A divisionDivision No. 137 · Wednesday, 19 March 2025· Commons· Taxation

National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill Motion to Disagree with Lords Amendment 21

316Ayes
187Noes
Carried · majority 129 · Government won
143 did not vote
Aye316No189DID NOT VOTE · 143

646 Members · Aye 316 · No 187 · DNV 143 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

Parliament voted on 19 March 2025 to reject Lords amendment 21 to the National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill, overturning a change made by the House of Lords to the government's employer National Insurance legislation. The motion to disagree with the Lords amendment passed by 316 votes to 187. The vote was one of several on the same day concerning Lords amendments 1 to 21, most of which the government also moved to reject. The vote matters because it keeps in place the government's planned increase to employer secondary Class 1 National Insurance contributions, meaning the higher rate and lower threshold for employers will proceed as originally set out. Lords amendment 21 was among a package of amendments seeking to protect certain sectors, particularly health and social care providers including GPs, dentists, pharmacists, social care organisations and hospices, from the full effect of the new rates. By rejecting the Lords amendments, the government confirmed that those independent contractors and charitable providers will not receive the same direct relief that central government departments, local authorities and public corporations will receive to offset their increased costs. Labour MPs voted unanimously in favour of rejecting the Lords amendment, with 282 Labour and 32 Labour and Co-operative members supporting the government position and none voting against. Conservatives (96), Liberal Democrats (62), the Scottish National Party (8), Reform UK (5), Plaid Cymru (4), the Green Party (3) and the Democratic Unionist Party (3) all voted against the government. Two independents voted with the government and six against. There were no notable cross-party rebellions within Labour's ranks. The vote represents a stage in the parliamentary process known as ping-pong, in which the two Houses exchange disagreements over amendments until one House accepts the other's position or a compromise is reached.

Voting Aye meant
Support the government in overturning the Lords' amendment, keeping the original Bill's approach to increasing employer National Insurance contributions
Voting No meant
Support retaining the Lords' amendment, which modified the government's employer National Insurance increase in some way
§ 01Who voted how.503 voting Members · 143 absent

Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.

Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped Aye
281
0
80
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
96
20
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
62
10
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
32
0
10
Independent
3
5
5
Scottish National Party
Whipped No
0
8
1
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
5
2
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
3
2
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
3
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
0
1
0
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
0
Your Party
0
0
1

Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed

§ 02From the debate.7 principal speakers
James MurraySupportiveEaling North
Government must reject all amendments as they risk funding needed to fix inherited fiscal crisis and repair public services; exemptions would require higher borrowing, lower spending, or other tax rises.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,959 words)
Gareth DaviesOpposedGrantham and Bourne
Amendments should be supported to protect healthcare providers, charities, and small businesses; the national insurance rise is a broken manifesto promise that will stifle growth and harm vulnerable sectors.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (2,721 words)
Daisy CooperOpposedSt Albans
All 21 amendments should pass as the jobs tax is self-defeating, robbing Peter to pay Paul by taxing GPs and care providers who prevent hospital admissions; alternative fairer revenue sources exist.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (1,111 words)
Dr Jeevun SandherSupportiveLoughborough
Individual exemptions would compromise tax neutrality, simplicity, and stability; a good tax system treats similar activities similarly and does not introduce cliff-edge perverse incentives.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,233 words)
The tax will devastate children's hospices, care homes, nurseries, and early years providers; costs will cascade to vulnerable families and women disproportionately, and the government shows no compassion.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,432 words)
Wendy MortonOpposedAldridge-Brownhills
Labour broke its manifesto promise on national insurance; the amendments protect essential services and vulnerable people, and the threadbare government benches show Labour does not care.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,145 words)
Dave DooganOpposedAngus and Perthshire Glens
The national insurance increase is an unforced fiscal error; 82% of firms face potential lay-offs, and growth is collapsing; the government should conduct a proper impact assessment as Lords amendment 21 requires.SNP · Voted no · Read full speech (1,024 words)
§ 03Related divisions.Same topic · recent
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0