The topic lensIssue · 18 divisions tagged · 12 parties active

Planning.

Planning policy and development control

TopicPlanning
ParentHousing
RelatedSocial Housing · Renters · Homelessness · House Building
Divisions tagged
18
This parliament
Parties active
12
≥1 vote tagged
Most on-whip
Traditional Unionist Voice
86% aligned
Recent activity
10
Most-recent divisions
§ 01Where the parties sit on planning.18 divisions · this parliament

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.

PartyStance vs neutral midpointNet %Discipline
Labour PartyLab
-347% on-whip · 352 MPs
Conservative and Unionist PartyCon
-446% on-whip · 109 MPs
Liberal DemocratsLD
050% on-whip · 70 MPs
Labour and Co-operative PartyInd
-248% on-whip · 42 MPs
IndependentInd
+656% on-whip · 13 MPs
Reform UKRef
-644% on-whip · 8 MPs
Democratic Unionist PartyDUP
+2373% on-whip · 5 MPs
Plaid CymruPlaid
+1060% on-whip · 4 MPs

Source · Hansard · alignment is the share of party MPs who voted with the party majority on tagged divisions

§ 02Recent planning divisions.last 5 · of 18 tagged
DateMotionAyeNoCarried
13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 37
Aye: Support the government in removing the Lords amendment, trusting ministerial promises to consult on how assets of community value are handled in planning · No: Keep the Lords amendment to enshrine clarity on assets of community value in law, rather than relying on a government promise to consult
255131Yes
13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 33
Aye: Support the government's rejection of the Lords amendment, accepting that existing consultation requirements are sufficient and that the affirmative parliamentary procedure is not needed for the national scheme of delegation · No: Support the Lords amendment, arguing that the Bill concentrates too much power in the Secretary of State and that Parliament should have a formal vote before a national scheme of delegation is introduced
255130Yes
13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1
Aye: Support the government's position of removing the Lords-inserted requirement for enhanced parliamentary scrutiny of major infrastructure projects, prioritising faster delivery of infrastructure · No: Support the Lords amendment requiring stronger parliamentary oversight of major infrastructure decisions, arguing Parliament should have sufficient time to scrutinise projects like HS2 or Heathrow expansion
253137Yes
13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 3
Aye: Support the government's rejection of the Lords amendment, keeping planning processes streamlined without the additional notification and representation requirements the Lords wanted to add. · No: Back the Lords amendment and its additional notification and representation requirements, arguing these provide important safeguards in the planning process.
256131Yes
13 Nov 2025Planning and Infrastructure Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 32
Aye: Support the government's decision to reject Lords Amendment 32, backing the government's approach to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill over the Lords' proposed change · No: Oppose the government's rejection of Lords Amendment 32, believing the Lords' amendment should be retained in the Bill
26780Yes

All 18 divisions on this issue →

§ 03MPs most aligned, by party.Top-3 most-on-whip per major party

By party, the MPs whose voting record on planning is most closely tracking the party majority. A fuller “most active by speech volume + written questions” ranking is pending — needs per-issue speech aggregation.

§ 04Where planning money lands.Council-service mapping pending
Pending — issue-to-service mapping

Mapping each Westminster issue to the equivalent council service bucket (so “Planning” → 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.

Sources, methods & last update
Issue taggingEach division is tagged to one or more issues by Claude classification, reviewed by topic admins.
VotingHansard division lists · Commons Votes API
AlignmentShare of party MPs voting with the party majority on tagged divisions
CohortThis parliament · 18 divisions