Where can you find online the voting records for the both Houses of the UK Parliament?

Where can you find online the voting records for the both Houses of the UK Parliament?

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

I wish to see online, for any past Bill of Parliament, in the House of Commons:

which MPs (in the House of Commons) and which peers (in the House of Lords) voted in favour and in opposition.

For instance, I desire this information for Bills that failed to abolish slavery:

But time was lost during the lengthy inquiries by the privy council committee for trade and plantations (1788) and by the Commons itself (1789-1790), and Wilberforce's motion for abolition was disappointingly defeated by 163 to 88 votes in 1791. In the following year, a compromise was reached in the Commons whereby the trade was to be prohibited from 1796.

These were partial measures which only slightly improved the horrific conditions experienced during the notorious middle passage.

The House of Lords stalled the motion pending its own inquiry, which was eventually allowed to lapse because of the wars against revolutionary France. Wilberforce introduced an abolition motion in most subsequent sessions, and these were occasionally lost by only narrow margins, including by only four votes in 1796, when several supporters had deserted the chamber for the pleasures of the opera house.

and the successful Slave Trade Act 1807:

The effect of Stephen's 1806 act was to reduce the trade by two-thirds, paving the way for the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act in February 1807. The Prime Minister, Lord Grenville, introduced the Slave Trade Abolition Bill in the House of Lords on the 2nd January 1807 when it received a first reading. The House of Lords, voted for the abolition of the slave trade on 5th February by 100 votes to 34; after an impassioned speech by the Prime minister, despite opposition from the West India Lobby. The bill was debated for ten hours in the House of Commons on 23rd February. At 4am the next morning the House voted in favour of the Bill by 283 votes to 16. Finally on 25 March 1807 the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act received its royal assent, abolishing the slave trade in the British colonies and making it illegal to carry enslaved people in British ships.

These records are not kept, and never have been kept, because Divisions of the House (both Lords or Commons) are not, and never have been, by roll call. The exact procedure is nicely summarized in Wikipedia, but the crux is that only total votes for and against have ever been recorded, and those only when a voice vote has been unclear.

In the case of the Commons, after the Speaker has made the first announcement of a division, due to a voice vote being unclear, the bells are rung continuously to summon members to vote, until eight minutes later when the doors of the House are locked. The members then file through doors into two separate division lobbies, counted as they pass through.

In exceptional cases a process known as nodding through makes special provision to count Members who can be verified to be physically within the boundaries of the Palace of Westminster, and alive, but physically unable to actually walk through a door of division:

I remember the famous case of Leslie Spriggs, the then Member for St. Helens. We had a tied vote and he was brought to the House in an ambulance having suffered a severe heart attack. The two Whips went out to look in the ambulance and there was Leslie Spriggs laid there as though he was dead. I believe that John Stradling Thomas said to Joe Harper, "How do we know that he is alive?" So he leaned forward, turned the knob on the heart machine, the green light went around, and he said, "There, you've lost - it's 311.".

More commonly, Members who know they will be absent for an upcoming vote will pair off with a Member known to support the opposite side, both agreeing not to participate in the upcoming vote so that one or both may travel from the vicinity of Westminster to attend to official Parliamentary business. The respective Party Whips will enforce the pairing off, as this practice is beneficial to all parties, averaged over time.

The process for the House of Lords is structured similarly but varies in some of the details.

The historical Hansard transcripts record the results of Divisions, but a quick search was unable to find one where the tally of the votes for and against was recorded - presumably it is recorded whenever a voice vote was insufficient to determine the Motion.

UK Parliamentary History Collections

Find out more about UK Parliamentary History Collections in the IHR Wohl Library. Our collections focus on published primary sources, and the main coverage here is the official records of Parliament, and edited versions. We also hold a substantial collection of guides, bibliographies, periodicals and reference works, including biographical material.

Theresa May&rsquos voting in Parliament

Theresa May is a Conservative MP, and on the vast majority of issues votes the same way as other Conservative MPs.

However, Theresa May sometimes differs from their party colleagues, such as:

  • Theresa May generally voted for a wholly elected House of Lords most current Conservative MPs generally voted against. Show votes8 votes for, 5 votes against, 1 absence, between 2003&ndash2016. Conservative, 14 votes, between 2003–2016

We have lots more plain English analysis of Theresa May&rsquos voting record on issues like health, welfare, taxation and more. Visit Theresa May&rsquos full vote analysis page for more.

Theresa May has hardly ever rebelled against their party in the current parliament. Find out more.

Join GovTrack&rsquos Advisory Community

We’re looking to learn more about who uses GovTrack and what features you find helpful or think could be improved. If you can, please take a few minutes to help us improve GovTrack for users like you.

Start by telling us more about yourself:

I&rsquom a lobbyist, advocate, or other professional. I&rsquom a young person (younger than 26 years old). I&rsquom a member of a minority or disadvantaged group. I&rsquom a teacher, librarian, or other educator. Other

We hope to make GovTrack more useful to policy professionals like you. Please sign up for our advisory group to be a part of making GovTrack a better tool for what you do.

Young Americans have historically been the least involved in politics, despite the huge consequences policies can have on them. By joining our advisory group, you can help us make GovTrack more useful and engaging to young voters like you.

Our mission is to empower every American with the tools to understand and impact Congress. We hope that with your input we can make GovTrack more accessible to minority and disadvantaged communities who we may currently struggle to reach. Please join our advisory group to let us know what more we can do.

We love educating Americans about how their government works too! Please help us make GovTrack better address the needs of educators by joining our advisory group.

Would you like to join our advisory group to work with us on the future of GovTrack?

Email address where we can reach you:

Thank you for joining the GovTrack Advisory Community! We&rsquoll be in touch.

What is the Electoral College?

The Electoral College website now has an easy-to-remember address. Make sure to update your bookmarks!

The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The Founding Fathers established it in the Constitution, in part, as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens.

What is the process?

The Electoral College process consists of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress.

How many electors are there? How are they distributed among the States?

The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President. Your State has the same number of electors as it does Members in its Congressional delegation: one for each Member in the House of Representatives plus two Senators. Read more about the allocation of electoral votes.

The District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a State for purposes of the Electoral College under the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution. For this reason, in the following discussion, the word “State” also refers to the District of Columbia and “Governor” to the Mayor of the District of Columbia.

How are my electors chosen? What are their qualifications? How do they decide who to vote for?

Each candidate running for President in your State has his or her own group of electors (known as a slate). The slates are generally chosen by the candidate’s political party in your State, but State laws vary on how the electors are selected and what their responsibilities are. Read more about the qualifications of the electors and restrictions on who the electors may vote for.

What happens in the general election? Why should I vote?

The general election is held every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. When you vote for a Presidential candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's preferred electors. Learn more about voting for the electors.

Most States have a “winner-take-all” system that awards all electors to the Presidential candidate who wins the State's popular vote. However, Maine and Nebraska each have a variation of “proportional representation.” Read more about the allocation of electors among the States.

What happens after the general election?

After the general election, your Governor prepares a Certificate of Ascertainment listing the names of all the individuals on the slates for each candidate. The Certificate of Ascertainment also lists the number of votes each individual received and shows which individuals were appointed as your State's electors. Your State’s Certificate of Ascertainment is sent to NARA as part of the official records of the Presidential election.

The meeting of the electors takes place on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December after the general election. The electors meet in their respective States, where they cast their votes for President and Vice President on separate ballots. Your State’s electors’ votes are recorded on a Certificate of Vote, which is prepared at the meeting by the electors. Your State’s Certificate of Vote is sent to Congress, where the votes are counted, and NARA, as part of the official records of the Presidential election.

Each State’s electoral votes are counted in a joint session of Congress on the 6th of January in the year following the meeting of the electors. Members of the House and Senate meet in the House Chamber to conduct the official count of electoral votes. The Vice President, as President of the Senate, presides over the count and announces the results of the vote. The President of the Senate then declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.

The President-elect takes the oath of office and is sworn in as President of the United States on January 20th in the year following the general election.

. a Process, not a Place

The Office of the Federal Register (OFR) is a part of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and, on behalf of the Archivist of the United States, coordinates certain functions of the Electoral College between the States and Congress. It has no role in appointing electors and has no contact with them.

Opportunities and challenges

There are both opportunities and limitations with the adventure thread model. It presents a chance to think not just about the factual side of the suffrage movement but also to put yourself in someone’s else’s shoes, following Rose through as many different parts of the suffrage movement as possible. Using the archive material presented in this way, we can start to think about the thoughts and feelings of individuals involved.

Extract from The Illustrated London News depicting suffragettes outside the House of Commons ‘to persuade members to vote in favour of women’s suffrage’, 1 February 1913. Catalogue ref: ZPER 34/142

So in over 200 tweets, did we do the whole suffrage movement justice? Of course not! The movement for women’s suffrage was complex, multi-faceted and happened over decades. We hope that the scale of the thread gives a sense of that.

Have we inspired new interest in the movement, and driven people to find out more, in a fun and engaging way? We hope so! After all, these histories deserve to be told and creative uses of social media allow us to explore these experiences in new ways and introduce them to new audiences.

Whether you agree with the actions of suffrage campaigners or not, hopefully this ‘choose your own adventure’ thread has helped you think about the difficult choices they had to make. How far would you go to have the same voting rights as men?

With thanks to the team at Egham Museum for its support in talking to us about its experiences of creating a ‘choose your own adventure’ thread, and to the organisations referenced above for showing that Twitter can be used to tell immersive stories. Your help was invaluable.

If you want to find out more about the resources we have relating to the women’s suffrage movement, you can view our Suffrage 100 webpages, or if you are tempted to undertake some research yourself, you can view our research guide on How to look for records relating to the women’s suffrage movement.

Passing the annual budget is one of the most important tasks of the Houses of the Oireachtas. Find out more about what happens on budget day and access videos, debates and other resources.

Last updated: 2 October 2020

Cookies on
We use cookies to ensure our website works well. We'd like to use analytics and functionality cookies to help us improve it but we require your consent to do so. If you don’t consent, only necessary cookies will be used. Read more about our cookies

You need to update your browser. Your browser is out of date and some features of this web site may not display correctly.

Please upgrade to the latest version of one of these free browsers: Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari or Chrome.

You need to update your browser. Your browser is out of date and some features of this web site may not display correctly.

Please upgrade to the latest version of one of these free browsers: Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari or Chrome.

How to Research the History of Your House

This article was co-authored by our trained team of editors and researchers who validated it for accuracy and comprehensiveness. wikiHow's Content Management Team carefully monitors the work from our editorial staff to ensure that each article is backed by trusted research and meets our high quality standards.

There are 16 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page.

This article has been viewed 1,536,755 times.

If you own an older home, you've probably at some point wondered who slept in your bedroom long before you, when your plumbing was last updated, or why that ghost keeps hiding your car keys. Researching the history of your house is not only an exciting trip into the past, but it can tell you how the house is built and give you clues as to how it should be maintained. You can research the history of your house by examining the house itself, looking at government records, and reading through historical archives maintained for your city or town. [1] X Research source

They Would Be Heard: How African American Women Mobilized for Voting Rights

African American women faced racial divisions within the suffrage movement. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. explores their fight to overcome obstacles to the ballot.

Today, when we think of how to make our voices heard from city hall to Washington, most of us probably think of casting ballots on Election Day. Voting is the essence of being—and acting—as a citizen. Yet, the black heroines of our history show us that, even when our rights are unjustly suppressed, there are thunderous other ways to resist. From our founding through the 19th century and most of the 20th century, discriminatory laws excluded African American women in the South from the body politic. After the Civil War, when the 15th Amendment was ratified banning racial discrimination in voting, it only protected the rights of men (though those, too, would be rolled back in practice under Jim Crow).Even after the 19th Amendment made it possible for women to vote, discriminatory state laws kept black women and men out of the voting booth. In short, being a woman kept the blessings of one amendment out of reach, while being black in the former Confederate states stripped away the other.

But that is not the end of the story.

Even though they couldn’t vote, black women acted politically in other, often subversive ways. Take for instance the great Ida B. Wells-Barnett (also known as Ida B. Wells), the journalist and founder of the Free Speech newspaper in Memphis, Tennessee. Wells-Barnett could not vote out the elected officials who did nothing to stop, and in some cases even encouraged, the lynching of African Americans. She protested in other ways, through the courts, and through her pathbreaking work as an investigative reporter.

Black women demonstrated their political prowess in the summer of 1881, when 20 African American laundresses in Atlanta organized the Washing Society, a union, to negotiate higher pay and force employers to treat them with greater respect. They called for a strike, and 3,000 strikers and sympathizers joined the cause in the first three weeks. On August 1, the city passed a punitive $25 licensing fee for laundry services, but the strikers surprised the government by agreeing to pay it so that “We will have full control of the city’s washing at our own prices, as the city has control of our husbands’ work at their prices. . . . We mean business this week or no washing.” The city withdrew the fee two weeks later.

Black women laborers also used their resources and community status to work politically. In August 1896, ex-slave and Nashville washerwoman Callie House founded the National Ex-Slave Mutual Relief, Bounty and Pension Association of the United States of America, which provided mutual aid for black communities and even called for an early form of reparations. The association held its first convention in the fall of 1898. Along with Isaiah Dickerson, a schoolteacher and minister, House traveled the South forming chapters. The organization counted an estimated 300,000 members by World War I.

Black women tried to fill the political gaps left empty when black men were disenfranchised. As Glenda Gilmore has argued, white men viewed black women as less of a threat then black men, which allowed black women some measure of freedom in their own spaces. Black women organized women’s clubs and associations, combatted male alcoholism through the temperance movement, and organized through their churches. Middle-class African American women utilized the “politics of respectability,” as coined by the brilliant historian Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham, marshaling their education and status to form allegiances with white women and influence white politics without seeming overtly political.

From the pen to the picket line, the courthouse to the club hall, African American women at the nadir of race relations in our history found ways to make their voices heard, despite being denied their most fundamental citizenship right, and as we commemorate the anniversaries of the 15th and 19th Amendments this year, we must also remember those who fell through the cracks and still found a way to resist injustice.

Medical Records

The County Asylums website includes information about the local authority funded mental hospitals in London (both the City of London and the 1889-1963 London County Council) and in Middlesex.

Simon Forman, the notorious London astrologer, recorded 10,000 consultations between 1596 and 1603. Most of these are medical. Forman's casebooks can now be searched by name (of any party involved), date, sex, age, topic of consultation and many other criteria. The edition includes images of all the manuscript pages of Forman's first volume, and more will follow. They are available from the Casebooks Project at the Department of History and Philosophy of Science of the University of Cambridge