National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 8B
313Ayes
194Noes
Carried · majority 119 · Government won138 did not vote
645 Members · Aye 313 · No 194 · DNV 138 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 25 March 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 8B to the National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill, by 313 votes to 194. The amendment, originating in the House of Lords, sought to provide powers to exempt certain health and social care providers from the government's increase in employer National Insurance contributions. By passing this motion to disagree, the Commons overruled the Lords and kept the Bill in its original form, without carving out protections for providers such as GP practices, hospices, care homes, and NHS-commissioned dentists and pharmacists. The vote matters because it determines whether a wide range of independent health and care providers will face the full cost of the government's employer National Insurance changes, which raise the rate from 13.8% to 15% and lower the threshold at which contributions begin from £9,100 to £5,000 per year. Unlike NHS England itself, which receives direct government compensation for these increased costs, providers operating as independent contractors to the NHS do not receive equivalent support. Critics argued this will force hospices, social care companies, GP surgeries, and pharmacies to cut staff or reduce services, potentially increasing pressure on hospitals and ultimately costing the Treasury more in the long run. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously for the government position, with 312 votes in favour collectively and no defections. Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, the SNP, the DUP, Reform UK, Plaid Cymru, and the Greens all voted against, with five Independents also voting no. One Independent voted with the government. The vote forms part of a prolonged back-and-forth between the two chambers, known as parliamentary ping-pong, with the Lords having revised and resubmitted amendments after the Commons rejected earlier versions the previous week. A closely related vote the same day on Lords Amendment 1B produced a near-identical result of 312 to 190, and similar patterns were seen in votes on the Non-Domestic Rating Bill later in March, suggesting the government is consistently using its Commons majority to override Lords modifications to its tax and fiscal legislation.
Voting Aye meant
Support the government's decision to reject the Lords exemption, keeping hospices and social care providers subject to the NI contributions increase
Voting No meant
Back the Lords amendment to exempt hospices and social care providers from the employer NI hike, protecting them from significant additional costs
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
279
0
82
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
99
17
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
65
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
2
2
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
0
1
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
—
0
1
0
Your Party
—
1
0
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