Each row is one party. The bar shows how its MPs voted relative to a neutral midpoint — to the right = on-side with the majority position, to the left = opposed. The percentage figure is the share of that party’s MPs who took the same side: higher = more whip-disciplined, closer to 50% = a freer vote.
| Party | Stance vs neutral midpoint | Net % | Discipline | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour Party | Lab | -50 | 0% on-whip · 333 MPs | |
| Conservative and Unionist Party | Con | +50 | 100% on-whip · 109 MPs | |
| Liberal Democrats | LD | +25 | 75% on-whip · 69 MPs | |
| Labour and Co-operative Party | Lab | -50 | 0% on-whip · 41 MPs | |
| Independent | Ind | +8 | 58% on-whip · 10 MPs | |
| Reform UK | Ref | +50 | 100% on-whip · 6 MPs | |
| Democratic Unionist Party | DUP | +50 | 100% on-whip · 5 MPs | |
| Green Party of England and Wales | Grn | +21 | 71% on-whip · 5 MPs |
Source · Hansard · alignment is the share of party MPs who voted with the party majority on tagged divisions
| Date | Motion | Aye | No | Carried |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22 Jun 2026 | Armed Forces Bill Report Stage: New Clause 11 Aye: Support adding New Clause 11 to the Armed Forces Bill · No: Oppose adding New Clause 11 to the Armed Forces Bill, favouring the bill as it stands | 105 | 388 | No |
| 22 Jun 2026 | Armed Forces Bill Report Stage: New Clause 4 Aye: Support adding New Clause 4 to the Armed Forces Bill, backing whatever additional provision it proposed for service personnel or veterans · No: Oppose adding New Clause 4 to the Armed Forces Bill, either disagreeing with its substance or preferring existing provisions remain unchanged | 164 | 309 | No |
| 22 Jun 2026 | Armed Forces Bill Report Stage: New Clause 22 Aye: Support adding New Clause 22 to the Armed Forces Bill · No: Oppose adding New Clause 22 to the Armed Forces Bill, preferring the bill as it stands | 76 | 320 | No |
| 22 Jun 2026 | Armed Forces Bill Report Stage: Amendment 11 Aye: Support the proposed amendment to the Armed Forces Bill at Report Stage · No: Oppose the amendment, backing the Bill as it stood without this change | 171 | 321 | No |
| 2 Jun 2026 | Armed Forces Bill Committee: New Clause 6 Aye: Support legislating directly to protect armed forces families, including automatic transfer of special educational needs plans across UK nations when personnel are posted, and faster reserve mobilisation timelines — pushing the government to go further through statute rather than administrative action. · No: Oppose imposing rigid statutory requirements on the government, preferring practical and flexible implementation of support for service families and reserves — arguing these issues are better addressed through policy rather than primary legislation. | 100 | 371 | No |
All 8 divisions on this issue →
By party, the MPs whose voting record on armed forces support is most closely tracking the party majority. A fuller “most active by speech volume + written questions” ranking is pending — needs per-issue speech aggregation.
LabLabour Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Barry Gardiner | Brent West | 0% |
| Stephen Timms | East Ham | 0% |
| Clive Efford | Eltham and Chislehurst | 0% |
ConConservative and Unionist Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| John Whittingdale | Maldon | 100% |
| Bernard Jenkin | Harwich and North Essex | 100% |
| Julian Lewis | New Forest East | 100% |
LDLiberal Democrats
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Ian Roome | North Devon | 86% |
| Luke Taylor | Sutton and Cheam | 86% |
| Zöe Franklin | Guildford | 86% |
LabLabour and Co-operative Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Gareth Thomas | Harrow West | 0% |
| Meg Hillier | Hackney South and Shoreditch | 0% |
| Chris Evans | Caerphilly | 0% |
IndIndependent
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Alex Easton | North Down | 100% |
| Patrick Spencer | Central Suffolk and North Ipswich | 100% |
| James McMurdock | South Basildon and East Thurrock | 100% |
RefReform UK
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Andrew Rosindell | Romford | 100% |
| Lee Anderson | Ashfield | 100% |
| Richard Tice | Boston and Skegness | 100% |
Mapping each Westminster issue to the equivalent council service bucket (so “Armed Forces Support” → the matching service line on council finance, with the ranked-spend table this section wants) is its own taxonomy job. Council service spend lives on the council pages today; cross-cut by issue here in a follow-on pass.