Information between 17th January 2026 - 6th February 2026
Note: This sample does not contain the most recent 2 weeks of information. Up to date samples can only be viewed by Subscribers.
Click here to view Subscription options.
| Division Votes |
|---|
|
20 Jan 2026 - Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 95 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 347 Noes - 185 |
|
20 Jan 2026 - Sentencing Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 97 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 319 Noes - 127 |
|
20 Jan 2026 - Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 97 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 344 Noes - 182 |
|
20 Jan 2026 - Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 97 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 347 Noes - 184 |
|
27 Jan 2026 - Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 80 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 88 Noes - 310 |
|
27 Jan 2026 - Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 82 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 91 Noes - 378 |
|
21 Jan 2026 - National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 98 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 316 Noes - 194 |
|
21 Jan 2026 - National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 98 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 195 Noes - 317 |
|
21 Jan 2026 - National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 95 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 191 Noes - 326 |
|
21 Jan 2026 - Northern Ireland Troubles: Legacy and Reconciliation - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 88 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 373 Noes - 106 |
|
28 Jan 2026 - Youth Unemployment - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 89 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 91 Noes - 287 |
|
28 Jan 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 91 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 294 Noes - 108 |
|
27 Jan 2026 - Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill: Committee - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 80 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 88 Noes - 310 |
|
28 Jan 2026 - British Indian Ocean Territory - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 94 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 103 Noes - 284 |
|
27 Jan 2026 - Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill: Committee - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 82 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 91 Noes - 378 |
|
3 Feb 2026 - Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 97 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 458 Noes - 104 |
|
4 Feb 2026 - Climate Change - View Vote Context Nigel Huddleston voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 98 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 392 Noes - 116 |
| Written Answers |
|---|
|
Dairy Products: Nutrition
Asked by: Nigel Huddleston (Conservative - Droitwich and Evesham) Tuesday 20th January 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact on jobs and employment on changes in regulation in the dairy sector, including through the proposed revisions to the Nutrient Profiling Model, the Soft Drinks Industry Levy proposed inclusion of dairy products, the increase to employer’s National Insurance contributions, and packaging taxes. Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) The Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) and National Insurance contributions are the responsibility of HM Treasury and packaging taxes fall under the remit of the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs. The Nutrient Profile Model (NPM) is under the remit of the Department of Health and Social Care. We are committed to updating the standards which underpin the advertising restrictions on television and online and the promotion restrictions in stores and their equivalent places online on ‘less healthy’ food and drink products. The NPM 2004/05 is plainly out of date and updating the standards will strengthen the restrictions by reflecting the latest dietary advice and more effectively target the products of most concern to childhood obesity. An impact assessment will be published alongside a consultation later this year. It was announced at Budget 2025 that milk based and milk substitute drinks, for instance soya, almond, and/or oat, would be included in the scope of the SDIL from 1 January 2028. These reforms are not expected to have any significant macroeconomic impacts, including on employment, on the basis that the levy is limited to soft drinks, and an estimated 11% of United Kingdom soft drink sales will be affected. A full assessment of the impacts of these changes is included within the Strengthening the Soft Drinks Industry Levy – Summary of Responses document. This is available at the following link:
A Tax Information and Impact Note (TIIN) was published alongside the introduction of the bill, containing the changes to employer National Insurance contributions. The TIIN sets out the impact of the policy on the exchequer, the economic impacts of the policy, and the impacts on individuals, businesses, and civil society organisations, as well as an overview of the equality impacts. The Government protected the smallest hospitality businesses from recent changes to employer National Insurance by increasing the Employment Allowance to £10,500.
The Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs published the updated impact assessment of the packaging Extended Producer Responsibility scheme in October 2024, which evaluated the overall effects on packaging producers, without disaggregating by sector. |
|
Dairy Products: Nutrition
Asked by: Nigel Huddleston (Conservative - Droitwich and Evesham) Wednesday 21st January 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what recent discussions his Department has had with Dairy UK and other trade bodies on the potential impact of the revised Nutrient Profiling Model (NPM) for the dairy supply chain. Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) As set out in our 10-Year Health Plan for England: fit for the future, we will take decisive action on the obesity crisis, easing the strain on our National Health Service and creating the healthiest generation of children ever. As part of this, we are committed to updating the standards which underpin the advertising restrictions on television and online and the promotion restrictions in stores and their equivalent places online on ‘less healthy’ food and drink products. The Nutrient Profiling Model (NPM) 2004/05 is plainly out of date and updating the standards will strengthen the restrictions by reflecting the latest dietary advice and more effectively target the products of most concern to childhood obesity. The Government has met with a range of stakeholders over the past year to listen to their concerns, and officials met with Dairy UK in August 2025. The Government remains committed to engaging relevant stakeholders and we will consult this year on the application of an updated NPM’s to the advertising and promotion restrictions to ensure they can feed in their views. |
|
Dairy Products: Labelling
Asked by: Nigel Huddleston (Conservative - Droitwich and Evesham) Thursday 29th January 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential financial implications for the dairy and yoghurt manufacturing industry of redesigning labels and packaging as a result of yoghurt and other dairy-based products being classified as high in fat, sugar, or salt under the revised Nutrient Profiling Model. Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) As set out in our 10-Year Health Plan for England: fit for the future, we will take decisive action on the obesity crisis, easing the strain on our National Heath Service and creating the healthiest generation of children ever. As part of this, we are committed to updating the standards which underpin the advertising restrictions on television and online and the promotions restrictions in stores and their equivalent places online on ‘less healthy’ food and drink products. The Nutrient Profiling Model (NPM) 2004/05 is plainly out of date and updating the standards will strengthen the restrictions by reflecting the latest dietary advice and will more effectively target the products of most concern to childhood obesity. Applying the new NPM to our advertising and promotions policies will further incentivise businesses to reformulate their products, making it easier for consumers to make healthier food choices. We have published guidance to industry on how to determine which food and drink products will be in scope of the advertising and promotions restrictions. Products are classified as ‘less healthy’ for the purpose of the restrictions if they achieve a score within the thresholds of the NPM and fall into one of the categories of food and drink products which are of most concern to childhood obesity, which are set out in the regulations. We will publish a consultation this year to seek stakeholder views on applying the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions on less healthy food and drink products, including an impact assessment of the costs to businesses and intended health outcomes. We set out in the 10-Year Health Plan for England: fit for the future that applying the new NPM to these policies is expected to reduce a further 170,000 cases of childhood obesity. |
|
Dairy Products: Nutrition
Asked by: Nigel Huddleston (Conservative - Droitwich and Evesham) Thursday 29th January 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential financial implications for the dairy and yoghurt manufacturing industry of reformulating products if the revised Nutrient Profiling Model results in yoghurt and other dairy-based products being classified as high in fat, sugar, or salt. Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) As set out in our 10-Year Health Plan for England: fit for the future, we will take decisive action on the obesity crisis, easing the strain on our National Heath Service and creating the healthiest generation of children ever. As part of this, we are committed to updating the standards which underpin the advertising restrictions on television and online and the promotions restrictions in stores and their equivalent places online on ‘less healthy’ food and drink products. The Nutrient Profiling Model (NPM) 2004/05 is plainly out of date and updating the standards will strengthen the restrictions by reflecting the latest dietary advice and will more effectively target the products of most concern to childhood obesity. Applying the new NPM to our advertising and promotions policies will further incentivise businesses to reformulate their products, making it easier for consumers to make healthier food choices. We have published guidance to industry on how to determine which food and drink products will be in scope of the advertising and promotions restrictions. Products are classified as ‘less healthy’ for the purpose of the restrictions if they achieve a score within the thresholds of the NPM and fall into one of the categories of food and drink products which are of most concern to childhood obesity, which are set out in the regulations. We will publish a consultation this year to seek stakeholder views on applying the new NPM to the advertising and promotions restrictions on less healthy food and drink products, including an impact assessment of the costs to businesses and intended health outcomes. We set out in the 10-Year Health Plan for England: fit for the future that applying the new NPM to these policies is expected to reduce a further 170,000 cases of childhood obesity. |
| MP Financial Interests |
|---|
|
2nd February 2026
Nigel Huddleston (Conservative - Droitwich and Evesham) 3. Gifts, benefits and hospitality from UK sources Motorsport UK - £1,200.00 Source |