A divisionDivision No. 140 · Tuesday, 25 March 2025· Commons· Taxation

National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1B

312Ayes
190Noes
Carried · majority 122 · Government won
143 did not vote
Aye313No192DID NOT VOTE · 143

645 Members · Aye 312 · No 190 · DNV 143 · grey dots in centre are abstentions

Analysis
Commons

MPs voted 312 to 190 on 25 March 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 1B to the National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill. The amendment, which the House of Lords had inserted into the Bill for the second time, would have created a power for ministers to exempt certain health and care providers, including hospices, GP practices, NHS-commissioned dentists and pharmacists, and charitable health and care organisations, from the government's increase in employer National Insurance contributions. The Commons voted to disagree with the Lords, removing the exemption power from the Bill. The vote has immediate practical consequences for hospices and other charitable health providers. The Bill raises the employer NICs rate from 13.8% to 15% and lowers the threshold at which employers become liable from £9,100 to £5,000 per year, both taking effect from 6 April 2025. Unlike NHS bodies, hospices and similar charitable providers receive no direct compensation for this additional cost. Opposition MPs cited Hospice UK figures suggesting the changes will cost the hospice sector up to £30 million per year, raising concerns about reductions in services for people at the end of life. The government argued that granting exemptions would require higher borrowing, lower spending elsewhere, or alternative tax rises, and pointed to a £100 million capital fund and £26 million in revenue support for hospices as the appropriate form of assistance. Party lines held almost completely. All 310 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted supported the government's position; none voted against. The 100 Conservatives, 64 Liberal Democrats, 8 SNP members, 5 DUP members, 4 Plaid Cymru members and 4 Reform UK members who voted all opposed the motion. Two independents voted with the government and four against. The vote formed part of a parliamentary ping-pong process, in which the Lords had already sent back the same exemption a second time after the Commons rejected it the previous week. A related division on the same day, Division 140's companion vote on Lords Amendment 21B, produced a similar result of 314 to 196.

Voting Aye meant
Support the government's decision to raise employer National Insurance on hospices and care providers without exemption, accepting that the fiscal cost of exemptions is too high and that existing grants to the hospice sector are sufficient compensation.
Voting No meant
Oppose applying the employer National Insurance rise to hospices and charitable health and care providers, arguing the £30 million annual cost threatens vital services for the dying and most vulnerable, and that an exemption power should be available to ministers.
§ 01Who voted how.502 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
278
0
83
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
100
16
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
63
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
32
0
10
Independent
2
5
6
Scottish National Party
Whipped No
0
8
1
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
4
3
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
5
0
Green Party of England and Wales
0
0
4
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Your Party
1
1
0
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Restore Britain
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
0

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

§ 02From the debate.8 principal speakers
James MurraySupportiveEaling North
Government must reject amendments 1B, 5B, 8B and 21B as they undermine £24bn funding target; exemptions would require higher borrowing, lower spending or other tax rises; approach mirrors Conservative health and social care levy policy.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,713 words)
Gareth DaviesOpposedGrantham and Bourne
Amendments essential to protect hospices facing £30m annual cost, children's hospices facing £5m combined cost, and smallest businesses already hit by business rates cuts and Employment Rights Bill red tape.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,943 words)
Daisy CooperOpposedSt Albans
Henry VIII powers in amendments would allow government to exempt health and care providers when growth materializes; capital funding for hospices is insufficient; amendment 8B should empower exemption of small businesses.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (1,137 words)
Sir Roger GaleOpposedHerne Bay and Sandwich
Bill directly taxes jobs in hospices and care sector; government claim of compensation is illusory; hospice care is integral to NHS and should be treated as such; staff reduction is inevitable.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (587 words)
Dave DooganOpposedAngus and Perthshire Glens
Social care, GP, pharmacy and hospice sectors cannot diversify or raise prices; government's £24bn fiscal drag produces only £10bn net benefit and would fall to £8bn if proper exemptions granted; this represents catastrophic policy misadventure.Scottish National Party · Voted no · Read full speech (1,046 words)
Gregory StaffordQuestioningFarnham and Bordon
Inconsistency: NHS England exempted but NHS GPs, dentists not; unclear why public body gets exemption while contractors delivering same services do not.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,136 words)
Jerome MayhewOpposedBroadland and Fakenham
Government's exemption of NHS proves it understands the damage to healthcare; deliberate decision to penalize hospices; perverse that assisted dying funding may come from taxation of palliative care.Conservative · Voted teller_no · Read full speech (469 words)
Sir Edward LeighOpposedGainsborough
St Barnabas hospice in Lincoln losing £300,000 annually; government health settlement does not compensate; contradicts commitment to palliative care expressed in assisted dying debates.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (86 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