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 · 226 MPs | |
| Conservative and Unionist Party | Con | +50 | 100% on-whip · 83 MPs | |
| Liberal Democrats | LD | 0 | 50% on-whip · 57 MPs | |
| Labour and Co-operative Party | Lab | -50 | 0% on-whip · 26 MPs | |
| Green Party of England and Wales | Grn | -50 | 0% on-whip · 5 MPs | |
| Plaid Cymru | Plaid | 0 | 50% on-whip · 4 MPs | |
| Independent | Ind | -7 | 43% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17 Jun 2026 | National Security (State Threats) Bill Committee: Amendment 8 Aye: Support Amendment 8 to the National Security (State Threats) Bill as tabled in Committee · No: Oppose Amendment 8, preferring the Bill to proceed without this change | 144 | 249 | No |
| 17 Jun 2026 | National Security (State Threats) Bill Committee: Amendment 3 Aye: Support the amendment, seeking to preserve judicial oversight and ensure the new state threats powers remain subject to human rights-based legal challenge · No: Oppose the amendment, backing the government's version of the bill without the additional judicial oversight safeguard | 87 | 320 | No |
All 2 divisions on this issue →
Mapping each Westminster issue to the equivalent council service bucket (so “Counter-Terrorism Policy” → 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.