§ 00 Issue11 named divisions1 bill
Policing
Police funding and neighbourhood policing
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
22 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: Government motion in relation to LA439Aye = Support the government's position on amendment LA439 to the Crime and Policing Bill · No = Oppose the government's position on amendment LA439, backing the alternative approach proposed in or against LA439253 · 145Passed14 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 333Aye = Support the government's decision to reject Lords Amendment 333, siding with ministers who argued the change was unworkable or inappropriate · No = Oppose removing Lords Amendment 333, arguing it contained important protections and deserved proper parliamentary consideration254 · 159Passed14 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 6Aye = Support the government rejecting the Lords' fly-tipping amendment, trusting the government's alternative approach (or lack thereof) to tackling illegal waste dumping · No = Support the Lords' amendment to introduce tougher measures against fly-tipping, arguing rural communities and landowners need stronger legal protections and enforcement powers297 · 171Passed14 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 11Aye = Support the Government's decision to reject Lords Amendment 11, removing a change the Lords made to the Crime and Policing Bill · No = Support keeping Lords Amendment 11, backing the Lords' addition to the Crime and Policing Bill against the Government's wishes290 · 175Passed14 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 359Aye = Support the government's rejection of the Lords amendment, preferring existing tools like the foreign influence registration scheme over formally proscribing the IRGC as a terrorist organisation · No = Support the Lords amendment to proscribe the IRGC as a terrorist organisation, arguing it poses a direct and serious threat to people in the UK and that current measures are insufficient279 · 158Passed14 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 2Aye = Support the government's position of rejecting the specific Lords amendment while accepting the government's own alternative provisions in its place · No = Support retaining the Lords amendment as passed, disagreeing with the government's proposed substitution299 · 178Passed14 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 357Aye = Support the government in rejecting the Lords amendment, preserving the 'historical safeguard' that protects legitimate political discourse about terrorism from prosecution under encouragement-of-terrorism laws · No = Support the Lords amendment, arguing that glorifying acts of terrorism by proscribed organisations should not benefit from the historical safeguard, and that the current law is too permissive279 · 75Passed14 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 342Aye = Support the government's approach of using flexible statutory guidance rather than rigid statutory evidence requirements for youth diversion orders in terrorism cases · No = Support the Lords' position that specific evidence requirements should be enshrined in statute to ensure courts only impose youth diversion orders where truly necessary and proportionate283 · 71Passed14 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 311Aye = Support the government's rejection of the Lords' amendment 311, backing the government's preferred alternative approach to the underlying issue in the Crime and Policing Bill · No = Support retaining the Lords' amendment 311, opposing the government overriding the Lords' change to the Bill301 · 103Passed14 Apr 2026Crime and Policing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 334Aye = Support the government's approach of replacing the existing NCHI code of practice with a stricter national standard, rather than an outright statutory abolition of NCHIs · No = Back the Lords amendment to fully abolish non-crime hate incidents in law, arguing the government's alternative does not go far enough to protect free speech and civil liberties357 · 92Passed
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.