← Back to Westminster Hall Debates
Member Defections: Automatic By-elections
16 March 2026
Lead MP
Roz Savage
South Cotswolds
Lib Dem
Responding Minister
Anna Turley
Tags
TaxationDemocracy & Elections
Word Count: 10020
Other Contributors: 5
At a Glance
Roz Savage raised concerns about member defections: automatic by-elections in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key Requests to Government:
The petition asks whether the current constitutional arrangements strike the correct balance between representation, independence, and accountability or if there should be additional democratic mechanisms when an MP decides to switch parties.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
The petition on automatic by-elections following member defections has gathered over 129,000 signatures. It reflects a crisis of confidence in democracy where voters suspect MPs might represent their own interests rather than those of their constituents. The debate touches upon the complexity of voter decision-making and the role of political parties in elections.
Charlie Dewhirst
Con
Bridlington and The Wolds
Acknowledges the frustration of voters when MPs defect but argues that automatic by-elections could undermine MPs' standing as elected representatives. He supports the principle of first-past-the-post voting system which ensures a direct link between MPs and their constituents.
Graham Stringer
Lab
Blackley and Middleton South
I agree with my hon. Friend's arguments until he got to the point about Prime Ministers, because is it not a consistent position that if a hon. Member changes their political party there should be a by-election, therefore if there is a change in leader, as the Conservatives have got into the habit of doing, there should be a general election? I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving away again and I do not wish to push this point too far, but if people vote on the basis of the political party and its leader's name, then a change in leadership should lead to a general election. I am sure that everybody in this room is familiar with the arguments for and against PR. In moving the motion, the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) gave a very balanced speech. There was only one thing that I thought was unbalanced: the argument that somehow there would be less tactical voting in a PR system. A PR system is actually set up and designed for tactical voting. Noted a constitutional precedent for by-elections when Members change political parties or join the Cabinet, referencing Winston Churchill's loss in a Manchester by-election before World War I.
John Lamont
Con
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk
Over the years, some former Conservative colleagues have ended up alongside Lib Dems in the House of Commons. In such cases, should there have been a by-election for these MPs to reaffirm their mandates? My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. I do not want to downplay his greatness as a local constituency MP, but I am sure that, like me, he recalls the 2019 election in which he was first elected, and how many conversations we had with voters on the doorstep about the relative merits of Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister. That undoubtedly was the biggest issue driving people to vote, alongside the desire to get Brexit done. The key difference is surely that MPs are elected by their constituents, but the Prime Minister is appointed by the monarch based on who can command the confidence of the House of Commons. We do not have a presidential system. Will the hon. Lady give way? It is. Does the hon. Lady not recognise that we have had that debate in the UK? Part of Nick Clegg and David Cameron's coalition agreement was a referendum on the alternative vote, and the British people rejected it in very large numbers. He thanked the Minister for her analysis but challenged whether she applies similar logic to Labour colleagues who lose their Whip due to non-compliance with government policy. He also asked the Minister to clarify a potential contradiction in her stance on by-elections at the point of defection.
Lisa Smart
Lib Dem
Hazel Grove
Ms Smart discussed the pattern of former Conservative MPs defecting to Reform UK and expressed concern about public trust being eroded. She highlighted over 130,000 signatures on a petition demanding automatic by-elections when MPs switch parties and mentioned that nearly 200 in her Hazel Grove constituency had signed it. Ms Smart also emphasized the need for electoral reform to ensure fair representation and advocated for proportional representation systems. Suggested that proportional representation voting systems have not been discussed enough and can retain constituency links. Hour.
Robbie Moore
Con
Keighley and Ilkley
All political parties undertake extensive data collection on their voter base, which shows that most people vote based on the political party rather than individual candidates. Therefore, triggering a by-election due to defections is important to ensure voters are represented by someone who reflects how they cast their votes. Mr. Moore argued that when a Member of Parliament changes political affiliation, it undermines voter trust. He cited his own election experiences in Keighley and Ilkley, noting the importance of both local representation and national party loyalty. Mr. Moore highlighted that electoral votes often reflect support for a political party as much as an individual candidate, emphasizing the need to maintain clear boundaries between parties when MPs defect. Before the hon. Member gets on to how we should change the whole system, I am keen to understand the Liberal Democrats' view on the petition specifically. Should a defection trigger a by-election? Asked about the advantage of standing under a political party brand compared to as an independent. He questioned the sincerity of Ministers when they claim to have listened carefully to debate contributions, suggesting that such claims are often made despite pre-written speeches. He also raised concerns about fairness to the electoral base if Members change political allegiance during Parliament.
Government Response
Anna Turley
Government Response
I thank the hon. Member for South Cotswolds and others for their contributions to the debate on automatic by-elections following member defections. The public voted for change at the last general election due to numerous Conservative-led by-elections caused by scandals, misconduct, and bullying. While I respect the concerns of petitioners who feel that a party defection warrants a by-election, I argue that it is up to MPs themselves to examine their conscience regarding their relationship with voters rather than imposing such requirements through legislation. The British public should have faith in assessing an MP's decision based on evidence presented, including whether they jumped ship out of principle or political ambition.
I stress the importance of party politics for achieving shared values and collective action, citing historical examples where Labour has fought for ordinary people's rights and opportunities. Parties can evolve over time, but MPs should remain accountable to their constituents rather than being solely accountable to party leaders in Westminster. A by-election following a defection would disrupt constituency representation and divert focus from local issues to election campaigning.
The Recall of MPs Act 2015 already provides mechanisms for triggering by-elections due to custodial sentences, suspensions, or false expenses claims, which I believe strike the right balance in our democracy. Adding defections to this list would undermine political integrity and conflate political disagreement with ethical misconduct. Ultimately, the public should judge an MP's actions through general elections rather than mandating automatic by-elections.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About Westminster Hall Debates
Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.