Disability Benefits.
PIP, ESA, and disability support
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 | +39 | 89% on-whip · 329 MPs | |
| Liberal Democrats | LD | -50 | 0% on-whip · 62 MPs | |
| Labour and Co-operative Party | Lab | +45 | 95% on-whip · 40 MPs | |
| Independent | Ind | -23 | 27% on-whip · 11 MPs | |
| Scottish National Party | SNP | -50 | 0% on-whip · 9 MPs |
Source · Hansard · alignment is the share of party MPs who voted with the party majority on tagged divisions
| Date | Motion | Aye | No | Carried |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 Jul 2025 | Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill Committee: Clause 2, as amended, and Clause 3 stand part Aye: Support the government's proposal to reduce the UC health top-up for new claimants from November 2026, while ring-fencing protection for existing claimants, severely ill people, and those who are terminally ill. · No: Oppose cutting the UC health element for new claimants, arguing it will harm disabled people and those with long-term health conditions who rely on the benefit. | 334 | 137 | Yes |
All 1 divisions on this issue →
Mapping each Westminster issue to the equivalent council service bucket (so “Disability Benefits” → 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.