National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill: Second Reading
332Ayes
189Noes
Carried · majority 143 · Government won127 did not vote
648 Members · Aye 332 · No 189 · DNV 127 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 3 December 2024 to give a second reading to the National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill, passing it by 332 votes to 189. A second reading is the first substantive vote on a bill's principles, meaning MPs approved the measure proceeding through Parliament. The bill raises employer National Insurance Contributions from 13.8% to 15%, reduces the per-employee earnings threshold at which employers become liable from £9,100 to £5,000 per year, and doubles the Employment Allowance from £5,000 to £10,500 while removing the previous eligibility cap. The vote advances the government's single largest revenue-raising measure from the October 2024 Budget, intended to fund the NHS and other public services. From 6 April 2025, most employers will pay NICs on a wider portion of each employee's earnings and at a higher rate. The government argues that over half of all employers will pay no more or less than before once the doubled Employment Allowance is factored in, and that small employers can hire up to four workers on the national living wage without paying any NICs at all. Opponents contend the changes will suppress wages, deter hiring, and place real burdens on small businesses, charities and voluntary sector organisations that the Employment Allowance cannot fully protect. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 328 Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted backed the bill; every Conservative, Liberal Democrat, SNP, Reform UK, Plaid Cymru, Green and DUP MP who voted opposed it. Four independents voted in favour and three against. The Liberal Democrats, despite being an opposition party, joined the Conservatives in the no lobby, making this a broad cross-opposition rejection rather than a simple government-versus-official-opposition split. The bill subsequently passed its third reading in March 2025 by 339 votes to 172.
Voting Aye meant
Support raising employer National Insurance to fund public services, accepting that businesses face higher costs while arguing smaller employers are protected by a doubled Employment Allowance
Voting No meant
Oppose the employer NIC increases, arguing they will suppress wages, reduce hiring and harm small businesses, charities and the voluntary sector beyond what the Employment Allowance can offset
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
296
0
65
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
92
24
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
62
9
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped Aye
32
0
10
Independent
—
4
4
6
Scottish National Party
Whipped No
0
9
0
Reform UK
Whipped No
0
7
0
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
4
1
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
4
0
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
1
0
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
Defends the Bill as necessary to fix public finances and fund NHS; argues it protects working people (no income tax/VAT/employee NI rises) and small businesses (via doubled employment allowance to £10,500), while businesses with broadest shoulders must contribute.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,810 words) →
Opposes the Bill as breaking Labour's manifesto promise; argues it is a regressive 'jobs tax' that will suppress wages, reduce employment, and harm small businesses, charities, GPs, and hospices without justification.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (2,610 words) →
Opposes the measure as undermining growth; calls for exemptions for health and care providers; urges consideration of alternative revenue sources (bank tax, gambling duty, digital services tax) that target the wealthy rather than businesses.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (1,469 words) →
Challenges the Government distinction between pay packets and suppressed wages/lost jobs; notes Scottish hospitality faces particular hardship without business rates relief unlike England.SNP · Voted no · Read full speech (1,568 words) →
Supports the Bill as delivering record NHS investment (£25.6bn), teacher recruitment, and school rebuilding; argues Opposition want services without paying for them and lack credible alternatives.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,539 words) →
Defends the Bill in context of Conservative failure; highlights the £22bn fiscal black hole and need to avoid austerity; attacks Opposition for inconsistency (they voted for health levy in 2021).Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,279 words) →
Opposes as breaking manifesto; reports constituents in hospitality cannot see viable path forward; questions whether Government understood the fiscal situation during transition period.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,002 words) →
Concerned about impact on Welsh public services (30% workforce in public sector, £380m cost); seeks assurance that reimbursement to local authorities will be full and recurring.Plaid Cymru · Voted no · Read full speech (1,408 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0