Aviation.
Airports and air travel policy
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 · 284 MPs | |
| Conservative and Unionist Party | Con | +50 | 100% on-whip · 89 MPs | |
| Liberal Democrats | LD | +50 | 100% on-whip · 60 MPs | |
| Labour and Co-operative Party | Ind | -50 | 0% on-whip · 32 MPs | |
| Independent | Ind | +7 | 57% on-whip · 10 MPs | |
| Scottish National Party | SNP | +50 | 100% on-whip · 4 MPs | |
| Plaid Cymru | Plaid | +50 | 100% on-whip · 4 MPs |
Source · Hansard · alignment is the share of party MPs who voted with the party majority on tagged divisions
| Date | Motion | Aye | No | Carried |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 Oct 2025 | Sustainable Aviation Fuel Remaining Stages: Amendment 9 Aye: Support requiring the government to regularly review and report on how sustainable aviation fuel mandates affect passenger costs and the affordability of flying · No: Oppose the mandatory cost-impact review requirement, trusting the existing framework to balance green aviation targets without additional reporting obligations on passenger affordability | 160 | 321 | No |
| 15 Oct 2025 | Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill Remaining Stages: New Clause 5 Aye: Support requiring the government to publish a review of SAF feedstock supply, including assessing the impact of bioethanol plant closures, to ensure the UK can meet its sustainable aviation fuel targets · No: Oppose the additional review requirement, arguing it duplicates existing measures in the SAF mandate and that the global bioethanol market means UK plant closures would not significantly affect SAF production | 80 | 315 | No |
| 15 Oct 2025 | Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill Remaining Stages: Amendment 8 Aye: Support requiring a formal review of how sustainable aviation fuel costs are passed on to passengers, ensuring affordability and cost of living impacts are considered · No: Oppose the amendment, arguing existing SAF mandate provisions already address these concerns and a separate cost review is unnecessary or duplicative | 152 | 317 | No |
All 3 divisions on this issue →
By party, the MPs whose voting record on aviation 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jonathan Hinder | Pendle and Clitheroe | 33% |
| Barry Gardiner | Brent West | 0% |
| Stephen Timms | East Ham | 0% |
LDLiberal Democrats
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Andrew George | St Ives | 100% |
| Tessa Munt | Wells and Mendip Hills | 100% |
| Sarah Olney | Richmond Park | 100% |
IndLabour and Co-operative Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Gareth Thomas | Harrow West | 0% |
| Mark Hendrick | Preston | 0% |
| Meg Hillier | Hackney South and Shoreditch | 0% |
IndIndependent
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Adnan Hussain | Blackburn | 100% |
| Diane Abbott | Hackney North and Stoke Newington | 0% |
| Dan Norris | North East Somerset and Hanham | 0% |
Mapping each Westminster issue to the equivalent council service bucket (so “Aviation” → 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.