{"query":"NHS","divisions":[{"division_id":2405,"date":"2026-07-13","title":"Immigration and Asylum Bill: Reasoned Amendment to Second Reading","aye_count":97,"no_count":358,"plain_explanation":"MPs voted on a Reasoned Amendment to reject the Immigration and Asylum Bill at its second reading. The amendment failed 97-358, meaning the bill will proceed to full second reading debate. This indicates Parliament will continue examining the bill's detailed provisions on border security, immigration controls, and asylum policy.","working_class_impact":"mixed","business_impact":"mixed","impact_summary":"Workers in some sectors may benefit from reduced competition, but NHS patients, asylum seekers, families seeking reunification, and businesses dependent on international recruitment lose out.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":3727,"bill_short_title":"Immigration and Asylum Bill"},{"division_id":2386,"date":"2026-06-22","title":"Armed Forces Bill Report Stage: New Clause 22","aye_count":74,"no_count":323,"plain_explanation":"MPs voted on a new clause to the Armed Forces Bill that would have required the government to provide priority NHS treatment for veterans and their families. The majority of MPs voted against the clause, so it will not become law. The government opposed the measure citing cost concerns.","working_class_impact":"hurts","business_impact":"neutral","impact_summary":"Veterans and their families lose out on priority healthcare and housing support, while the government avoids additional spending.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2375,"date":"2026-06-16","title":"Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill Remaining Stages: New Clause 14","aye_count":151,"no_count":258,"plain_explanation":"The House of Commons rejected New Clause 14 of the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill, meaning the proposed additional safeguards for network and information systems will not be added to the legislation. The clause fell with 151 votes in favour and 258 against.","working_class_impact":"mixed","business_impact":"helps","impact_summary":"Businesses avoid extra costs while ordinary people and vulnerable groups lose out on stronger cyber protections.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2357,"date":"2026-06-02","title":"Armed Forces Bill Committee: New Clause 2","aye_count":171,"no_count":302,"plain_explanation":"MPs rejected New Clause 2 to the Armed Forces Bill by 302 votes to 171, meaning the proposed change will not become law. The government and most MPs voted against adding this new clause to the bill, which would have altered the legislation before it proceeds to further stages.","working_class_impact":"mixed","business_impact":"neutral","impact_summary":"Armed Forces personnel and their families lose out on potential new protections or benefits, while taxpayers and businesses face no change.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2355,"date":"2026-05-20","title":"King's Speech Motion for an Address","aye_count":307,"no_count":171,"plain_explanation":"The UK Parliament has approved the King's Speech, which sets out the government's legislative agenda for the upcoming session. The motion passed with 307 votes to 171, giving the government a clear mandate to proceed with its priorities.","working_class_impact":"helps","business_impact":"mixed","impact_summary":"Workers and public services win, while some businesses face higher costs.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2288,"date":"2026-03-23","title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 3","aye_count":280,"no_count":164,"plain_explanation":"The Commons voted to reject a Lords amendment that would have removed the new rule requiring salary sacrificed under optional remuneration arrangements to be subject to National Insurance contributions. With the motion passing, the Bill will now make those sacrificed salary amounts liable for NICs.","working_class_impact":"hurts","business_impact":"hurts","impact_summary":"Workers lose net pay, businesses face higher costs, and the government gains additional NIC revenue.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":4046,"bill_short_title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Act 2026"},{"division_id":2286,"date":"2026-03-23","title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1","aye_count":280,"no_count":161,"plain_explanation":"The Commons voted to reject a Lords amendment that would have preserved tax advantages for salary sacrifice pension arrangements. By disagreeing with the amendment, Parliament will close a loophole where pension contributions through salary sacrifice avoided National Insurance Contributions, bringing those amounts into the NIC regime.","working_class_impact":"mixed","business_impact":"hurts","impact_summary":"Workers with salary sacrifice pensions lose a tax perk but gain from stronger public service funding, while businesses face higher NIC costs.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":4046,"bill_short_title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Act 2026"},{"division_id":2281,"date":"2026-03-11","title":"Finance (No. 2) Bill: Third Reading","aye_count":292,"no_count":161,"plain_explanation":"The UK Parliament passed the Finance (No. 2) Bill with 292 votes in favour and 161 against. This bill covers taxation changes, duties, and provisions related to public revenue and the National Debt.","working_class_impact":"mixed","business_impact":"mixed","impact_summary":"Workers and families face a mix of potential benefits and costs depending on specific tax and benefit provisions, while businesses see changes to their tax obligations and investment environment.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":683,"bill_short_title":"Finance (No. 2) Act 2010"},{"division_id":2280,"date":"2026-03-11","title":"Finance (No. 2) Bill Report Stage: Amendment 6","aye_count":175,"no_count":292,"plain_explanation":"MPs voted on Amendment 6 to the Finance (No. 2) Bill at its Report Stage. The amendment sought to introduce a new levy on large businesses to fund the NHS and other public services, but it was defeated, with 175 votes in favour and 292 against. This means the proposed levy will not be included in the bill.","working_class_impact":"hurts","business_impact":"helps","impact_summary":"Workers lose out on potential public service improvements, while businesses avoid a new levy.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2279,"date":"2026-03-11","title":"Finance (No. 2) Bill Report Stage: Amendment 5","aye_count":172,"no_count":283,"plain_explanation":"MPs voted down amendment 5 to the Finance (No. 2) Bill at report stage, meaning the proposed change will not become law. The bill proceeds in its original form, so no new taxes or spending measures from that amendment are enacted. The vote shows the House rejected the specific tweak to the finance legislation.","working_class_impact":"hurts","business_impact":"helps","impact_summary":"Workers lose out on potential new support while businesses avoid additional levies.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2278,"date":"2026-03-11","title":"Finance (No. 2) Bill Report Stage: New Clause 11","aye_count":174,"no_count":292,"plain_explanation":"MPs voted on a proposal to add a new clause to the Finance (No. 2) Bill that would have introduced a new levy on large corporations to raise funds for the NHS. The majority of MPs voted against the clause, so it was not included in the bill.","working_class_impact":"helps","business_impact":"hurts","impact_summary":"Working-class patients lose out on potential NHS improvements, while large corporations avoid a new tax.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2250,"date":"2026-01-28","title":"Draft Medical Devices (Fees Amendment) Regulations 2026","aye_count":294,"no_count":108,"plain_explanation":"Parliament has approved the Draft Medical Devices (Fees Amendment) Regulations 2026, which update the fees that manufacturers pay for licensing, conformity assessment and registration of medical devices. The change is intended to allow the regulator (MHRA) to recover its costs and improve oversight, and it passed with a majority of 186 votes.","working_class_impact":"mixed","business_impact":"helps","impact_summary":"Manufacturers and regulators gain from a stable fee framework, while patients and the NHS may face higher costs and potential pressures on healthcare budgets.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2247,"date":"2026-01-27","title":"Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill: Amendment 9","aye_count":91,"no_count":378,"plain_explanation":"The amendment to prioritize UK medical graduates for training places was voted down, with 91 MPs in favour and 378 against, so the proposed change will not be enacted.","working_class_impact":"mixed","business_impact":"hurts","impact_summary":"UK medical graduates miss out on a leg up, while overseas doctors and NHS trusts keep the status quo.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":4062,"bill_short_title":"Medical Training (Prioritisation) Act 2026"},{"division_id":2245,"date":"2026-01-21","title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill: Third Reading ","aye_count":316,"no_count":194,"plain_explanation":"The bill passed means that salary sacrificed for employer pension contributions will now be subject to National Insurance contributions (NICs). This closes a loophole where employees could avoid NICs by sacrificing part of their salary into a pension. As a result, employees using salary sacrifice will pay more NICs, and employers will also pay more employer NICs on those amounts.","working_class_impact":"hurts","business_impact":"hurts","impact_summary":"Workers lose out as salary sacrifice becomes less attractive, while the government gains more NICs revenue.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":4046,"bill_short_title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Act 2026"},{"division_id":2244,"date":"2026-01-21","title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill Committee: New Clause 5","aye_count":195,"no_count":317,"plain_explanation":"The House of Commons Committee voted down a new clause that would have changed the way employer pension contributions are subject to National Insurance. With 195 MPs in favour and 317 against, the clause was rejected, meaning the original Bill provisions remain unchanged.","working_class_impact":"hurts","business_impact":"helps","impact_summary":"Workers lose out on potential pension improvements, while businesses dodge extra costs.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2243,"date":"2026-01-21","title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill Committee: Amendment 5","aye_count":191,"no_count":326,"plain_explanation":"MPs voted on amendment 5 to the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill. The amendment was defeated, with 191 votes in favour and 326 against, so the proposed change will not be added to the Bill.","working_class_impact":"hurts","business_impact":"hurts","impact_summary":"Workers and the public lose out on a potential reduction in costs, while the government and pension schemes retain the higher contributions.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2234,"date":"2026-01-13","title":"Finance (No. 2) Bill Committee: New Clause 25","aye_count":187,"no_count":351,"plain_explanation":"Members of Parliament voted on a new clause to the Finance (No. 2) Bill that would have raised the minimum wage and given employers a tax credit to cover the extra cost. The proposal was defeated, with more MPs voting against it than for it, so the clause will not become law. As a result, the existing wage levels and tax rules remain unchanged.","working_class_impact":"neutral","business_impact":"neutral","impact_summary":"Workers miss out on a pay rise, while businesses avoid higher labour‑cost pressures.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":null,"bill_short_title":null},{"division_id":2224,"date":"2025-12-17","title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill: Second Reading","aye_count":312,"no_count":165,"plain_explanation":"The bill amends social security legislation to make salary sacrificed for employer pension contributions subject to National Insurance contributions, closing a tax relief loophole. This means employees using salary sacrifice will pay more NICs, reducing their net pay, while the government gains extra revenue. The measure passed with a majority of MPs supporting it.","working_class_impact":"hurts","business_impact":"neutral","impact_summary":"Workers lose net pay from added NICs on salary sacrifice, while the government gains revenue for public services.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":4046,"bill_short_title":"National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Act 2026"},{"division_id":2221,"date":"2025-12-15","title":"Employment Rights Bill: Government motion to disagree with the Lords in their Amendment 120N to Commons Amendment 120G and their Amendments 120P to 120S to Commons Amendment 120H","aye_count":311,"no_count":96,"plain_explanation":"The government successfully voted to reject Lords amendments that would have changed worker protections in the Employment Rights Bill. This means the original Commons provisions protecting workers from dismissal and re-engagement on inferior terms remain intact. The Bill passed with a comfortable majority of 311 votes to 96.","working_class_impact":"helps","business_impact":"mixed","impact_summary":"Workers win with stronger protections against fire-and-rehire tactics; businesses that relied on this practice lose a cost-cutting tool.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":2896,"bill_short_title":"Employment and Trade Union Rights (Dismissal and Re-engagement) Bill"},{"division_id":2210,"date":"2025-12-08","title":"Employment Rights Bill: Government motion to insist on disagreement to Lords Amendment 1B but to propose Government amendments (a) and (b) in lieu of Lords Amendment 1B","aye_count":327,"no_count":96,"plain_explanation":"The government successfully passed its own version of the Employment Rights Bill, rejecting a Lords amendment that would have strengthened worker protections and replacing it with its own amendments. This means the final law may provide fewer safeguards for workers against dismissal and re-engagement on inferior terms. The vote was decisive, with the government winning 327 votes to 96.","working_class_impact":"hurts","business_impact":"helps","impact_summary":"Workers lose protections while businesses gain flexibility.","analyzed":1,"bill_id":2896,"bill_short_title":"Employment and Trade Union Rights (Dismissal and Re-engagement) Bill"}],"bills":[{"bill_id":2544,"short_title":"NHS Funding Act 2020","long_title":"To make provision regarding the funding of the health service in England in respect of each financial year until the financial year that ends with 31 March 2024.","current_stage":"Royal Assent","is_act":1,"is_defeated":0,"division_count":3}]}