Planning and Infrastructure Bill: Third Reading
306Ayes
174Noes
Carried · majority 132 · Government won164 did not vote
644 Members · Aye 306 · No 174 · DNV 164 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
MPs voted on 10 June 2025 to pass the Planning and Infrastructure Bill at its Third Reading, sending it to the House of Lords for further scrutiny. The vote passed by 306 ayes to 174 noes. Third Reading is the final Commons stage, at which MPs vote on the bill as a whole after all amendments have been considered. The bill overhauls England's planning and infrastructure consenting systems with the stated aim of accelerating housebuilding and major infrastructure delivery. Its key provisions include streamlining the consenting process for nationally significant infrastructure projects, restricting judicial review rights for development consent orders, creating a Nature Restoration Fund through which developers pay a levy to Natural England in lieu of site-by-site environmental mitigation, reforming electricity grid connections to move from a first-come, first-served system to a first-ready, first-connected approach, and introducing a cap-and-floor financial support scheme for long-duration electricity storage. It also requires strategic spatial development strategies across England and reforms compulsory purchase procedures. The vote divided sharply along party lines. All 305 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted supported the bill; none voted against. All 97 voting Conservatives, all 56 voting Liberal Democrats, all six voting Reform UK members, all four Plaid Cymru MPs, all four Green MPs, and all five voting members of the Democratic Unionist Party and Ulster Unionist Party voted against. Three independents voted aye and four voted no. The opposition parties united in opposition despite their differing objections, which had included concerns about judicial review restrictions, the adequacy of environmental protections, compulsory purchase compensation levels, and the pace of reform. Several related divisions during the bill's Report Stage on 9 and 10 June saw amendment proposals defeated by comfortable government majorities, indicating the government successfully resisted attempts to alter the bill before Third Reading.
Voting Aye meant
Support the Planning and Infrastructure Bill becoming law, backing faster planning approvals, streamlined infrastructure consenting, and the new Nature Restoration Levy as a way to accelerate housebuilding and energy infrastructure.
Voting No meant
Oppose the Bill in its current form, with concerns spanning judicial review restrictions on planning challenges, inadequacy of environmental protections, compulsory purchase compensation levels, and the pace of reform bypassing local communities.
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
275
0
86
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
97
19
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
56
15
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
30
0
12
Independent
—
3
4
6
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
6
2
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
4
1
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
4
0
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Your Party
—
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
0
0
1
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
—
0
1
0
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
New Clause 22 should require statutory guidance on using CPOs for active travel routes to match existing CPO use for roads, citing Welsh precedent and evidence that current guidance is insufficientLiberal Democrats · Voted no · Read full speech (2,076 words) →
Supports development corporation powers as critical for delivery but warns against forcing behaviour change through CPOs; emphasis needed on working with communities and sustainabilityLabour · Voted aye · Read full speech (212 words) →
Bill represents over-centralisation by Minister and Deputy PM; opposes most new clauses as they extend CPO powers; calls for improved compensation (New Clause 85) and fairness to farmers and landownersConservatives · Voted no · Read full speech (4,377 words) →
Supports amendments 88/89 on recreational land and New Clause 107 on public land disposal; opposes New Clause 85 as it would double-pay landowners and reduce council housing; backs community-led infrastructure approachLiberal Democrats · Voted no · Read full speech (2,915 words) →
Amendment 68 would allow councils to acquire land at current use value without hope value to deliver council homes; argues developer-led model has failed to produce affordable housing despite high supplyConservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (783 words) →
New Clause 128 should establish community benefit scheme requiring 20% of CPO value paid into local community funds; CPO powers need stronger checks and balances to protect rural communities from industrial energy infrastructureConservative · Voted no · Read full speech (810 words) →
Amendments 88/89 should extend hope value disregard to recreational facilities; New Clause 107 should allow discounted disposal of public land for public good purposesLiberal Democrats · Voted no · Read full speech (2,454 words) →
Bill addresses false dichotomy between development and nature; smaller 'little and often' developments vital for rural communities; supports streamlining to enable local projects like affordable housing for school retentionLabour · Voted aye · Read full speech (800 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0