How to Check Your MP’s Voting Record and Expenses

Your MP’s decisions in Parliament can affect taxes, housing, immigration, policing and public services. Yet many voters only see a headline or a short social media clip.

Checking the evidence takes less time than most people expect. You can find how your MP voted, whether they took part in divisions, and what parliamentary costs they claimed. The key is using reliable sources and reading the figures in context.

Key Takeaways

• Use your postcode or constituency to identify the correct MP before checking any records.
• Parliament provides official voting information, while TheyWorkForYou makes it easier to search.
• IPSA publishes MPs’ business costs and expenses, including claims by category and date.
• Attendance, party loyalty and policy positions are different measures, so don’t treat one figure as the whole record.
• Compare votes and expenses over the same period, then check the original source before sharing a claim.

Find the Right MP and the Reliable Sources

Start by confirming who represents your constituency. MPs can change after a general election, by-election or resignation, and constituency boundaries may also change. A search based on an old constituency name can lead you to the wrong person.

TheyWorkForYou lets you enter your postcode and view the MP linked to your address. You can also browse the full list of MPs if you already know the constituency or member’s name.

Once you’ve found the right MP, check the official Parliament member profile as well. Parliament says an individual voting record is available through the member’s biography page under “parliamentary activity”. Its MPs’ voting record guidance also points readers towards Hansard and other official records.

These sources have different strengths. Parliament is the primary source for formal proceedings and division results. TheyWorkForYou presents parliamentary information in a more accessible format and brings votes, speeches and written questions together.

Check the MP’s full name, party and constituency before opening a result. Some MPs have similar names, while search engines can show an old profile or a member from a different Parliament. Record the date you checked, because voting statistics and expenses data change as new information appears.

You should also decide what you want to measure. A general MP voting record might include every division, while a focused search could examine votes on immigration, tax, crime, housing or local government. A clear question produces a more useful answer than a broad search for “good” or “bad” voting.

How to Check an MP’s Voting Record

A formal vote in the House of Commons is called a division. MPs vote “Aye” or “No”, and the result records which members took part. A member may also be recorded as absent, although that label doesn’t explain why they weren’t there.

On an official Parliament profile, look for the section covering parliamentary activity or voting. You can then follow individual divisions and read the related bill, motion or amendment. The wording matters because a vote may concern a narrow procedural point rather than the main principle described in a news report.

TheyWorkForYou is useful for a quicker review. Its MP pages show voting activity, speeches, written questions and other parliamentary work. However, treat its summaries as a starting point. Open the original vote or debate when the issue matters to you.

A voting record can answer several different questions:

• Did the MP take part in a particular division?
• Did they vote with or against their party?
• How often did they vote in divisions?
• Did they speak about the subject?
• Did they introduce questions, amendments or legislation?

Those questions shouldn’t be mixed together. An MP who votes regularly may rarely speak in debates. Another member may speak often but miss a specific division. Parliamentary work also includes committee meetings, constituency casework and written questions, which a simple Aye or No count won’t show.

Party voting deserves careful reading. MPs often follow a party whip, particularly on major government business. A vote against the party may attract attention, but voting with a party doesn’t prove that the MP personally supported every part of a policy. Free votes, procedural divisions and issues with several amendments can all affect the meaning of a result.

If immigration, border control or local representation is your main concern, search for the exact bill or motion and read its text. For a comparison with Reform UK’s stated position, you can review the Reform UK website and its published policy material. Readers interested in housing can also compare parliamentary votes with Reform UK housing policies.

The most reliable approach combines the numerical record with the substance of the vote. A headline saying that an MP “voted for” a policy may leave out an amendment, a separate stage of the bill or a motion with limited legal effect.

How to Check Your MP’s Expenses

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, known as IPSA, publishes official information about MPs’ business costs and expenses. Its searchable database covers claims by MP, constituency, year, month, category and expense type.

Search the MP’s name first, then select the financial year you want to examine. You can narrow the results by categories such as office costs, accommodation, travel or other business expenses. The database also allows users to sort and download information, which helps when comparing several months or years.

The latest complete financial year in July 2026 is 2025-26, which runs from 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026. Some information may still arrive in stages. IPSA normally publishes claims in batches every two months, with data appearing around three months after the relevant period. Annual totals are generally published in September.

That delay matters. A low figure may mean that claims haven’t been published yet, rather than showing that an MP spent little. Always check the reporting period and publication date before drawing a conclusion.

An expense claim isn’t the same as personal income. MPs can claim costs connected with parliamentary work, and a payment may go directly to a supplier, landlord or service provider. Office rent, staff-related costs, equipment, travel and accommodation can all appear in the published data.

Read the description and category beside each amount. A large accommodation figure may relate to the cost of maintaining a base near Parliament, while a travel claim may cover an official journey. The location of an MP’s constituency, the size of the area and their parliamentary responsibilities can affect legitimate costs.

Some sensitive information has limited detail. Security and disability assistance claims are published in aggregate once a year rather than as individual transactions. This protects personal safety and medical privacy, so the public record won’t show every type of support in the same way.

Third-party websites can make IPSA data easier to browse, particularly when you want to compare MPs or constituencies. Still, use IPSA’s own database as the final reference. Aggregated figures may use different dates, categories or definitions, and a chart can hide the detail behind a total.

A high expense total is a reason to inspect the claim, not proof of misconduct. A low total isn’t proof of better performance.

Read Voting and Expense Figures in Context

The simplest way to misread an MP’s record is to turn one number into a verdict. Attendance percentages, rebellion counts and expense totals can help, but each measures only part of a member’s work.

An absence may have several explanations. An MP could be ill, attending a committee, dealing with urgent constituency work or unable to vote because of an agreed pairing arrangement. The public record may show that the member didn’t vote, but it won’t always explain the reason.

Likewise, “rebellion” usually means voting against the majority position expected by the MP’s party. It doesn’t measure whether the MP took a principled stand, made a mistake or supported a different amendment. Read the motion and the party position before using the label.

Compare like with like. Look at the same Parliament, the same time period and the same types of vote. Comparing one MP’s full parliamentary career with another member’s first year produces a distorted result.

Expenses need the same care. Compare similar constituencies and reporting periods, then separate office, staffing, travel and accommodation costs. A rural constituency with long travel distances may produce different claims from a compact urban seat. The figures tell you what was claimed and published, not how effectively the MP dealt with constituents.

The strongest assessment uses several sources:

1. Identify the specific issue and find the related division.
2. Read the official result, motion or bill text.
3. Check the MP’s attendance and voting pattern over a reasonable period.
4. Review the matching IPSA expense data and keep the categories separate.
5. Look for the MP’s explanation, speech, written statement or local response.

This approach also helps when political parties publish their own claims about MPs. Party websites and campaign material can show a party’s position, but they shouldn’t replace the parliamentary record. Use each source for what it can establish, then compare the evidence.

Build a Clear Record You Can Recheck

If an issue matters to you, keep a short note with the vote date, bill or motion title, the MP’s vote and the source link. Add the expense period, category and amount when reviewing claims. This prevents a strong figure from being separated from the date or context that gives it meaning.

A spreadsheet can help you track several votes without relying on memory. Use separate columns for attendance, vote choice, party position and your own comments. For expenses, keep office costs, accommodation, travel and other categories apart.

Review the record after major votes or when new IPSA data is published. Don’t treat every parliamentary division as equally important. Focus on issues that affect your household, workplace, community or political priorities.

When you share a finding, include the date and the original source. A precise statement such as “the MP voted No in this division on this date” is more useful than a sweeping claim about their entire record.

Conclusion

Checking an MP voting record and expenses is a practical way to judge representation with evidence rather than slogans. Parliament and TheyWorkForYou can show how a member participated, while IPSA records the business costs claimed during a defined period.

The fairest assessment looks beyond one vote or one total. Read the motion, check the dates, compare similar records and separate legitimate parliamentary costs from claims that deserve further questions. Your MP’s public record is there to be examined, and careful scrutiny gives voters a clearer basis for deciding whether their representative has earned their support.