Members back meat import ban and ministerial prosecutions, but only just vote to scrap two-doctor abortion rule

The day's tightest contest was also its most delicate: Should abortion be available without needing two doctors to sign it off? Yes only just carried, and the most-respected Yes case was just two words, "Outdated nonsense." The top No argument was a patient-safety point that explicitly set autonomy aside, which suggests the losing side was arguing a different question from the winning one.

Elsewhere, members were rather more decisive.

The verdicts

Should the UK ban imports of meat and eggs produced in ways that are illegal on British farms? Yes won overwhelmingly, on a plain fairness case: if British farmers must pay for higher welfare, what is the point of the rules if imports can undercut them? Even the sole starred No case agreed.

Accountability was the other big theme. Should ministers face prosecution for misleading the public about protecting care homes during Covid? Yes won overwhelmingly, with one voter insisting "Accountability is the mother of Trust". The most-respected No case warned that it sounds great to say yes, but ignores the pressure of government decisions.

On order and security, members were comfortable but cautious. Should the army be called in if the UK faces riots like those in France? Yes won comfortably, though many Yes voters hedged it as a last resort, and the No side answered with a warning about fanning flames. Was the UK right to send RAF fighter jets to defend Saudi Arabia from Houthi attacks? Yes also won comfortably, yet the most-respected argument of the entire debate came from No, asking why help Riyadh against one Iranian proxy while denying it to the US and Israel against others.

The money questions produced some awkward majorities. Should the Budget prioritise paying down the £3 trillion national debt over tax cuts? Yes won comfortably, although the sharpest No lines called it a false binary choice. Should the Budget use taxpayers' money to scrap gas standing charges? Members voted against, yet barely anyone defended the charge itself: the No case was a refusal to pay out twice to bribe the energy firms, and even the top Yes case wanted the firms to foot the bill.

Finally, Should MPs and government departments stop using X, formerly Twitter? Members comfortably voted against, with the sharpest No line an invitation: "We need them to keep exposing themselves." Many No voters added one condition, no switching off replies.

A fresh ballot opens today, and members have shown no sign of running out of opinions.

Have your say

Every verdict above was decided by people like you. See the full results →

Today's referendums are already live. Cast your vote — or create an account and be counted.