 expansion253 · 137Passed13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 39Aye = Support rejecting the Lords amendment, backing the Government's flexible 'brownfield-first, not brownfield-only' approach to allow development on greenfield land where necessary to meet housing targets · No = Oppose rejecting the Lords amendment; want to protect the countryside by legally requiring developers to prioritise brownfield sites before building on greenfield land248 · 132Passed10 Jun 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill Report Stage: New Clause 22Aye = Support giving councils compulsory purchase powers to build cycling and walking routes, even over the objections of private landowners · No = Oppose extending compulsory purchase powers for active travel, preferring voluntary cooperation with landowners and community-led approaches76 · 307Defeated
How is this calculated?
Government alignment shows how often a party's MPs voted with the government's stated position on this issue. This is the most comparable metric across parties, as it measures the same reference point for everyone.
Issue-aligned direction shows how often MPs voted in the direction tagged as supportive of this issue by AI analysis. For example, if a vote is tagged “pro-environment”, an Aye vote counts as aligned.