This paper seeks to explore speaking virtually in parliamentary proceedings via teleconferencing software may affect legislators’ influence in the debate. Whilst plenty of research has been done on political communication in the virtual environment, which found that political conversation in the virtual environment tends to be more confrontational and less able to make an impression on counterparties, virtual parliament provides a unique opportunity to study how the virtual and physical speech interact with each other under the same context. Using Hansard record of the House of Commons during the COVID-19 pandemic, and by looking at the lexicon similarity between speeches to infer influence, this paper will analyse whether MPs' speeches made via teleconferencing during hybrid proceedings are indeed less influential in the subsequent debate than their colleague who deliver speeches in person. The result find that virtual speeches are more influential than the average physical speech, but this is reverse when MP fixed-effect was included, which suggest a self-selection process where more influential MPs choose to participate virtually might be driving the result. These findings further our understanding of how the virtual environment may shape political conversation as well as inform us of the potential consequences of parliaments adopting virtual proceedings in the future.