Agriculture and Rural Affairs
Farming, rural economy, and countryside
Based on 7 parliamentary votes
Sub-issues
How Parties Voted on Agriculture and Rural Affairs
Government alignment shows how often each party voted with the government's stated position. Issue-aligned direction shows agreement with the AI-identified supportive stance.
Recent Votes
| Vote | Result | Date |
|---|---|---|
A Conservative Opposition Day debate motion on rural communities, likely calling on the government to do more to support rural areas. The government voted it down, as is standard practice with opposition motions. Yes = Support greater government attention and resources for rural communities, backing the opposition's criticism of Labour's rural policy · No = Reject the opposition motion, defending the government's existing approach to rural communities and services Govt: No | 107-334 | 7 Jan 2026 |
The government put forward an amendment to change the wording of an opposition-proposed debate motion on seasonal agricultural work, likely to soften or redirect criticism of government policy on seasonal worker visas and rural employment conditions. Yes = Support the government's amended version of the motion on seasonal work, accepting the government's framing of its approach to seasonal agricultural labour · No = Prefer the original opposition motion on seasonal work, signalling dissatisfaction with the government's record or policy on seasonal worker schemes and rural employment Govt: Aye | 319-98 | 10 Dec 2025 |
An opposition party brought a motion on seasonal work to a Commons vote, likely calling on the government to address issues facing seasonal agricultural workers such as visa schemes, pay, or working conditions. The government voted it down. Yes = Support the opposition's position on seasonal work, likely backing improved conditions, visa access, or protections for seasonal agricultural workers · No = Reject the opposition motion on seasonal work, backing the government's existing approach to seasonal labour in agriculture Govt: No | 100-323 | 10 Dec 2025 |
Vote on regulations that reduce the 'delinked payments' made to farmers in England — subsidies that replaced EU-era direct payments after Brexit. These regulations set the schedule for cutting those payments, which are being phased out as part of the transition to a new agricultural support system. Yes = Support proceeding with the planned reduction of delinked farm subsidy payments in England, as part of the government's agricultural transition policy · No = Oppose the reduction in delinked payments, arguing the cuts are too steep, too fast, or harmful to farmers' financial viability Govt: Aye | 297-165 | 31 Mar 2025 |
MPs voted to approve updated regulations governing official controls on imports and border checks, continuing work begun under the previous Conservative government. The vote was largely uncontroversial, though Jim Allister raised concerns about how the underlying EU regulation affects Northern Ireland's constitutional position under the Windsor Framework. Yes = Support updating import control regulations, reducing red tape at the border while maintaining food safety and biosecurity standards · No = Oppose the regulations, primarily on grounds that the underlying EU framework embedded in them undermines Northern Ireland's place in the United Kingdom Govt: Aye | 422-77 | 15 Jan 2025 |
Vote on whether to approve new rules implementing the Windsor Framework's Northern Ireland pet travel scheme, which requires pet owners travelling between Great Britain and Northern Ireland to use pet passports instead of the informal grace period arrangements currently in place. Opponents, including the TUV's Jim Allister, argued this imposes new bureaucratic requirements on travel within the UK that did not previously exist. Yes = Support implementing the Windsor Framework pet travel scheme, accepting that a formal pet passport system is a reasonable and improved arrangement for moving animals between Great Britain and Northern Ireland · No = Oppose the Northern Ireland pet travel scheme, arguing it imposes new restrictions on movement within the United Kingdom that undermine the constitutional integrity of the UK and go beyond the previous grace period arrangements Govt: Aye | 412-16 | 13 Nov 2024 |
An Opposition Day debate brought by the Conservatives calling on the government to take action on farming and food security. Opposition Day motions are proposed by the opposition to embarrass or challenge the government, and a No vote means the government majority defeated the motion. Yes = Support the Conservative motion pressing the government to do more to protect British farming and strengthen food security · No = Reject the Conservative motion, with Labour arguing their own approach to farming and food security is adequate or superior Govt: No | 188-357 | 8 Oct 2024 |
How is this calculated?
Government alignment (primary bar) shows how often a party's MPs voted with the government's stated position on this issue. This is the most comparable metric across parties, as it measures the same reference point for everyone.
Issue-aligned direction (secondary bar) shows how often MPs voted in the direction tagged as supportive of this issue by AI analysis. For example, if a vote is tagged “pro-environment”, a Yes vote counts as aligned. This can be misleading when the tagged direction happens to align with opposition amendments rather than government bills.
Why these metrics may differ: Opposition parties often vote against government bills for strategic or procedural reasons, even when they broadly support the policy area. The government alignment metric makes this clearer by showing the actual voting pattern against a consistent reference.
Source: Commons division data from the UK Parliament Votes API. Alignment direction determined by AI analysis of vote stance tags. Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.