National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 5B
311Ayes
192Noes
Carried · majority 119 · Government won144 did not vote
647 Members · Aye 311 · No 192 · DNV 144 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
MPs voted on 25 March 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 5B to the National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill. The amendment, passed by the House of Lords, would have given the government the power to exempt certain health and care providers, including hospices, GP practices, NHS-commissioned dentists and pharmacists, and charitable health and care organisations, from the increase in employer National Insurance contributions. The motion to disagree with the Lords passed by 311 votes to 192. The Bill raises employer National Insurance from 13.8% to 15% and lowers the earnings threshold at which employers become liable from £9,100 to £5,000 per year, both taking effect from April 2025. The rejected amendment would not itself have granted an exemption but would have created a legal power for ministers to do so for specific health and care providers. The government argued that accepting any such exemption would require higher borrowing, lower spending elsewhere, or other tax rises to make up the shortfall. Critics argued the tax rise threatens hospice finances in particular, with the Conservative opposition citing Hospice UK warnings that the sector faces costs of up to £30 million per year as a result. Labour MPs voted unanimously in favour of rejecting the Lords amendment, with 308 votes combined from the Labour Party and Labour and Co-operative grouping and no Labour MPs voting against the government. Conservative, Liberal Democrat, SNP, DUP, Reform UK and Plaid Cymru MPs all voted against the motion. Two independents voted with the government. The division was fought on almost identical lines to the vote the same day on Lords Amendment 1B, which covered similar exemption powers and was rejected by 312 to 190.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government rejecting the Lords amendment, keeping the employer NIC rise applied to hospices and health and care providers, on the grounds that exemptions would require higher borrowing, spending cuts or other tax rises
Voting No meant
Support the Lords amendment giving the government power to exempt hospices, GP practices and charitable health and care providers from the employer NIC rise, arguing the tax hike threatens vital services for the most vulnerable
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
276
0
85
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
99
17
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
64
7
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
32
0
10
Independent
—
2
5
6
Scottish National Party
Whipped No
0
9
0
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
5
2
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
0
1
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
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
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) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0