§ 00 Issue16 named divisions1 bill
Prisons
Prison system and rehabilitation
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
20 Jan 2026Sentencing Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 7Aye = Support rejecting the Lords amendment requiring free court transcripts of sentencing remarks within 14 days, preferring the government's own alternative approach · No = Support the Lords amendment giving victims and the public the right to free transcripts of sentencing remarks within 14 days, as proposed by the Conservatives in the Lords318 · 128Passed29 Oct 2025Sentencing Bill Report Stage: New Clause 19Aye = Support pushing ahead with homicide law reform and mandatory re-sentencing of IPP prisoners now, rather than waiting for further reviews · No = Oppose legislating ahead of the Law Commission's homicide review, and reject the mandatory IPP re-sentencing timetable as proposed173 · 321Defeated29 Oct 2025Sentencing Bill: Third ReadingAye = Support passing the Sentencing Bill into law, including its provisions on sentencing reform, youth justice measures, and potentially addressing the IPP sentencing backlog · No = Oppose the Sentencing Bill in its current form, potentially arguing it does not go far enough on IPP reform, is too soft on crime, or raises other concerns about the legislation320 · 103Passed29 Oct 2025Sentencing Bill Report Stage: New Clause 20Aye = Support creating a child cruelty register to monitor and manage offenders convicted of child abuse or neglect, in the same way sex offenders are tracked · No = Oppose the child cruelty register as proposed, likely on grounds that existing measures are sufficient or that the proposal needs further development before being enshrined in law184 · 309Defeated29 Oct 2025Sentencing Bill Report Stage: New Clause 12Aye = Support mandating the government to re-sentence all remaining IPP prisoners within 18 months, providing a firm legal deadline to end a widely condemned form of indefinite imprisonment · No = Oppose imposing a statutory 18-month deadline for IPP re-sentencing, preferring the government to work at its own pace to address the issue without binding legislative commitments it may not be able to meet84 · 312Defeated29 Oct 2025Sentencing Bill Report Stage: New Clause 1Aye = Support adding new provisions to the Sentencing Bill, including mandatory re-sentencing of IPP prisoners within 18 months and stricter sentencing for young offenders who commit serious crimes, including removing their anonymity · No = Oppose these new clauses, likely preferring to keep existing sentencing frameworks and the government's own approach to IPP reform and youth justice172 · 328Defeated21 Oct 2025Sentencing Bill Committee: Clause 1, as amended, stand partAye = Support keeping the clause that requires courts to presume short sentences (under 12 months) should be suspended rather than served immediately in prison · No = Oppose the clause, arguing it wrongly restricts judicial discretion and will result in fewer offenders going to prison when they should386 · 104Passed21 Oct 2025Sentencing Bill Committee: New Clause 30Aye = Support introducing a new provision to the Sentencing Bill, likely restricting the use of short custodial sentences or strengthening presumptions in favour of suspended sentences · No = Oppose the new clause, preferring the existing Bill approach to sentencing reform without this additional provision80 · 386Defeated21 Oct 2025Sentencing Bill Committee: Amendment 46Aye = Support tightening the suspended sentence threshold and limiting the Bill's scope so that serious offenders are less likely to avoid immediate custody · No = Oppose this amendment, backing the government's existing wording in the Sentencing Bill which retains the 'not more than 12 months' threshold for suspended sentences106 · 379Defeated21 Oct 2025Sentencing Bill Committee: New Clause 9Aye = Support requiring courts to publish offender nationality and immigration status data, arguing it enables better-informed policy on borders and criminal justice · No = Oppose the mandatory collection and rapid publication of offender nationality/immigration status data, likely on grounds of practicality, privacy, or that it is unnecessary or divisive106 · 319Defeated
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.