A divisionDivision No. 139 · Monday, 24 March 2025· Commons· Planning

Planning and Infrastructure Bill: Second Reading

330Ayes
74Noes
Carried · majority 256 · Government won
241 did not vote
Aye331No76DID NOT VOTE · 241

645 Members · Aye 330 · No 74 · DNV 241 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 24 March 2025 to give the Planning and Infrastructure Bill its Second Reading, allowing it to proceed to further scrutiny. The vote passed by 330 ayes to 74 noes. A Second Reading is the first substantive vote on a bill, approving its general principles rather than its detailed provisions. The bill aims to speed up planning approvals for 1.5 million new homes and 150 major infrastructure projects, reform how electricity grid connections are allocated, create a Nature Restoration Fund so developers can pay a levy rather than manage environmental obligations site by site, and restrict the scope for legal challenges to delay major infrastructure decisions. If the bill becomes law, it will affect anyone seeking planning permission for large-scale development in England, local councils, energy companies, and households near new electricity transmission lines, who would receive bill discounts under one of its provisions. Labour and Labour Co-operative MPs voted unanimously in favour, providing the bulk of the 330 ayes. The Liberal Democrats supplied almost all of the 74 noes, with 64 of their MPs voting against. Plaid Cymru's four MPs also voted no, as did two DUP MPs and one Reform UK MP. The Green Party's three MPs voted aye, alongside two independents. The bill sits within a broader Labour programme to reverse what the government describes as years of planning inaction, and it subsequently passed its Third Reading on 10 June 2025 by 306 votes to 174.

Voting Aye meant
Support the government's sweeping planning reform agenda, including faster housing delivery, streamlined infrastructure consenting, and reduced scope for legal challenges to delay major projects
Voting No meant
Oppose the bill, raising concerns about the erosion of local community consultation rights and the pace and scale of planning liberalisation
§ 01Who voted how.404 voting Members · 241 absent

Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.

Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped Aye
289
0
72
Conservative and Unionist Party
0
0
116
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
63
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
36
0
6
Independent
2
4
7
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UK
0
1
6
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
0
2
3
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Your Party
1
1
0
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
0
0
1

Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed

§ 02From the debate.8 principal speakers
Angela RaynerSupportiveAshton-under-Lyne
Bill is essential to get Britain building again; transforms planning to deliver 1.5m homes and infrastructure while protecting communities and nature through better consultation and streamlined processes.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,912 words)
Kevin HollinrakeOpposedThirsk and Malton
While supporting some principles, the Bill's 1.5m target is undeliverable; removing councillor powers is anti-democratic; housing targets unfairly shift burden to rural areas; concerns about environmental protections and lack of investment in skills.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (3,581 words)
Gideon AmosQuestioningTaunton and Wellington
Welcomes compulsory purchase reforms and nature restoration fund, but criticises Henry VIII clauses and removal of community voice; argues councillors approve 85-90% of applications and are not the blocker; advocates community-led development.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (2,962 words)
Mark PritchardOpposedThe Wrekin
Constituents want homes but demand proper consultation, right location and scale; objects to ignoring local views through mandatory local plans.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (89 words)
Andy SlaughterQuestioningHammersmith and Chiswick
Welcomes affordable housing expansion but raises concern that Gypsies and Travellers have been systematically discriminated against and excluded from planning provisions.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (117 words)
Sir Roger GaleOpposedHerne Bay and Sandwich
Supports speedier planning but warns against removing right to object to major projects; cites National Grid Sea Link converter station as example of legitimate public concern.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (92 words)
John McDonnellQuestioningHayes and Harlington
Seeks clarification on Heathrow expansion process and expresses concern about removing compulsory purchase consultees from pre-application stage.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (105 words)
Chris HinchliffSupportiveNorth East Hertfordshire
Bill offers opportunity to reform planning after Conservative mismanagement; advocates stronger council housing programmes, land value capture, and environmental limits on growth.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (869 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