May 2026

Kate Osamor voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Tulip Siddiq voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Gavin Robinson voted AYE on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Nick Smith voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Jim Shannon voted AYE on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Bambos Charalambous voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

I will start by addressing comments made by Members on the Opposition Benches, in particular the hon. Members for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) and for Isle of Wight East (Joe Robertson), who decried Government policy on energy as ideological. I hold my hands up and say that, for me, it is ideological: making the UK more secure and making people better off is at the very core of my ideology. I would class that as ideological.

You were very clear about taking interventions, Madam Deputy Speaker. Although I do normally appreciate the right hon. Gentleman’s contributions, this time I will not—[Interruption.] As he asked so nicely, I will let him.

I think the right hon. Gentleman unintentionally misrepresents Government policy, as it is my understanding that we will continue to use oil and gas, and it will play a key part in the just transition. Events in the middle east have made it very clear and have reminded us that national security and energy security go hand in hand. When global events destabilise supply, it is families here at home who feel the impact on their energy bills. We must therefore prioritise energy independence, which i

Stephanie Peacock voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Preet Kaur Gill voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

I have to say, I share a good deal of the Secretary of State’s frustration, not least because I was one of those who argued at the time that if the speed of the railway was reduced to roughly what she is proposing, it would open up a number of alternative route options, avoiding the open countryside that the line now cuts across. Can I counter-intuitively ask her to be a little more ambitious, despite everything she has said about high-speed rail? She will recognise that the strategic benefits o

(Urgent Question): To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement on the Government’s approach to redacting or withholding documents within scope of the Humble Address agreed by the House on 4 February 2026.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question, and I thank the Minister for what he has said. As you and the House know, the Intelligence and Security Committee has been considering redactions to documents on the grounds that, if unredacted, those documents may prejudice national security or international relations. It has become apparent to us that the Government also intend to redact documents for other reasons not specifically permitted in the Humble Address or, in some cases, to w

Patrick Hurley voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Catherine West voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Gareth Snell voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Michelle Scrogham voted NO on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)

Parliamentary appearance by Sir Alec Shelbrooke

Mary Glindon voted AYE on 'King's Speech Motion for an Address: amendment (i)' (108-323, defeated)