Westminster Hall

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

Wednesday 7 January 2026

[Matt Western in the Chair]

Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

09:30

[Chris Evans (Caerphilly) (Lab/Co-op)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered patient access to tissue freezing for advanced brain cancer treatment, diagnostics and research.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western—you look remarkably like the man I had breakfast with 45 minutes ago.

I am pleased that this topic is getting the attention it deserves, and I am grateful to open this important debate, especially ahead of Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week, which begins on 13 January. I must confess I knew relatively little about the effects of brain cancer until I met my constituent, Ellie James. Ellie has travelled from Wales today and is in the Gallery. I admire how tirelessly she has campaigned in memory of her late husband, Owain, who has brought us all here today.

Owain passed away from glioblastoma, the most common type of malignant brain tumour in adults, in June 2024. He was just 34 years of age. Since then Ellie has been campaigning for what she calls Owain’s law to be implemented in this country. Owain was young, fit and healthy, and he had his whole life ahead of him. He leaves behind a family, including a young daughter. Owain’s story highlights the importance of informed consent from patients and their families regarding treatment and the storage of their brain tissue.

Owain was diagnosed with a brain tumour in September 2022. Half of Owain’s 14 cm tumour was surgically removed, but only 1 cm of the removed tissue was stored fresh or flash frozen. The 1 cm was used to treat Owain with a form of immunotherapy treatment that requires the patient’s frozen tissue. Owain received three rounds of the vaccine before the frozen tissue ran out, at which point further surgery was not considered possible. The remaining 6 cm of tissue was stored in paraffin, making it unsuitable for additional vaccines.

Owain died a few months later, despite his cancer showing signs of regression during the treatment. If all the removed tissue had been fresh frozen, around 30 vaccines could have been created. If Owain and his family had been more informed about the practices surrounding brain tissue freezing and storage, and if the hospital had chosen the flash-freezing method for all the removed tissue instead of keeping it in paraffin, Owain could still be with us. His story is truly devastating, but what most stood out to me was that there was a real, achievable potential to extend, if not save, his life.

The amount of grief that Ellie and Owain’s family face must be tremendous and unimaginable. However, out of grief great change can take place, and I pay tribute to Ellie for her determination to turn her unimaginable grief into something positive that can help others. There is currently no consistent national guidance or sufficient infrastructure to ensure that brain tumour tissue removed during surgery can be stored in the fresh frozen state required for advanced therapies such as immunotherapy and cancer research. It is fundamentally wrong that Owain and his family learned of the small proportion of tissue initially frozen only once the vaccines ran out. I am sure they are not the only people that that will have happened to.

For every patient diagnosed with a less survivable cancer, the average one-year survival rate is 42%. That is compared with a one-year survival rate of 70% for all cancers. Those statistics need to improve. There are procedures surrounding brain tissue freezing that can be changed, which would have an undeniably positive impact on survival rates. There are already groups doing research and drawing attention to what can be done to improve outcomes for people with cancer, such as the all-party parliamentary group on the less survivable cancers. There are also charities such as Cancer Research UK and Macmillan that conduct valuable research and support cancer patients and their families. Again, I pay tribute to them.

There are, however, specific recommendations that I would like to mention, which link specifically to Owain and many others who face similar situations. The NHS needs an appropriate number of medical freezers to store fresh frozen tissue. In many cases, there is not enough freezer space to facilitate this type of brain tissue freezing. That must change. That long-term investment would save lives.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

Brain cancer is one of the deadliest cancers, and it disproportionately affects young adults: it is the big cancer killer of people under 40. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that this proposal not only would save lives at a relatively small cost but has an economic benefit? The Brain Tumour Charity points out that most people diagnosed have to give up work, and so do their carers: 70% of carers also have to give up work to look after those afflicted. There is an economic benefit to doing this, at a relatively low cost, and of course it would save lives.

[Chris Evans]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right. We have to remember that a cancer diagnosis affects not just the person, but their family and loved ones. A lot of people have to leave work to care for those people, and they have to deal with the emotional impact too. Her economic point is absolutely right. The wider point is that we lead the world in life sciences. If we did what I am suggesting, we could be a world leader in brain cancer care and we could save lives too, so it is a win-win for everybody.

As the hon. Lady said, the change is cost effective. It is estimated that it would cost £250,000 to £400,000 to ensure that all NHS trusts have the necessary capacity and capabilities for flash freezing. Every brain cancer patient should be able to access the latest treatment and research and the most accurate genome-sequencing techniques.

In Owain’s case, there was enough freezer space, so storing his tissue in paraffin was a conscious decision not made out of necessity. That is why attitudes and established guidance protocols within the NHS about brain tissue freezing need to change. It should not be the norm to store removed brain tissue in something that makes it unusable for further research or treatment. I hope the Minister will commit to establishing national standards so that every suitable brain tumour sample is routinely frozen.

A brain tumour can happen to anyone. It could affect us or any of our loved ones. This change needs to happen now to save lives in the future. It needs to happen for people such as Owain who are no longer with us, for people who are currently unwell with brain cancer and for people who will unfortunately become ill in the future. This Labour Government have a real opportunity to enact meaningful, positive and feasible change. We must seize that, especially if it is achievable and affordable.

As I said earlier, we lead the world in life sciences, and brain cancer care is something that we can proudly be world leaders in. The national cancer plan, which will be published next month, must address the storage of brain tissue. Specifically, it must outline exactly how it will improve outcomes for patients with less survivable cancers. If we are serious about putting patients at the heart of cancer care, improving their awareness of the storage of their own tissue is one of the simplest places to start.

The way that treatment is allocated is deeply unfair. The postcode lottery of cancer treatment must end. It is wrong that a person’s ability to access cancer treatment is dependent on where they live: 40% of people with cancer in the UK have struggled to access treatment or care because of where they live. That is ineffective, unfair and discriminatory. Those are not the values that a Labour Government should uphold. For the cost of a few hundred thousand pounds, we could eliminate the postcode lottery that affects brain cancer patients. We need to ensure that all types of treatment, including experimental ones involving freezers and vaccines, can succeed in all areas, not only some. That exceptionally small investment could have a lifesaving impact.

It is not only treatment that is affected by current protocol, but research. Owain’s tissue was no longer suitable for research because it was stored in paraffin. It is also incredibly difficult for a person to have control over their own tissue post extraction. The confusion about who technically owns it makes it challenging for people such as Ellie to retrieve the remaining tissue for further testing or research. We need to stop putting unnecessary barriers in place. We are making things harder than they need to be, and these practices have a direct impact on people’s everyday lives.

It is just as alarming that all this is done without informed consent from the patient or their families. The importance of the storage method for brain tissue cannot be overstated when someone’s life relies upon it. Brain cancer patients and their families should have an absolute right to be consulted on and to give informed consent on how their tumour is stored. While we have the opportunity to make these changes in the national cancer plan for England, we must do so. It is a small, affordable change that could have a huge impact and improve cancer treatment nationwide.

This issue was debated in the Welsh Senedd in July, and I wonder if the Minister could liaise with the Welsh Government about introducing a similar plan. I understand that the Minister there said he was not minded to introduce legislation. Could she raise this topic with him in bilateral meetings at some point? I was also hoping to get a commitment from the Minister today to meet me and my constituent Ellie, so that Ellie can explain in detail her husband Owain’s experience and we can discuss how to prevent the same thing happening to current and future patients.

In matters of great importance like this, patients must be aware of what is happening to their tissue during treatment and afterwards. Families should be able to access their tissue if needed for future testing and research. I urge the Minister to think of real people like Owain, Ellie and their young daughter, whose lives could be so different now if patients were consulted, if the tissue was stored differently and if there were more medical freezers. I would specifically like to know the Government’s plans regarding brain tissue freezing, given the impact it would have on diagnostics, treatment and research. Do the Government plan to invest in freezer capacity, and do they intend to make flash freezing the norm?

While brain tumours will continue to happen to people like Owain or anyone in this room, diagnostics, treatment and research can get better. The Government can lead the way and begin to change the attitudes and practices surrounding brain tissue freezing—in fact, we must do so. I do not wish to hear another story like Owain and Ellie’s, which is absolutely tragic, and I want Ellie’s campaign to succeed; it can and must. The most devastating thing is that Owain’s outcomes could have been different if the established guidance protocol had been different. Perhaps if these things had happened, Owain could have been sitting with Ellie in the Public Gallery today.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

I remind Members that if they wish to be called in the debate, they should bob.

09:39

[Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for securing the debate, and I thank Ellie for all her work, as well as Hugh and the others who are pushing very hard on this issue—many thanks indeed.

I want to try to make this debate a bit broader in two directions. My sister, Georgie, also has a glioblastoma. She was diagnosed two and a half years ago and has been incredibly brave and determined, working with the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) and Ellie to try to get more brain cancer justice, and driving that debate. That also applies to many people in my constituency of Witney who have brain tumours but also tumours of all sorts of cancers.

We ought to be considering two things. First, I ask the Minister to consider making tumour tissue freezing standard for all cancerous tumour tissues, not just brain. However close the issue is to my heart, I think it is inequitable to just focus on brain tumours. We have to try to get all tumour tissues frozen as standard, and the economies of scale mean that makes sense.

The other thing is how we have equitable and public health-oriented access to that tissue once it is stored, which we as a country are massively failing on. I ask the Minister to consider reforming the Human Tissue Act 2004, which could be broadened in terms of what is legally permitted in research contexts. That would create explicit legal pathways for retrospective clinical samples.

First, clinical tissue, such as biopsies and diagnostic archives, could be routinely made available for public health research under clear safeguards, without requiring separate project-by-project consent. Secondly, requirements for de-identified tissue could be simplified, clarifying that truly anonymised, non-identifiable samples can be used without consent or an HTA licence for a wider range of research, rather than just narrowly defined exceptions.

Thirdly, licences could be converted to broader authorisations. Instead of a licence for each tissue bank, accredited biobanks could be allowed to supply samples under nationally recognised frameworks. Fourthly, DNA analysis rules could be reworked. Barriers to genomic public health research could be reduced by redefining or narrowing the offence of having tissue for DNA analysis, provided that strong data protection is ensured. That is one big chunk.

The second big chunk I am asking for—there are only two—is that we reform the Human Tissue Act 2004 to apply a default system similar to the one we now use nationally for organ donation to tumour tissue data. To do so, Parliament would need to amend the HTA to introduce a deemed consent regime for residual tumour tissue and derived data. That would be limited to public interest cancer research, with a statutory and simple opt-out, strict purpose limits and enhanced oversight by the Human Tissue Authority.

The model would mirror the Organ Donation (Deemed Consent) Act 2019, but apply just to data derived primarily from tumour tissue. In plain English, that means that we have something that works for organ donations and saves lives day in, day out. If any of us die, our organs are taken and our next of kin can opt out if they choose. The great majority of people do not opt out. That has meant that many more organs have been available, which has saved lives. Somebody may want to dispose of their tumour tissue, but the great majority of us do not; we would want it used for public health and science, so having it as an automatic—

[Monica Harding]

I am sorry to stop my hon. Friend mid flow, because that is a really interesting concept. I draw his attention to a BBC article from today about using centuries-old samples of tumours from bowel cancer to work out why there is such a massive increase in bowel cancer among young people. I do not understand the science of it, but surely that is a step forward for our research as well.

[Charlie Maynard]

My hon. Friend speaks to the point. Of course, those people have been dead for many centuries, but we believe it is worth being able to access that information, and at the moment it is not accessible in most cases. That is something we really want to change.

I look to Denmark’s registry-first legal architecture, with mandatory health registries covering cancer diagnoses, pathology, genomics, and treatment and outcomes. The Danish cancer registry automatically records tumour data, covers the entire population and is used for research, oversight and quality improvement. Participation is automatic, with opt-outs rather than being consent-based. Our Government are seeking to rapidly expand our national genomics capabilities, and I applaud them for that, but without far better and more sensible access to the base tissue, with appropriate safeguards, there is no genomics-based, population-wide health service.

09:48

[Dame Siobhain McDonagh (Mitcham and Morden) (Lab)]

Debates on brain tumours are a bit like buses—there are none for ages, then they all come one after the other. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for organising this debate—the second of two debates on this topic on consecutive days. I send my condolences to Ellie and her entire family on the death of Owain. I think, like a number of people in this room, I understand some of what she has experienced. I have to inform you, Mr Western, that a former Labour MP is close to dying of a glioblastoma—another politician after Tessa Jowell and my sister Margaret. I want to ask: when do we intervene to do something about this, rather than talk about it?

I am supportive of any measure that genuinely improves patient outcomes for glioblastoma patients. Anything that increases survival of this devastating disease is worth supporting, but in my own experience, working closely with clinicians and supporting my late sister through her glioblastoma treatment, the most effective way to improve outcomes for patients with brain tumours is by accessing clinical drug trials. Without trials there is no route to better treatment or lifelines, and for too many patients, no pathway at all.

I think we can all agree that the number of clinical trials under way for brain tumours is entirely inadequate. It is impossible to justify that, since 2008, the National Institute for Health and Care Research has invested just £13.7 million towards brain tumour research and none of the funding to date has supported using repurposed drugs—that is, using some of the immunotherapy drugs that are changing the face of the larger cancers and their outcomes.

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

I want to pay tribute to my constituent, Alex Davies, who sadly passed away last November, the day after his 50th birthday, two years after his glioblastoma diagnosis. He is survived by his wife Emma and their two daughters. Alex volunteered to have his brain tissue frozen after two surgeries, for ongoing research at the Christie hospital in Manchester.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government’s national cancer plan should include more and better-used funding for research and more clinical trials, particularly for poorly understood cancers such as glioblastoma on which she has campaigned tenaciously over many years?

[Dame Siobhain McDonagh]

My hon Friend is absolutely right. Let us be absolutely clear: there is no route for an improvement in any of the rare cancers unless there are more trials—and the system mitigates against that. There is a lot of talk at the moment about the Government of stakeholders. The stakeholders involved in drug trials—the major pharma companies and cancer charities—do not get involved in these trials because for pharma there is no money in it, and for the big charities, there seems to be more interest in primary science and mice work than there is in using some of these amazing drugs to find out whether they can provide some sort of support to people with rare cancers.

It is the lack of treatment options, and this inaction, that led me, alongside my sister’s extraordinary network of friends and supporters, to launch our own trial in her memory. When the system does not move quickly enough, patients and families are forced to take matters into their own hands. We have an established clinical trial now under way at the University College London Hospitals clinical research facility with encouraging early indicators, a wider trial programme mapped out and further trials ready to follow with protocols written.

We are seeking to clarify how to secure the funding needed to repeat and extend this work using alternative drugs, so that more patients can benefit. We continue to raise funds to support that goal.

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

Yesterday the hon. Member outlined the tremendous work being done to privately raise about £1 million for research. Does she agree that that needs to be supplemented and complemented by statutory funding to make the dramatic difference that she, and hopefully all of us, agree needs to happen?

[Dame Siobhain McDonagh]

I completely agree with the hon. Member. Anything that we have raised—£1 million over two years—is a drop in the ocean. It is an important drop in the ocean, and it has led to action, which is what we need, but in the longer term, it has to be the Government and the pharmaceuticals that are not intervened on if we are to make progress.

[Monica Harding]

May I pay tribute to the hon. Member for everything she is doing on glioblastoma? It has affected my own family: my brother-in-law, Pip Harding, was diagnosed with a glioblastoma. He has received oncothermia therapy, but only through crowdfunding. The cost of—I think—10 treatments was something like £40,000, which he got from his friends and family. That shows the generosity of the public, as well as how interested the public are in this, so does she agree that we should ask the Government to match the public spirit on this?

[Dame Siobhain McDonagh]

I thank the hon. Member for all the work she does; it is thrilling to hear that her brother-in-law has made such progress with the Oncotherm machine. The machine is in the UK because my sister raised the funds to bring it over, but it cannot go into an NHS hospital because it cannot get approval from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, so it is for people who can raise the money to access it, as she rightly says. Forty thousand pounds is a lot of money, but in this world it is only a fraction of what other possible treatments may cost; people sell their homes, spend their pensions and leave themselves completely bankrupt on the death of a loved one. It is the wild west out there, as she knows.

We have established a trial at UCLH, and we have encouraging early indicators, but we need to do so much more. Our hope is to do 10 trials with repurposed drugs, and we want to clarify how we can bid for the money from the NIHR. We are not the only people doing this—we are not exceptional. Patients and families who see the lack of alternatives are getting involved and raising money, as the hon. Member just said, but anything we can raise is insignificant in comparison with what the Government or big pharma can raise. How is it that, upon Tessa Jowell’s death, the previous Government can have given the NIHR £40 million for research, in good faith, and none of it has been spent on testing out repurposed drugs?

I am grateful that in yesterday’s debate the Minister highlighted the letter that I received from the head of the NIHR, Lucy Chappell, setting out the routes for funding and how they can be accessed. As a result of that debate, I went back to read the letter. It does not take us any further; the funding routes are still impossible to navigate in any effective way. I therefore thank the Minister for her commitment to provide further guidance. I do not want that just for me, for the work that I do, or for the work that Dr Mulholland does at UCLH; I want to encourage all the flowers to bloom, because somebody may actually hit on the progress we need.

Even for an experienced clinical team with an established research base, the funding process is complex, fragmented and difficult to navigate. If it is challenging for clinical teams in major London teaching hospitals, I worry deeply about how many other clinical teams, without the same visibility or support, will simply fall away before a trial even has the chance to begin. Will the Minister consider how clearer, more navigable routes to accessing funding can be set out, and provide clearer direction, so that the money committed by the Government can reach the trials that patients so urgently need?

09:59

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for setting the scene so incredibly well, and the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for all that she does—I was impressed by her contribution yesterday, and she equalled it today.

I think we all know someone who has been touched by cancer. The youngest daughter of a close friend of mine was diagnosed with glioblastoma last Christmas, and she died a few weeks later. At that time, the diagnosis was bleak, and the lives of my friend and his wife were changed forever. Bleak does not even come close to the sense of loss.

[Mr Campbell]

I have personal experience of a very young constituent who lost her father for the exact same reason. The trauma affects not just the immediate family, but close friends too, and it lives with them for years. Hopefully, we can see some progress both today and in the next few weeks, whenever the cancer issue is addressed in the main Chamber.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank my hon. Friend. That story makes today’s debate that bit more impactful for me and for us all. My friend is a veteran. He served in the forces with great courage. He has shoulders as broad as a rugby player. He is a man who could take on anything. He laid his life on the line for the freedom of everyone here. Yet, he could do nothing but watch—

[Dame Siobhain McDonagh]

The hon. Gentleman has been very kind to me in all these debates and has called me soft-hearted. If I am soft-hearted, that perhaps applies to both of us.

[Jim Shannon]

We are both soft-hearted, as many other Members in this Chamber probably are.

This man was so strong. When his wee daughter died, life became very focused on that; it will be always focused on that. I can understand how Owain’s law has come about, because families are determined to ensure that their devastation is not replicated, if one single thing can be done to prevent it. I thank those in the Public Gallery for being here.

What can we do? Owain’s law is an indication of what we can do. Tissue freezing preserves DNA. Without this key, simple and cost-effective step, patients cannot access the latest cancer treatments, diagnostics and research. There is a way forward.

As the Minister knows, I am always pleased to see her in her place. We are all very fond of her, and she understands things better than most—we all know the circumstances. I am looking forward to her response to the ask from the hon. Member for Caerphilly and from everyone else. To help end this preventable postcode lottery, hon. Members should please consider entering the current ballot for Health and Social Care questions, which closes today. If they can get their question in before noon today, that would be good. Next week, they would then have an opportunity to ask it on the Floor of the House, to help prevent more brain cancer patients in our constituencies from missing out.

In the NHS, most brain cancer patient samples are stored in paraffin wax rather than being flash frozen in medical freezers. When this happens, patients lose access to potentially lifesaving newer treatments developed using these samples, to more precise diagnostic methods and to advanced research, including future testing to find out whether a patient’s condition is genetic and likely to be passed on to their children. That is important in the lives we lead. Some conditions are hereditary; they come from our mum or dad—maybe our grandparents—down to us, and may pass on to those who come after us.

I thank Ellie’s campaign for giving me their paper before the debate, as it really does help us to understand things just that wee bit better. I know that the Minister has seen it and the three questions to her, so I do not need to repeat them—she is probably very aware of what they are. Those are the campaign’s requests.

I have a couple of requests of my own, which will not come as a surprise to anyone in the Chamber, and certainly not to the Minister. New research from the Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission shows that access to tissue freezing varies dramatically between trusts, meaning that eligibility for advanced treatments can depend entirely on where a patient lives. A postcode lottery is preventing my constituents in Strangford in Northern Ireland from benefiting from more precise whole genome sequencing, personalised immunotherapy and cutting-edge diagnostic options. My constituents are not the only ones affected—everyone is affected.

I have received information indicating that, for just £250,000 to £400,000, every brain cancer patient in the UK could have routine access to tissue freezing by default, unlocking the treatments the Government have committed to delivering. The three questions from the Owain’s law campaign are the important ones, but can the Minister look at this issue? When we think about what we are trying to achieve in this debate, it is important that we have some goals. I know that the Minister always replies helpfully and positively to us.

In Northern Ireland, funding for freezing brain tissue is primarily tied to research initiatives rather than standard patient care. A local charity called Brainwaves NI is currently funding a pilot scheme at the Belfast health and social care trust and Queen’s University Belfast, which uses rapid nanopore sequencing. I do not pretend to understand what all these things are—I am not a medical person, just an MP who tries to represent his constituents when he can. That process requires specialised tissue handling, often involving freezing, to reduce diagnosis times from weeks to hours.

It is clear from all the contributions to the debate, including from those who have personal knowledge, that we do not need pilots but more equitable access to tissue freezing throughout the United Kingdom. I support the calls the hon. Member for Caerphilly has made so well on behalf of his constituents and indeed all the United Kingdom. Glioblastoma is a death sentence, but tissue freezing could change that. It is right and proper that we do all we can to see that change in all of the United Kingdom.

My last request is that the Minister liaise with the regional Administrations in Scotland and Wales, and particularly with the Administration in Northern Ireland and with the Assembly. Brain cancer affects us all; it does not stop at the border of Scotland and England or in the Irish sea. It is all of us together, so we need to work together to find a way of funding a cure for advanced brain cancer. With that, I look forward very much to the Minister’s response.

10:07

[Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I start by saying how honoured I am to follow the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who demonstrates so ably that the high-minded ideals of representation, compassion and decency run right through this place, and perhaps more often than is fully recognised. I thank him for his contribution.

I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for securing this important debate, and his constituent Ellie for her campaigning—I can say without hesitation that you have another signed-up supporter of Owain’s law here today in me. As my hon. Friend demonstrated, MPs do not generally come to these debates to have abstract policy discussions, but to do our most important job: to be the voice of our constituents.

That is where I want to start. I want to share the experience of my constituent, Samantha Jones, who came to see me alongside her father-in-law, Garry Jones, following the death of her husband, Trevor, from glioblastoma. Trevor was just 41 years old when he suddenly became ill on Christmas Day 2024. Until that moment, there had been no warning signs and no symptoms that anyone could reasonably have recognised. Tests revealed stage 4 glioblastoma, and he was given six months to live. He lived for nine months and died in September 2025.

Like so many families confronted with this diagnosis, they were plunged into a world of shock, fear and urgent decision making. A biopsy was taken, which confirmed and sequenced the cancer, and at that point the family believed that everything possible was being done. It was only later, through Samantha’s own research and through conversations with an oncologist experienced in international practice, that they learned something that they found deeply troubling. There were treatments that may have been available to Trevor on the basis of his biopsy, but they could not be used because the tissue sample had not been flash frozen. Instead, the biopsy had been stored in paraffin blocks, which is standard practice in much of the UK, as we heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly. By the time the family discovered the significance of that, it was too late: Trevor was too ill to undergo another biopsy, too unwell to travel and unable to take part in clinical trials.

Samantha told me that in Germany brain tumour biopsies are flash frozen as a matter of course. That allows for far more advanced genomic and molecular testing, which can open the door to a wider range of treatments. In the UK, by contrast, flash freezing is done only if it is specifically requested, or if the patient is part of a clinical trial. For families who have just been told that their loved one has an aggressive and terminal brain cancer, that is not a realistic expectation. They are in shock. They are terrified. They are placing their trust in the system to do everything that it can, without knowing that one unmade request could close off future options entirely.

That raises a simple but profound question, which I put to the Minister: why does the NHS not routinely flash freeze all brain tumour biopsies as standard practice? What can we do to change that here and now? I am not suggesting false hope. I fully recognise that glioblastoma remains a devastating diagnosis with limited treatment options, but when options are already so few, it cannot be right that patients are denied even the possibility of certain treatments because of how their tissue samples were stored.

This is also an issue of fairness and equality. Access to the best possible diagnostics and research pathways should not depend on geography, chance or whether a family happen to know the right question to ask at the worst moment in their lives. Samantha and Garry came to see me not only in grief but with a determination—one reflected by Ellie, in the Public Gallery this morning—that something good might come from their devastating experience. They want other families to be spared the same sense of missed opportunity and unanswered questions.

More broadly, brain cancers remain under-recognised and underfunded compared with other forms of cancer, despite their severity and poor outcomes. If we are serious about improving survival, treatment and research, we must be willing to look honestly at current practice and ask whether it is good enough, because I think the consensus is that it is not.

I hope that the Minister will engage constructively on this issue and consider making the flash freezing of brain tumour biopsies standard practice across the NHS, because that could improve patient access to treatment, strengthen research and offer families reassurance that everything possible is being done. For Trevor, such a change has come too late, but for future patients it does not have to.

10:13

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for securing this important debate, and all other hon. Members who have contributed. I would also like to highlight the incredible work done by the campaigners for Owain’s law—you are doing a most remarkable campaign.

Owain was diagnosed with a grade 4 tumour in 2022 and sadly died in 2024. Despite showing success, Owain stopped receiving effective treatment because not enough of his brain tissue was frozen to make further immunotherapy vaccines. Owain’s wife, Ellie, is calling for fair and equal access to brain tissue freezing, enabling every patient to access new treatments and research. The Government need to listen to the campaign, to act and to invest in brain tumour freezing so that we can start to save more lives.

Brain cancer is already the biggest killer of people under 40, and 45% of brain cancers are diagnosed in an emergency setting, meaning that the cancer has progressed untreated and that the patient is more unlikely to tolerate treatment.

Given so many factors affect survival outcomes for brain cancer patients, the Government need to start improving treatment of brain cancer now. Most brain cancer patients in Wokingham cannot access advanced technologies, such as personalised immunotherapy cancer treatments that rely on frozen tissue. The Royal Berkshire NHS foundation trust and the Frimley Health NHS foundation trust do not have any medical-grade freezers suitable for storing tissue samples, and they have no access to the rapid freezing equipment suitable for brain tissue. That situation needs to change.

The cost of providing the right freezers would be small for each hospital trust. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Charlie Maynard) and other Members who have today called for other tissues to be frozen, not just brain tissue.

Like many other Members today, I am really pleased to see the Minister in her place. I have a very simple question for her: can she confirm that equal access to high-quality tissue storage pathways will be addressed in the upcoming national cancer plan?

[Dame Siobhain McDonagh]

On a point of order, Mr Western. I want to make a clarification. In my response to the intervention by the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding), I mixed up quangos. I suggested that it was the fault of the MHRA that the Oncotherm machine was not in an NHS hospital. It is, of course, the fault of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. I would not want anybody to think that that machine has not been approved and registered by the MHRA.

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

Thank you. Your point of order is noted.

10:16

[Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for securing this very important debate on equitable access to tissue freezing for brain cancer patients.

My constituent’s son was first diagnosed at the age of 10 with a very rare brain tumour. When he should have been playing with friends and going to school, he underwent surgery and intense radiotherapy. After treatment, he returned to normality, but 13 years later the tumour recurred and he received the same treatment. Earlier this year, when he was 28 years old, and just three and a half years after his last treatment, the tumour was back again. Further radiotherapy was not safe, so he underwent six months of chemotherapy. His mum told me about the devastation of undergoing chemotherapy, knowing that it was never going to be a cure and that the tumour is expected to recur. In the 18 years that he has been living with the diagnosis and undergoing treatment, there has been no progress in treatment options, and a cure has not been found. Sadly, my constituent’s son is not alone; every year, 13,000 people are diagnosed with this brutal condition.

Like many people, I was struck by the story of Owain, who was diagnosed with a 14 cm grade 4 brain tumour in his right frontal lobe. Similar to my constituent’s son, Owain was told that the standard treatment of radiotherapy and chemotherapy could only hold the tumour back for a period of time, until he sadly died.

Owain’s campaign is now run in his memory by his brilliant wife Ellie, who is here today in the Public Gallery. The campaign has exposed the lack of communication, clarity and consistency in brain tissue freezing. Fresh tissue freezing can help to deliver personalised treatment, research and diagnostics, but across the country there is unequal access to it. Brain cancers are difficult enough to tackle. Even when tumours are surgically removed, cancer cells have already infiltrated the brain, often causing a tumour to regrow, sometimes within just a few months.

We know that current drug treatments struggle to have an impact on tumour mass and that radiotherapy can only delay recurrence. Consistent access to brain tumour storage across the country could help to save future lives and improve outcomes for existing patients. A recent study by specialists from the department of neurosurgery at King’s College hospital and Guy’s cancer centre aims to implement a robust pathway whereby tumour tissue can be stored as a fresh frozen sample. Their report concluded that although the implementation of this pathway appeared to be straightforward, the limiting factor was the need for a fridge. There were also difficulties in liaising with the multiple teams involved, which was very time consuming, and disagreements about who should fund the freezer.

Such concerns have been reflected by the charity Brain Tumour Research, which highlighted the variations in the basic infrastructure needed to support brain tissue freezing. The Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission has also noted the numerous barriers to genome sequencing, which requires tissue freezing to enable precise diagnosis, prognosis and tailored treatments.

Therefore, we are not struggling with unknown barriers. The solutions are right in front of us. When battling brain cancer, every day counts. Because of the lack of communication with Owain, there was not enough tissue frozen appropriately to create the vaccines needed to help tackle his tumour. Now his young daughter Amelia must grapple with life without dad.

The Government have an opportunity to finally make a real difference to the thousands of people affected by brain cancer, by ending the postcode lottery of cancer treatments. The Conservatives spent 14 years failing to make any progress on improving cancer outcomes, and now it is time for action. The Liberal Democrats urge the Government to pay close attention to the specific difficulties facing brain cancer patients in the delayed national cancer plan. This includes setting out tangible improvements for brain cancer patients and equitable access to tissue freezing. We also cannot ignore that quick access to treatment saves lives, which is why I once again call on the Government to make sure that 100% of patients start treatment within 62 days of urgent referral.

There can be no more families torn apart, left in the dark or blocked from possible treatments. With the UK lagging severely behind our peers on cancer outcomes, it is time for this Government to turn around the Conservative Government’s failure to improve cancer outcomes, and finally to place the UK as a global leader in cancer research and outcomes.

10:20

[Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this morning, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for securing this debate, and the cancer charities, including Brain Tumour Research and Brain Tumour Charity, who provide invaluable support to my constituents. I also thank Owain’s family for their important campaign. I want to recognise the contribution of the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh), who has shown such incredible energy and dedication to the cause over the last few years. It is impressive to get a trial up and running that offers real hope to people, so I thank her for that work.

Each year sees around 13,000 new cases of brain and central nervous system cancers and 5,500 deaths. As has been said already this morning, brain cancers are the leading cause of cancer-related death for those under the age of 40. As a doctor and a granddaughter, I have witnessed the devastation that brain cancers can exact on patients and their loved ones. Despite advances in detection, neurosurgery and radiotherapy, the mortality for brain cancers has barely changed since 2000, whereas the most common cancers have seen substantial decreases over the same period. Demographics are working against us. Epidemiological modelling indicates that a quarter of the growth in brain cancer cases can be attributed to population ageing, a pattern that is expected to continue in the coming decades.

Research published last year found that in England the median survival for patients with a glioblastoma was seven months. It rose to 16 months for patients with the most aggressive treatments. The reason those patients survived longer is because they had access to personalised treatments, experimental drugs or trial pathways, and much of that begins with tissue freezing. Two people can be diagnosed with glioblastoma, but their underlying genetics can be completely different. Frozen tissue enables a pathologist to undertake gold standard genomic sequencing, which not only leads to a more precise diagnosis, but helps doctors predict how a tumour is likely to behave, identify more personalised treatment strategies based on the genetic mutations driving the tumour, and determine whether the patient would be able to benefit from clinical trials that are available.

Unfortunately, as we have heard, access to genomic sequencing is characterised by stark geographic inequality. High volume specialist centres, typically in urban areas, are more likely to have established tissue freezing and integrated genomic diagnosis than centres serving more rural communities. A report by the Tessa Jowell Centre of Excellence found a nearly 300% increase in whole genome sequencing activity since 2021, and around three in 10 NHS centres within its network were still not requesting it. Among centres that do freeze tissue, the activity rates vary from zero samples to several hundred, and diagnostic times are worsening. The median time from tissue collection to final integrated molecular diagnosis in 2024 was 21 days, whereas the benchmark is 14 and only 30% met that. What does the Minister intend to do to improve that speed?

Tissue freezing is a basic requirement for advanced testing, but every year thousands of patients’ tissue samples are soaked in formaldehyde and embedded in wax blocks. Although formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue preservation has been used in pathology labs since the early 20th century, it is not adequate for molecular work because it causes the cross-linking and fragmentation of nucleic acids and protein, meaning that any DNA or RNA that is extracted is degraded and often unsuitable for genomic sequencing and creating those important personalised cancer therapies. The British Neuro-Oncology Society has described FFPE as “suboptimal”. It results in patients being locked out of cutting-edge treatments, regardless of clinical suitability, with knock-on effects on patient outcomes and the pace of scientific research. Will the Minister explain why FFPE, rather than tissue freezing, is still determining access to personalised brain cancer treatment for some NHS patients?

The Government’s 10-year health plan anticipates that by 2035 half of all healthcare interactions will be informed by genomics. That is a bold mission, but the contributions to today’s debate show that there is a gap between where Ministers want to be and where we are at the moment. In response to a written parliamentary question, the Government acknowledged:

“Information on the number of NHS trusts in England that have facilities for fresh freezing brain cancer tissue samples is not currently collected.”

That is a serious problem, because without the data it is difficult for Members and cancer charities to ascertain whether progress is being made, and for the Minister to make progress on delivery. Will the Minister confirm whether her Department has plans to start collecting that information? If it does not, why not?

Patients should always be fully informed before they have treatment, and it has been disturbing to hear today that some have not been given all the information, particularly about what will happen to the tissue afterwards and the potential consequences of that. What are the Government doing to improve the consent process in such cases to ensure that, before the biopsy, patients are fully informed about what is happening to their tissue and are given the choice?

We have heard that sometimes only a small percentage of the tissue is frozen, limiting the treatment options available. Will the Minister tell us why that is the case, and what she is doing to improve the proportion that is frozen? Every trust taking brain cancer samples must have the capacity and facilities to freeze the tissue they obtain.

We are all waiting for the delayed cancer plan, which we expect to be published on World Cancer Day. I have said before that I think delaying it for presentational purposes is wrong, but I hope it will be published soon. Will the Minister confirm that the cancer plan will deliver fully informed consent, provide the necessary capability—both human resource and equipment—for freezing, and ensure that the research landscape improves, in terms of both ease of access and financial metrics, to encourage UK research investment?

Everyone in this House wants treatments to improve and a cure to be found. I know the Minister is hugely committed to this issue and is working hard on it. I am interested to hear her response and to see the cancer plan, which she has been working on, as soon as possible.

10:27

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Ashley Dalton)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) and all other hon. Members for their contributions, many of which were deeply personal and moving. I thank them all for their courage and soft-heartedness, and for bringing such compassion and insight to this debate.

Let me say how sorry I was to hear about the loss of Owain at the age of just 34. His story reminds us that many people lose their lives to brain cancer very shortly after diagnosis, and we are determined to do all we can to change that. I extend my deepest sympathies to his wife Ellie, who is here today, and his daughter Amelia. I would be honoured to meet Ellie and my hon. Friend to hear more about her and Owain’s story.

Just yesterday, I was here for a debate on less survivable cancers. These debates and the petition show how much progress on cancer matters to Parliament and the public. My hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) said that debates on brain cancer are a bit like buses: there are none for ages, then suddenly three at once. I want to acknowledge that her work has led to the higher profile for such debates in Parliament, more of which are taking place. I thank and commend her for her efforts in this field.

My hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly raised incredibly serious issues about how informed consent, tissue freezing and innovation are impacting patients. I will take those points in turn. I will primarily address the context in England, although I acknowledge that areas of this policy apply across the UK. On informed consent and tissue storage, as a cancer patient myself, I find it very troubling when patients say they have not been informed about their tissue storage, as campaigners have reported. I completely understand why the Owain’s law petition calls for people to be properly informed about the choices available to them. Let me be clear: patients must always be fully informed about their rights, options and choices regarding the storage and future use of their tissue samples.

The Human Tissue Authority was established in 2004 to oversee and licence organisations in the removal, storage and use of human tissue in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Under the Human Tissue (Quality and Safety for Human Application) Regulations 2007, consent must be sought to collect human tissues and cells that are to be used in patient treatment. The Human Tissue Authority ensures compliance against those regulations as part of its standards, inspection and licensing regime.

Consent should be sought in line with the suitable treatment options available to individual patients, which would be determined by their clinicians. That requirement extends to the collection of tumour samples that are to be used as the starting material in the manufacture of cancer vaccines. The Government expect establishments to be held to the highest standards to ensure appropriate and ethical use of human tissue. I understand that my hon. Friend is meeting with the Human Tissue Authority to discuss this matter further, and I know that he will keep me closely in the loop on that.

Owain’s law also asks for every NHS hospital to freeze suitable brain tumour tissue to allow patients to benefit from emerging cancer treatments. Individual pathology services in England have their own processes, known as standard operating procedures, for fresh freezing of tissue samples. NHS procedures mirror local capabilities, which means the capacity for fresh freezing often depends on the availability of neurosurgery services in the local area.

The human tissue regulations were introduced due to concerns that pathologists were retaining human tissues without appropriate consent. Any changes will need to be carefully considered by the Government. However, as was requested by my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly and the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), I am happy to liaise with the devolved Governments on this issue, and I commit today to further exploring the current arrangements for freezing tissues and the options for change, particularly for brain tumour tissues.

Beyond improving access to emerging treatments through freezing, we know that the most effective way to improve survival rates from cancers, including brain cancers, is to catch them early. That is why we have agreed around £600 million of capital investment in diagnostics for this financial year. Over £100 million will go to histopathology services, automation and digital diagnostics to improve pathology laboratories.

[Dame Siobhain McDonagh]

I apologise for challenging the Minister’s assertion, but in the case of glioblastoma, it really does not matter how early it is detected; the consequence is the same. It is a stage 4 tumour that is going to kill the person and the average life expectancy is nine months.

[Ashley Dalton]

I note my hon. Friend’s clarification, but with that in mind, we do know that it is important to diagnose all cancers as quickly as possible, and the diagnosis of brain cancers is equally important so as to start treatment as quickly as possible. To that end, the Chancellor announced further investment in diagnostics at the autumn statement as part of a £6 billion capital investment to deliver constitutional standards.

On genomics, I met the chief scientific officer for genomics yesterday to discuss how we ensure that the UK remains a world leader in genomics—which we are—and that we can apply genomics to improve cancer outcomes. We hope that our investment in diagnostics and pathology will mean that, in future, patients such as Owain will access a greater range of treatment options.

My hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly and Ellie are entirely right to raise the importance of innovation, particularly for less survivable cancers such as brain cancer. The Government are proud to support the Rare Cancers Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur). Next Friday, Baroness Elliott will move its Second Reading in the other place.

We will go even further to ensure that all patients with brain cancer have access to cutting edge clinical trials, innovation and lifesaving treatments. As part of our action, the National Institute for Health and Care Research announced the pioneering brain tumour research consortium to accelerate research into new brain tumour treatments across the UK. The NIHR is backing the consortium with an initial £13.7 million and more money to come this year. The world-leading consortium aims to transform outcomes for adults and children who are living with brain tumours and for their families, ultimately reducing the number of lives lost to cancer. As I confirmed yesterday, I will write to my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden in detail regarding access to funding. I am happy to commit to seeking information and exploring how we can make access to funding much clearer and more transparent.

I am pleased to confirm that the national cancer plan for England will be published in just a few short weeks, in early February. It will focus on rarer cancers, including brain cancer, and will include further details on how we will improve outcomes and work with stakeholders such as the Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission to do so. The plan will detail further action to speed up diagnosis and treatment in England, ensuring that patients have access to the latest treatments and technology and ultimately driving up survival rates.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the Minister for her comprehensive reply to all our questions. In my contribution, I mentioned that Queen’s University Belfast and the Belfast health and social care trust are doing a pilot scheme, which I hope will benefit England, Scotland and Wales. Can the Minister ask her Department’s civil servants to take that on board?

[Ashley Dalton]

I am happy to confirm that I will ask officials to look into that, and to give me some advice on that pilot and on having a conversation with those running it about what we could learn from them. I thank the hon. Member for raising that question.

I will close by paying tribute to our late colleague and Member of the Senedd, Hefin David. Through tireless campaigning, he brought Owain’s story to the Senedd. My hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly has now brought it to this place and I thank him for that. I look forward to working with him and other hon. Members to make 2026 the year that we shift the dial for patients with brain cancer.

10:37

[Chris Evans]

In a debate where tears were shed, it was good to hear the Minister’s positive reply. I look forward to meeting with her and Ellie to discuss Owain’s case further. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for her work on this issue. From a position of great grief, she has tried to bring about something good. I think that we can all endorse what she has been trying to do in her campaigns.

I am pleased that the Minister has committed to meeting with the devolved Administrations, because if one thing came out of this debate, it is that cancer is no respecter of age, where we live or boundaries. It affects everybody and we need a national effort to deal with it. I am pleased with the Minister’s response; I thought it was very positive. I look forward to working with her and all other hon. Members to provide the hope that we so desperately need in cases like these.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered patient access to tissue freezing for advanced brain cancer treatment, diagnostics and research.

10:38

Sitting suspended.

Bromsgrove: Local Government

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

11:00

[Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered local government organisation in Bromsgrove.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. The reorganisation of Worcestershire councils will be the largest local government reshuffle in more than 50 years. It represents a defining moment for our county—one that offers either the opportunity to deliver better value for money to residents or the risk that parts of the county will be pushed, involuntarily, into becoming extensions of an urban city. The stakes could not be higher.

The required aims of the new council organisation are clear: financial sustainability, good value for money, high-quality services and an ambition of continued improvement. Those are not abstract aspirations, but the practical foundations required to protect our communities and safeguard essential services. Only one of the two options before us will achieve the wants and needs of the local community: one unitary authority—a single, united structure that provides the clarity, efficiency and strategic strength necessary to meet the challenges that lie ahead.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I spoke to the hon. Gentleman beforehand to get his thoughts on what he was trying to achieve. Does he agree that local government must be efficient, accessible and accountable, and that consolidation is worth while, but not at the expense of the accessibility of services? Hailing from the rural constituency of Strangford, where constituents do not have accessible local government, I support the hon. Gentleman in his quest to ensure that it is a priority in any restructuring.

[Bradley Thomas]

I agree wholeheartedly with the hon. Gentleman. The disaggregation and loss of access to sustainable services is a profound risk in any case of local government reorganisation, but particularly in rural constituencies.

I acknowledge the recent survey shared around Worcestershire, and thank those who responded: local consent should always be a priority in any devolution process, including local government reorganisation. The results showed a clear split in opinions across the county, and must be considered in context. Some 48% of respondents supported two unitary councils, 29% supported one unitary authority and 19% did not support any reorganisation, yet the number of respondents—4,200—represents only 0.6% of Worcestershire’s 621,000 population, meaning the survey is questionable as a true representation of Worcestershire as a whole. In short, it is a snapshot, not a consensus.

Worcestershire is a rural county—approximately 85% is classified as such—and a picturesque one, with a seamless mix of small urban cities, semi-rural towns, rural villages and uninterrupted green space. That is no less so in my constituency, which is 79% rural and 89% green belt. Serving the needs and wants throughout the vastly different parts of the county is a delicate balancing act, but it is a balancing act that allows Worcestershire to be so wonderfully unique. It is a balancing act that allows my constituents to enjoy beautiful country walks and quaint villages on their doorsteps, alongside the convenience of more urban towns or cities not very far away. That harmony between rural tranquillity and accessible urban life is part of what makes Worcestershire a fantastic place to live.

That balancing act would be toppled by the forced use of a city template. A model designed for incomparable metropolitan areas cannot be imposed on a county defined by its largely rural character without causing catastrophic disruption. Keeping decisions local to Worcestershire is vital: it is the only way to ensure that local communities are not sidelined, that my constituents’ voices are not stripped away and that the fabric of rural life is not sacrificed. Counties shaped by their rural character are rightly proud of their identities and traditions, and any local reorganisation that happens in Worcestershire must recognise and respect our distinct needs.

[Mark Garnier (Wyre Forest) (Con)]

My hon. Friend and Worcestershire neighbour is making a strong argument about the risks of a north-south divide, in which the north could be subsumed under a greater Birmingham. That is a very important point. Is he as surprised as I am that, of the district and city councils across Worcestershire, Wyre Forest was the only one to advocate a single Worcestershire unitary authority rather than the split model?

[Bradley Thomas]

I am surprised but that must be seen in the context of the survey I referenced. Only a very small proportion of the Worcestershire population responded to any consultation about future options. I will refer later to the wider stakeholders that are supportive of a single unitary authority to deliver local government in the best interests of residents across Worcestershire, including Wyre Forest.

The creation of two unitary councils would do the opposite of respecting the distinct needs and rural identity of Worcestershire. It would see the north Worcestershire section become by default an extension of Birmingham and would fundamentally shift our identity. North Worcestershire is a neighbour of Birmingham, but is proud to be part of the adjacent countryside that so many Birmingham residents enjoy. Conversely, north Worcestershire enjoys a proximity to Birmingham, while maintaining its unique rural character and slower pace of life.

A divided structure would only weaken our voice, dilute our identity and place our future in the hands of those who do not understand us. One unitary authority is the only option that protects Worcestershire’s integrity, strengthens its governance and secures its long-term ambition for prosperity. Many residents across Bromsgrove and the villages have chosen to live there because they value the way of life. That valued identity must be protected from being merged into an urban extension, or even treated as a subset of an identity that has existed for generations and delivered a footprint for successful local government service delivery until now.

We are already at risk of urbanisation and our local democracy is already being eroded by the unprecedented housing targets being forced upon us, despite consistent local objection. As a 79% rural constituency composed of 89% green belt and approximately 8% brownfield land, our housing targets have increased by 85%. Meanwhile, our neighbouring city of Birmingham with at least 140 hectares of brownfield land and extensively established infrastructure, has seen targets cut by more than 30%.

If we were involuntarily to risk becoming an extension of Birmingham, it is highly likely that our precious green belt would be sacrificed even further. The character of our county, its landscape, identity and rural heritage would be placed at real risk. Despite that loss, it would still be the urban areas that would continue to receive the largest proportion of infrastructure investment, leaving my constituency questioning how it can be expected to absorb the growth when infrastructure is already at capacity.

Urban areas have the highest demand for housing precisely because they are urban. That is why urban densification remains the housing policy most genuinely representative of the public’s needs and wants. When providing a common-sense counter to central Government decisions, such as unreasonable housing targets, one unified voice is essential. A single coherent authority can speak for the whole county, representing all our views and standing the strongest chance of securing greater funding for transport, housing and economic development. Multiple voices drown each other out; a united voice is harder to ignore.

Alongside ensuring that decision making is kept local to Worcestershire and that my constituents are not stripped of their voice—an action that would run counter to the principle of devolution—a single unitary council is also the most sensible financial decision. It would protect local democracy while strengthening our ability to shape our own future. Financial sustainability is vital for any council. Across the country, we have seen many councils struggle with rising costs; costs that inevitably become the burden of the British taxpayer. Without a sustainable model, residents pay the price through higher taxes, reduced services or both.

My constituents have already experienced a 4.9% increase in council tax this year, due to increasing financial pressures, and are set to face a staggering 9.9% increase from Reform’s county council in the next financial year. A single financially resilient authority is the most responsible way to safeguard public money and ensure that essential services remain secure for the long term.

[Mark Garnier]

My hon. Friend has been very indulgent of me. I suspect one interesting point was not taken into account by the survey. That would be the fantastic cost of splitting up all the county-wide services, which range from adult and children’s social care to waste disposal. To divide that into two and then merge the district authorities would in itself be an unnecessary cost if we have two authorities rather than one.

[Bradley Thomas]

I agree with my hon. Friend and neighbour. He makes a very relevant point that the cost of organising two councils will be profound, and in the long term will prove to be a false economy. The figures that I will quote shortly will demonstrate that further.

Reorganising local government will not resolve all the financial challenges facing our communities, because even with structural change, there will continue to be rising demand on adult social care, persistent pressures in homelessness and temporary accommodation, a growing resource need for schools and increasing demand for children’s services. That is why financial sustainability must be by design and not chance. Anything less will fail to meet the increasing needs of local communities and will ultimately result in deficits that must be paid for by hard-working residents. Financial sustainability cannot be an afterthought; it must be the foundation.

One council will have the ability to follow six key principles to achieve genuine and lasting financial sustainability. First, it could reduce the cost of leadership and governance by redesigning leadership from the ground up to reflect the needs of a new, modern unitary authority. Secondly, it could become prevention focused by embedding a long-term independence-based approach across all services, enabling people to get back on their feet and easing the burden on local provision. Thirdly, it could ensure that all commissions are intelligent and that services provided are appropriate and necessary, supported by the unparallelled buying power and market access afforded to one council, enabling strategic investment in better value services. Fourthly, it could nurture an accountable and high-performing workforce by bringing together the strengths of seven predecessor authorities and building on their collective skills. Fifthly, it could deliver responsible custodianship of public assets to maintain a balanced budget, safeguard the continued delivery of local services and preserve our historic culture. Finally, it could make decisions that are fully informed and grounded firmly in evidence.

The outcome of that approach is simple—£32 million saved by 2031 and a more balanced, less impactful increase to council tax. In comparison, the imbalance between service need and income from council tax would be significant under two unitary councils. A new North Worcestershire unitary council would face substantial challenges, with higher levels of need but a smaller share of the tax base, while a South Worcestershire unitary authority would experience significant council tax rises over the same period. It is simple to understand that improved financial results lead directly to improved services for the community.

With the stronger position created by one council, services could be delivered through a more community-centred approach, with simpler, more accessible pathways. Residents will no longer need to navigate multiple tiers of local government to resolve their issues. That is particularly beneficial for individuals who require access to multiple services at once. This model will not only increase transparency and improve local access, which are distinct components of British politics, but will also ensure that policies truly reflect what people actually want to see and expect their council tax to support.

Streamlining service delivery under one council removes the risk of a postcode lottery where access, cost, sufficiency and quality vary depending on where residents live. That is especially vital for young people, as many schools are reaching capacity, so students are being required to travel further, and for rural communities, which are already facing limited infrastructure compared with more urbanised areas. Key people services, including housing, family support and social care, are currently delivered across two tiers of local government, creating unnecessary complexities and inefficiencies. That is particularly important in Worcestershire, where demographic shifts are significant—an ageing population exceeding the national average, with 22% of people aged 66 to 84, alongside a growing younger population of more than 117,000 children. Those trends place profound pressure on essential services such as GPs, hospitals, schools, nurseries and social care.

One council could integrate those services so that they work cohesively to achieve better outcomes for the community. A prime example, given the demographics that I mentioned, is the ability to align health priorities with housing and leisure, enabling preventive policies that improve quality of life and reduce pressure on health services later on. Removing duplication across services would also increase efficiency in the council’s overall offering. It would allow organisations, including local NHS trusts and schools, to build stronger, more consistent relationships as they would be working with a single unified authority rather than navigating multiple structures. It is evident that one council would be able to deliver the improved and simplified services that my constituents called for.

The risk of disaggregation also cannot be ignored. The need for high-cost social care, the service that 42% of survey respondents cited as the one that they care about most, is concentrated in one half of Worcestershire, while the greatest proportion of the tax base is in the other half. The current degree of balance that results in residents paying relatively low tax would be disrupted, creating long-term instability for both households and essential services.

Not only is the disaggregation of social care a dangerous risk, but it would set back the progress on bringing its functions to the high standard that they are. Adults would be at risk of not receiving seamless community care. Service deliveries and assessments would be delayed. Children’s services would be restricted by boundary lines, causing disruption for those not on the correct side to continue their current care; it would be a postcode lottery. Maintaining two recording systems for social care would be costly and take a long time to implement, diverting resources from frontline support.

Similarly, fragmenting the network of partnerships in Worcestershire would only complicate funding arrangements, commissioning plans, service eligibility and the ability to install an action plan. Those partnerships have taken years to build; dismantling them would undermine the very foundations of effective care. Instead, relationships should be preserved and built upon, and closer collaboration would be far more possible with a single service provider rather than numerous tiers. That is a key benefit that only one unitary council can provide; it would ensure continuity, coherence and a system that works for every resident across Worcestershire.

A proposal for a single Worcestershire unitary authority has been backed by local partner stakeholders, including the police and crime commissioner, the local NHS integrated care board, Worcestershire acute hospitals NHS trust, the Worcestershire local visitor economy partnership, and commercial stakeholders, including Worcester Bosch.

It is evident that the proposal for a single unitary council meets the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s criteria for devolution arrangements. The case is clear and compelling. A single council for Worcestershire would offer not only operational simplicity, but a renewed sense of purpose for local government in our area. The one council would prioritise the delivery of high quality and sustainable public services to residents.

This would not simply be an organisational reshuffle; it would be a commitment to ensuring that every community, from the most rural parish to the most urban centre, receives services that are consistent, efficient and good value for money. Councils in the area have sought to work together in coming to a view that meets local needs and is informed by local views. This collaborative approach demonstrates a proactive start and an ambition to adapt and build a structure that is reflective of residents’ realities.

Having one council would enable stronger community engagement and deliver genuine opportunity for neighbourhood empowerment. Removing unnecessary layers of bureaucracy would give residents a stronger voice and a more direct relationship with those making decisions on their behalf. There would be a single tier of local government for the whole area, simplifying it and making it more accessible. The new structure would resize in order to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks. In an era when public finances are increasingly overwhelmed, the ability to operate with greater resilience and strategic oversight is essential. It cannot be doubted that one unitary council would significantly meet the criteria outlined by the Government, while being in the best interest of Worcestershire as a whole.

Keeping decisions local is vital, as is achieving long-term financial sustainability, offering consistent, high-quality services, and protecting our green belt and our county’s identity. That is why I strongly support the creation of one unitary council that would streamline services, improve value for money for residents and work towards a strong future for Worcestershire. This is an opportunity to shape an efficient and community-centred system for our local government—one that respects our current identity while preparing us for the challenges and opportunities ahead. A single unitary council is not merely an administrative preference; it is a strategic choice for a more secure, more coherent and more prosperous Worcestershire.

11:19

[The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)]

It is a pleasure, as ever, to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I congratulate the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) on securing this important debate on local government reorganisation in Bromsgrove and Worcestershire. I know that he has a keen interest in this issue, and we all heard the detailed argument that he made. I acknowledge the arguments, facts and point of view that he explained to us, which are on the record. He will understand that there is a limit to what I can say, given the process that we are undergoing, but I assure him that colleagues in the Department and elsewhere will read and understand what he has said. I thank him for putting forward his point of view.

For background, I will run through the reasons why we are reorganising local government and why we think that will benefit communities, although the hon. Member will know them already and he raised some of the issues. We want to streamline local government and replace the two-tier system with single unitary councils, precisely in order to create councils that can reform public services, drive economic growth and empower their communities. The hon. Member mentioned the criteria that we set out for doing that. As he said, this is not some bureaucratic exercise or tinkering with lines on a map; these are the biggest reforms to local government for a very long time—the biggest in 50 years, as he pointed out—and we need to make the most of this opportunity. We want people to have preventive public services, and we want to give economies the chance to thrive. With single councils in charge over sensible geographies, we will see quicker decisions to build homes, grow our towns and cities, and connect people to jobs.

Strong local government is central to tackling deprivation and poverty. People living in neighbourhoods that are high on the index of multiple deprivation deserve responsive and joined-up services that help them reach their full potential. Unfortunately, in too many areas across England, we have multiple levels of confusing and inefficient structures, whereas one council can take responsibility for the places it serves. The Government will deliver unitary local government in all areas of England within this Parliament, and I am really encouraged by the progress we have made so far. We have already announced two new unitary authorities for Surrey, and our consultations on the final proposals for a further six areas are due to close on 11 January.

As the hon. Member will know, we received proposals for unitary local government from councils in Worcestershire on 28 November. Let me place on record my thanks to local leaders and officers in the Worcestershire councils for their positive approach to collaboration and data sharing to enable the proposals we have received. That collaborative approach will stand the area in good stead in the unitary implementation phase, which is very important for all the reasons that the hon. Member set out. There is shared commitment in the area to get the best possible outcome for the residents, communities and businesses of Worcestershire.

I expect to launch a consultation in early February on the final proposals I received on 28 November, including those from Worcestershire, that seek to meet the terms of the 5 February statutory invitation. That consultation will run for seven weeks. Decisions on the most appropriate option for each area will be judgments made in the round, having regard to the criteria in the statutory guidance, the consultation responses and any other relevant information. We have heard much more relevant information today and, as I mentioned, that will be taken into account as we proceed.

I am grateful to the hon. Member for securing this debate. I know that he has spoken in the House on previous occasions to share his views, and we have heard them. I cannot comment further, but we are grateful that he has put those matters on the record. I know that there will be many opinions locally, and he has done an excellent job of representing his constituents this morning. When the time comes to launch the consultation, I know that he will engage with it to make sure that the views of his constituents are fed in. I am grateful to him and keen to hear those opinions.

Question put and agreed to.

11:24

Sitting suspended.

UK Town of Culture

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

14:30

[Alex Ballinger (Halesowen) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the UK Town of Culture competition.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I want to begin by saying why the UK town of culture competition matters to towns like Halesowen. At its best, culture is not a luxury for places that are already well off; it is the glue that keeps communities together when the economy is changing around them. It is the thing that turns a high street into a meeting place, a park into a shared memory, and local history into a source of confidence for the next generation. The town of culture award is not just a title for the tourist brochures; it can be a lever for investment, volunteering, skills and pride, and for the practical business of renewal, as well as the poetry.

It is right that the competition has arrived when it has, because anyone who has spent time in the Black Country will know that we have quietly been a centre of British culture for years. London may have the west end, but the Black Country was the birthplace of British rock music, with Led Zeppelin and Slade hailing from our part of the world. The capital may have art galleries, but we have the Black Country Living Museum to preserve the history of glass making, chain making and real industrial crafts. Through the Hawne Halesowen townswomen’s guild we have probably the best yarn bombers in the history of the world.

We are not short on culture, but we have been short on other people noticing it. That is why I am proud to speak today about Halesowen, a town that deserves to be understood. Halesowen sits at a remarkable junction: a market town with the industrial inheritance of the Black Country and the green breathing space of the surrounding countryside. It is a place where in the same afternoon people can feel the legacy of making and the comfort of landscape. That combination is not accidental: it is the outcome of centuries of people working the land, working the forge, and creating a community that knows what it means to pull together.

When we speak about the Black Country, we speak rightly about manufacturing, and Halesowen has that story in its bones. In and around Halesowen, families built livelihoods through skilled trades and hard physical work done in small workshops and backyards, with a pride in workmanship that still shapes our local character today. It is tempting to describe that as history and move on, but that would miss the point. The value of that heritage is not simply that it happened, but what it tells us about the people of Halesowen today. It is a town where practical intelligence is still prized, where people understand the dignity of work, and where small and medium-sized businesses do not need lectures on resilience, because they have been living it for decades.

If Halesowen is a town that makes, it is also a town that imagines. One of the great cultural treasures of the constituency is the Leasowes, a historic landscape that was shaped by the poet William Shenstone. The Leasowes is not merely a park; it represents an idea—an early expression of the English landscape tradition where beauty, nature and the rhythms of rural life were brought together in a way that influenced English gardens far beyond our town. Its remarkable beauty drew two former US Presidents to visit: John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. I issue an open invitation to the sitting US President to follow in their footsteps—it is a much nicer place than Greenland.

Within the Leasowes is a place that is exactly what the town of culture competition should be about: the Leasowes walled garden. It is hard to think of a more fitting symbol of what we are discussing. The walled garden is Halesowen at its best: respectful of the past, practical in the present and quietly ambitious for the future. It is not just a historical feature; it is a demonstration of civic pride in action. The walled garden has been brought back from ruin through the determined efforts of the Halesowen Abbey Trust and a remarkable team of volunteers who have given their time, skill and patience to restore a piece of heritage for public benefit. That work has received national recognition: just last month, the Leasowes walled garden was listed as grade II by Historic England, recognising both its historic significance and its architectural interest.

Halesowen has not only landscape but cultural reach through literature. It is the birthplace of Francis Brett Young, whose writing helped to put our region in the frame. Culture is not only what happens in big cities; it is also the patient recording of lives and places that feel to the people who live there like the centre of the world.

Halesowen is also the world centre of music. I mentioned Led Zeppelin earlier. Robert Plant grew up in Hayley Green and went on to become one of the defining voices in British rock; indeed, he was voted the best lead singer of all time by Rolling Stone magazine. And no town is complete without sport. Halesowen Town football club is not merely a team but an institution. It is one of the places where community life is renewed weekly, through familiar rituals: the talk on the terraces, the work of the volunteers behind the scenes and the intergenerational bonds that non-league football clubs uniquely sustain.

That brings me to someone who deserves to be named in this debate—Colin Brookes, the long-standing chairman of Halesowen Town FC, who passed away at the end of last year. Colin was a towering figure at the club, and he is remembered by many as the embodiment of its spirit and in many ways the town’s spirit, too. Colin guided Halesowen Town through many challenges, always remained close to the club and—fittingly—passed away while watching his beloved Yeltz.

However, the truth is that Halesowen’s culture is not only what I can list in a speech; it is also the daily life of the town. It is what happens in community centres, churches, schools, parks, cafés and small businesses; it is the volunteers who turn up in the cold to help run a youth club; and it is the sense that the town is more than a collection of streets. That matters profoundly when we talk about a town of culture, because the competition should not be about parachuting in a programme of events, and leaving behind a banner and a few glossy photographs. Instead, it should be about enabling a town to tell the truth about itself: what it has been, what it is now and what it wants to become.

In Halesowen, one of the truths that we can express with confidence is that ours is a welcoming town. For generations, people have come to Halesowen to work, to build families, to contribute and to become part of the place. That is not a recent trend—it is part of the Black Country story. We have communities who have shaped the local economy and culture over time, bringing traditions and different languages, food and faiths, that have widened the town’s horizons.

That diversity is not a weakness to be managed, but a strength to be celebrated. It is seen in the way that communities support one another. It is also seen in the celebration of the Black Country Multicultural Day in the town centre, or at the Halesowen/Dudley Yemeni community association, which offers language classes and youth activities. Culture, after all, is a shared language that allows people of different backgrounds to recognise themselves in a common home.

[Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. He has given an eloquent appraisal of why Halesowen is such a beacon for culture, and I note that Morgan Rogers, who plays for Aston Villa, was born in Halesowen. Will my hon. Friend join me in saying that this competition is not just about celebrating our past but about celebrating our future and people such as Max Stokes, a constituent of mine in Redditch, who curates the “Villa On Tour” YouTube channel, which has over 80,000 subscribers? People such as Max Stokes provide an outlet for our culture, including our sporting culture, to be seen by people across the world—culture with a Redditch accent and a Redditch voice. Does he agree that this competition should be about celebrating our future as well as our past?

[Alex Ballinger]

I join my hon. Friend in celebrating Max Stokes and his wonderful achievements in Redditch. My hon. Friend knows Halesowen well, because he has campaigned there for many years, so I hope that he will be an advocate for my town throughout the competition.

When I ask the Minister to recognise Halesowen’s cultural claim, I am not simply asking for a prize; I am making a practical argument. The town of culture award can help towns such as Halesowen in at least four concrete ways. First, it can boost our local economy, bringing in visitors to spend money in our shops, cafés and venues, supporting jobs that are rooted in a place. Secondly, it can strengthen skills and pathways for young people, particularly in the creative industries, events, heritage, digital media and community enterprise. Those sectors are growing and towns such as Halesowen should not be left to watch them grow from the sidelines. Thirdly, it can drive investment in local assets—our parks, halls, libraries and heritage sites—that towns rely on for civic life, but that often struggle to receive sustained funding. Finally and perhaps most importantly, the award can restore confidence. A community that feels seen and valued tends to act like it. Pride is not merely an ambition—it is a catalyst that changes what a town believes is possible.

In that spirit, I will put on the record what Halesowen can offer this competition. We can offer the story of a town that helped to build the country through skilled work, honest labour, technical ability and enterprise. We can offer landscape and heritage that connects people to the long thread of English history, and not as nostalgia but as stewardship. We can offer a living and modern cultural identity, and music, sport and community traditions that are rooted in place but outward-looking. We can also offer a model of community cohesion that is quietly impressive—diverse, practical and neighbourly.

I would want our programme to reflect those truths. I would want it to celebrate the makers and their skills to revitalise green spaces and heritage sites, to open doors for young people into culture and creative work, and to showcase the everyday institutions and individuals—community groups, faith organisations and volunteers—that keep our town strong.

Halesowen has the story, the assets and the people. With the right support, we can turn that into a bid that does justice not only to our town, but to the wider Black Country. If we are serious about culture at the heart of renewal, we should start with the towns that have never lost their sense of community, even when the national spotlight has looked elsewhere. Halesowen is one of those towns. It has earned its place in the national story and I hope that, through this competition, it will be given a platform to tell that story with the confidence it deserves.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Gill Furniss (in the Chair)]

I ask Members to bob so that I can see how many people wish to speak in the debate. To start the debate, I call Jim Shannon.

14:40

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Thank you for calling me so early, Ms Furniss. I was about to sit down, but I now have the unexpected pleasure of following the hon. Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger). It is wonderful to be here. I am sure that everyone is going to say that their constituency is the best, but mine is the best and I will try to explain why. The hon. Member has persuaded me of one thing: if I am spared, I will make it my business to visit his constituency and see if what says is true. I am sure it is—I do not doubt it for a second.

The debate presents a wonderful opportunity to showcase all our wonderful constituencies, and I am sure that we will all plead the case very well. However, I say proudly that my constituency of Strangford may just edge it—at least I believe that that will be the case—but we will see how the debate develops and whether others are persuaded by my words. The principle of the competition—and it is a competition—is a great idea. Of course, the heavy issues that we discuss daily are important—they are critically important to County Down—but it is also important that we celebrate our local towns and all that they do for communities across the United Kingdom.

The hon. Member for Halesowen is right that the largest town is the core of a constituency. I often talk about my constituency in the House. I always try to relate the issues we discuss to the situation back home, because those issues matter to people across the whole of the United Kingdom, although sometimes their scope is restricted by area. I am grateful that we all have the opportunity to showcase culture and I will focus on the wonderful town of Newtownards, which is the biggest town in the constituency and where my advice centre is. There are other notable towns such as Comber, Ballynahinch and Crossgar. I am not sure if hon. Members knows where those places are, but they are all in my constituency, and I make sure that Strangford is mentioned in nearly every intervention that I make and in every debate in which I participate.

Comber has a long history that dates back to the 17th century. It played an important role in the agricultural and linen industries that Northern Ireland had for many years, although unfortunately that is not the same today, giving it a unique cultural and economic heritage that is preserved in local museums and historical societies, which the hon. Member for Halesowen referred to in his contribution.

Newtownards is home to my main constituency office, where I support thousands of constituents. It is a town where history, heritage and creativity come together to form a truly unique cultural identity. Newtownards is a canvas of heritage. Anyone walking through the streets can see the historical Market House, the Scrabo tower and the old buildings that frame Conway Square. The hon. Member for Halesowen referred to cafés, but we have created a coffee culture in Conway Square, where a large number of coffee shops have opened in the last four to five years. There are family-owned shops: Wardens has been going since 1877 and Knotts is there too. The Old Cross, now the Parlour pub, was first built in 1735. That means that Wardens is almost 150 years old and the Parlour is 291 years old, so there is history and culture that goes back a long time.

I am very proud of my Orange culture, which has shaped identities for generations. I am a member of Kircubbin Volunteers LOL 1900, and I am also worshipful master of the House of Commons lodge. The lodges and parades are more than tradition; they bring communities together and invite everyone to take part in their culture, and people do. People from different religious persuasions —maybe different political persuasions—see the pageant and the celebration of the Orange parades. From local theatre groups to vibrant music ensembles, from community murals to creative festivals, the list is never-ending.

Culture should be for everyone, and I celebrate the story of that 17th-century town established in 1605: Newtownards. It was established as part of the plantation of Ulster, when English and Scottish settlers were encouraged to establish towns and farms in Ulster. I always look towards my Scottish and Gaelic brothers and sisters in this place and say to them, if we go back far enough, we might be related—we might even be cousins. Today we see that fertile land and Strangford Lough, which provided access to maritime trade, still used and loved.

To conclude, I acknowledge and love to hear others’ passion for the places that they represent. I adore my towns and, more so, I thank them for what they represent for the people who live in them and the businesses that hold them together. For the ones in my constituency, where else would you find more charm per square mile? I believe Strangford and Newtownards is that very place.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Gill Furniss (in the Chair)]

I can let you all have four minutes.

14:46

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

In Cornwall, we do not have big urban centres; we have towns with populations of about 20,000. That is why the UK town of culture competition is one that a large rural area such as Cornwall can get involved in. I am taking it as a good example of the Government’s commitment to, and awareness of, the rural parts of the country.

I am really lucky to come from a place with a distinctive narrative. We have our own language, which is now recognised again, and in Truro and Falmouth we have a beautiful peninsula town and a great little city, each with their own character and a strong sense of Cornish identity. Falmouth has a very distinct story. It is a vibrant place that has always turned its face outwards towards the sea. The packet ships took trade and parcels around the world from the late 1600s, and we have the two castles of Pendennis and St Mawes, built by Henry VIII, to protect Falmouth.

Now, Falmouth has an incredible arts and science university, stemming out of a 100-year-old art school, along with a thriving music scene and an active and young town council in lockstep with a strong business improvement district. The council runs an art gallery for all, a library, the peninsula headland, a newly built community radio station, and a theatre and venue. The team are award-winning and know how to run a world-class event, from international shanty festivals to the tall ships. Falmouth is inclusive and welcoming, from yacht to gig racing and from shanties and metal to Ukrainian soul. It hosts everything from the Lady of Shalott by Waterhouse to graduate shows of prosthetic props at Falmouth University in Penryn, where the Methodist chapel was recently converted into artist spaces.

Then there is Truro, Cornwall’s capital and one of the smallest cities in the UK. Lying upriver from Falmouth, it has been shaped by its proximity to the coast, as almost everywhere in Cornwall has been. There is evidence that the Phoenicians and the Romans traded with Truro, and by the 14th century it had become a significant port and stannary town, exporting locally mined tin and copper. We hope that can now happen again thanks to our critical minerals strategy.

By the 19th century, Truro was a local cultural centre. The Royal Institution of Cornwall was founded in the city to promote the arts and sciences. It was intended to provide access to culture and learning for Cornish people at a time when there was no universal education. This aim resembles that of the town of culture competition: to break down the barriers to opportunity and open up culture to everyone, even if they live in a peripheral area such as Cornwall, where some of the high arts barely come down at all.

The Royal Institution of Cornwall still exists today in the form of the Cornwall Museum and Art Gallery. Truro is also home to Cornwall’s beautifully renovated national theatre, which has just finished its Cornish panto, and our distinctive gothic revival cathedral, which hosts everything from art and silent discos to concerts. We have weekly markets, Bert Biscoe’s walking tours, fantastic pubs, bars and restaurants, and so much more.

Cornwall’s story has always been one of reinvention. When the packet service left Falmouth in the mid-19th century, the town adapted. As the river Truro silted up, the city became Cornwall’s administrative heart. Our mining industry has seen boom and bust, and now resurgence. Creativity has always sparked in Cornwall, but rurality and peripherality have often limited our opportunity. We face deprivation, which is why cultural infrastructure really matters. Whether it is one of the places I have mentioned alone, or as part of a hub-and-spoke model, they would all have my wholehearted support in the UK town of culture competition, and I urge them to apply.

14:49

[Danny Kruger (East Wiltshire) (Reform)]

It is a pleasure to listen to these wonderful encomia for our towns, and I am going to add my voice on behalf of Wiltshire, and particularly Amesbury. I would be delighted if Marlborough, the other big town in my constituency, were to win the competition, but I want to speak particularly for Amesbury.

I was struck by the hon. Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger), who made a very good speech on behalf of his constituency, boasting about its important link with the history of heavy metal. Anyone who has seen the film “This Is Spinal Tap” will know that in fact it is Stonehenge that is the genuine heart of the history of heavy metal. On that ground, if nothing else, surely Amesbury should win, because it is the town of Stonehenge. I will return to that point in a moment.

The hon. Gentleman for Redditch (Chris Bloore) intervened to suggest that the award should be about the future. I disagree. Surely it should be about the history of our places. There is no place in these islands with a longer, and therefore greater, history than Amesbury, because it is the oldest continually inhabited settlement in the British Isles. People were living there a very, very long time ago, in 8820 BC. In fact, the grave of what we now call the Amesbury archer—a man buried with a bow and arrow and various other valuable artefacts—was discovered in Amesbury some time ago. DNA testing has demonstrated that he came to Amesbury from the Swiss alps many centuries ago, in the days when this country was still connected to Europe by a land bridge. Those who believe we should rejoin our continental neighbours under some sort of terrible political union might be inspired to think of Amesbury as a place where that was demonstrated millennia ago.

Thousands of years after the original settlement, Stonehenge was built, and it stands as the greatest monument to a now forgotten civilisation—the heart of England from which so much derived. The great world heritage site that is the central district of Wiltshire is to be found in Amesbury. It is the site of Romans, Saxons and the myths of King Arthur, whose wife Guinevere is apparently buried in Amesbury—who can tell? We do know that King Alfred left the manor of Amesbury to his son. A little later, in the pre-Norman era, the first church was built there, and its remains are still there. Subsequently, and significantly, the remains of the only monarch of England whose whereabouts are not precisely known are believed to be somewhere in Amesbury. Queen Eleanor of Provence, the wife of Henry III, died somewhere in the area in 1291. We are hopeful that in the coming years we will discover her actual burial place and have a fitting memorial.

Having made the point about Amesbury’s past, I want to conclude by saying that it is a very vibrant, genuinely warm community that is rich in existing possibility and, indeed, in prosperity. It is part of the world heritage site, although sadly bisected from Stonehenge itself by the A303. We had been led to believe there was going to be a significant investment in tunnelling that road, which would have connected the town more closely to the site, but that is now not happening. Nevertheless, there is an enormous opportunity, and it is really important for Wiltshire that the town that hosts the museum for Stonehenge and is, as I say, the source of such amazing heritage should be able to benefit from the millions of tourists who come through every year. I hope that, through the town of culture award, we can recognise the importance of Amesbury locally, nationally and internationally.

14:53

[Dr Allison Gardner (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) for securing this debate. I am delighted to speak today to shine a spotlight on Longton, a proud town in my constituency and a place where culture does not just sit in museums but runs through everyday life. Longton stands proud among Stoke-on-Trent’s six towns—five not six, Mr Arnold Bennett—all of which retain their own identity.

Longton’s culture is inseparable from its history. It made a significant contribution to the UK’s heritage and culture through our proud pottery industry, which to this day still ships British products all over the world. Duchess China provides its china to the House of Commons and the House of Lords, and Sarah Rose provides china to No. 10—we are everywhere. Longton was once at the beating heart of the industry, and visitors from all over the world now come to marvel at our pottery heritage at the beloved Gladstone Pottery Museum, home of “The Great Pottery Throw Down”. But Longton’s heritage is not just a relic of its past. The skills, creativity and pride forged through generations of pottery and craft continue to shape our future. The ceramics industry has faced real challenges, but there is an enormous opportunity to grow tourism and breathe new life into our many heritage buildings.

Local businesses are already capitalising on the opportunity to showcase our culture. The Kiln at Number 12 offers visitors pottery, painting and hands-on craft experiences. I am sure Members have seen those fish-shaped drinking jugs—they are from the Gluggle Jug factory, in my constituency. Roslyn works, a grade II listed pot bank, is now an entrepreneurial centre that showcases the work of brilliant local artisans and hosts the smallest pottery kiln in the country. Launch It, which operates in Longton town hall, is a local hub for young entrepreneurs, creatives, artists and makers to seek business and start-up support—supporting new arts, crafts and creative businesses to thrive.

Our culture extends beyond pottery to arts and music. In our town centre, we have beautiful murals commemorating the world wars, as well as commemorating the world-renowned Belstaff brand, which started in Longton and now sells clothes all over the globe. There are plans for another huge mural opposite our train station to commemorate our proud pottery heritage, plus a new statue outside our town hall celebrating female potters. Music is central to Longton. At Methodist Central Hall, we have frequent choirs, including Stoke male voice choir.

We are incredibly lucky to have Urban Wilderness, a charity that delivers place-based events and arts programmes to empower our local community. It has recently secured funding to turn an old bank into a new art centre, expanding on its Moony Club programme—a free-to-access arts programme in Longton Exchange. In 2023, Urban Wilderness started its famous Longton carnival and pig walk parade. It is based on a local heritage story about Mayor John Aynsley, who won a bet with the Duke of Sutherland by walking a pig through the centre of Longton, thereby winning the Queen’s parkland for the people of Longton.

I thank Isla Telford at Urban Wilderness for putting forward Longton’s bid for the UK town of culture, and Roz Ryan, in the vibrant Longton Exchange, for putting the idea forward. Their bid proposal will look into themes of work and play, young people, and the legacy of our great ceramic heritage, including our canals and our connections to coal. They will be working with multiple partners to deliver a future-focused bid that builds on the centenary of Stoke-on-Trent and celebrates Longton’s unique blend of industrial manufacture, play and connectivity.

Longton’s story is not just a local one. It is a story of British industry, British creativity and British communities refusing to give up. I am confident that, with the right support, Longton can continue to be a vibrant town centre, and that it would be a great UK town of culture.

14:58

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) for his passionate pitch for his area.

I welcome the Government’s announcement of the competition for the town of culture 2028. The nature of a community is defined by three things: its landscape and architecture, its hospitality and retail sector, and—mostly—its culture. Dorset is the home of the Jurassic coast, but it is also home to some incredible culture: from the literature of Thomas Hardy and Enid Blyton to the Arts by the Sea festival in Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole, and the Inside Out festival, which pops up in the smaller towns and villages—not to mention Purbeck film festival, which is the oldest rural film festival in the UK, so lovingly curated by volunteers.

I agree with the hon. Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore), who talked about the future as well as the past. I celebrate both. The three towns of Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole, which are looking to bid together, offer a great story of togetherness. Christchurch has a history that dates back to AD 650, with its younger sibling Poole—with its fantastic links to Canada and fishing—receiving the first of its two charters in 1248.

Poole also draws on its local culture with the Folk on the Quay festival, which is the smaller sibling of the annual Wimborne minster folk festival. The harbour is also the setting for the amazing Poole harbour festival, which I am excited to confirm is being headlined this year by the Kaiser Chiefs, and will also feature my favourite band, Scouting for Girls, as well as many home-grown talents, such as Chris Payn, the Wonky Donkeys and the Mother Ukers.

Our incredible landscape also inspires visual arts. Our lord lieutenant even has an inspiring artist in residence, the lovely Dave Roberts, who pens everything that the lord lieutenant does throughout all the towns.

People often bemoan how our town centres have become identikit. As we move to online shopping, and as the high cost of trading makes it far more difficult, our towns and cities will become defined more by what we can do and experience than by what we can buy. That is why it is so important that councils continue to fund culture; it must not become something that only the wealthy can afford.

[Tony Vaughan (Folkestone and Hythe) (Lab)]

Does the hon. Member agree that economic regeneration through the arts and culture is a powerful way of showing the link between the past and the future in our national story? If so, would she agree that Folkestone is a prime example of that? Having been a port from which our troops went to the frontline in world war one, it became a commercial port, has been regenerated through the arts and is now the best place to live in south-east England.

[Vikki Slade]

I thank the hon. and learned Gentleman for raising that. Speaking of towns with incredible historical ports, much of the training for the D-day landings took place from Poole harbour. We now have the incredible Lighthouse cultural venue in Poole, where residents have mapped the town’s history, its links to Canada and its future in an incredible community play, showing how the town grew up.

The Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra, which is based in Poole, could not open up to the National Theatre schools programme without public funding. It could not send musicians into hospices, run its annual schools concert, which this year is based on the elements, or visit Exeter and Portsmouth without that local funding. It is absolutely crucial that we maintain that, so that grassroots groups can continue to meet in our draughty community centres to create the next generation of actors, musicians, authors and artists. They simply will not exist if we do not maintain funding for culture.

I am really pleased that the Minister is to confirm that the town of culture competition will come with £60,000 of funding; when looking into the city of culture scheme, I found that it can be incredibly expensive to enter these competitions; if a city does not get through to the final, they end up then having to cut the very services that they were trying to develop through the competition. It is a great decision to make sure that shortlisted places get a bite of the cherry.

I know that Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole will submit their own very vibrant and energising application, which will deserve support, but I must mention smaller groups too. Besides the UK town of culture, Dorset has its own town of culture competition, and I am thrilled that this year Wimborne, the heart of my beautiful constituency, has been announced as the town of culture 2026, with its incredible Museum of East Dorset—complete with a mummified cat—a chained library in Wimborne minster, the Tivoli theatre, the Allendale Centre, the annual Queen Elizabeth’s school show, which this year is “Legally Blonde: The Musical”, the Walford Mill Gallery, the annual folk festival and the Kingston Lacy stately home, which features incredible art celebrating its LGBT owner, who had to hide away in Spain when it was not safe to be gay in this country.

Wimborne really is the place to be in 2026 and can show other places how culture can be inclusive, relevant and fun even on a small scale. I would love to welcome the Minister and other hon. Members to come to Wimborne during 2026; I can assure them they will receive a warm welcome and leave enriched by a flavour of Dorset in our food and our culture.

15:03

[Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve, Ms Furniss. I want to tell a story about my own background and how it relates to the concept of culture-led growth.

I grew up in the ’70s and ’80s in the north-west of England in a town called Prescot, about 15 miles or so from my Southport constituency that was dominated for decades by the factory site of an industrial cable manufacturer. The town adopted the cable factory almost as a part of its identity. Ask anyone for miles around, and they would say, “Oh, Prescot—that’s where they make the cables.” The town’s football club is still called Prescot Cables. When I was a little boy, I used to make Lego models of the machinery that I could see through the factory gates that I passed on my way to school. The factory hooter, telling the workers when their shift was open, could be heard all over the town, and on new year’s eve it would blow especially at midnight to bring in the new year. The importance of that place to the town cannot be overstated.

Then they closed the factory down. Hundreds of well-paid jobs were gone. The next generation of lads growing up would not be making Lego models of the factory any more. There is nothing special about that story; it is one that is repeated everywhere. But there is a positive element, because over the last decade the town has been transformed through culture.

There has long been a rumour—probably untroubled by fact—that in the 1590s William Shakespeare visited Prescot to escape the plague. Based on that rumour, 20 years ago a small group of cultural practitioners decided to build an Elizabethan-style, 500-capacity theatre on the site of a big old bus stop in the town. People laughed; the council leader actually said,

“When I announced the plan in the council chamber, quite a few people started laughing”.

They are not laughing now, because there is indeed a playhouse on the site of that old bus stop, training up young people in the creative industries, the arts and performance.

The £40 million capital investment that was brought in was only the start of the story, though, because the theatre is attracting people back into the town. It has a positive multiplier effect. The jobs are coming back; cafés are opening where there used to be bookmakers; a community arts organisation is now going into schools to inspire children into a career in the creative industries. It would not surprise me if some of those children started building Lego models of the playhouse.

Here is my point: the destiny of a town is not set in stone. It can be changed. Commitment to cultural infrastructure can reverse a downward slide. Change can happen off the back of cultural improvement.

My hometown proves that, but we have also done similarly in my new home in Southport since I was elected. We have a year of culture in 2026. There will be an incredible sound and light installation taking over the town, turning it into a giant rainbow. There will be an outdoor ballroom in April, with 150 years of music and dance played out, and our favourite works of fiction are coming to life on the streets of the town in October—check out Southport2026.com for more details. We know that that is what a town of culture can do. It will allow the kids of today to look back in wonder in 50 years’ time, and to tell their grandchildren that they were there.

15:07

[Sarah Green (Chesham and Amersham) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I must say how good it is to stand up in Westminster Hall to speak enthusiastically about an initiative like this one. I thank the hon. Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) for securing today’s debate, because investment is often focused on cities and larger urban areas, so the town of culture initiative is truly welcome.

Having spoken to interested groups in my constituency, I know there is real excitement about the initiative and the fact that it will draw attention to towns where creativity, heritage and culture are already thriving. Becoming a town of culture will act as a catalyst for growth, allowing hidden gems to shine. As well as boosting local pride, it could help to support high street recovery and create opportunities for residents, especially young people, who may never have considered employment in the creative sector before.

At its heart, however, the initiative is about empowering local people—artists, musicians and volunteers as well as schools, community groups and local businesses—to create a cultural programme that reflects the identity of their town. That sense of ownership, and the platform it gives to local organisations, is what makes the initiative so powerful. It invites groups in local communities to work together to showcase what their town has to offer, and to tell their own unique story to the rest of the UK—and their MPs are doing a stellar job on their behalf in this debate.

I can tell the Minister that I have a town in my constituency, Chesham, where community groups, volunteers and businesses are champing at the bit to get started on their application. Frankly, it is brilliant to see. In his remarks, will he answer the questions that they have asked me, by clarifying the timeline that he is working to and confirming which authorities must support a bid?

15:09

[Sam Rushworth (Bishop Auckland) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) for securing this debate, and warmly welcome the opportunity for Bishop Auckland to bid to become the UK’s town of culture.

Bishop Auckland is the town that gave birth to the calendar. It was Bede who stood on a local hillside, looked at the cosmos and wrote “The Reckoning of Time”, by which we decide when Easter is today. The north-east is the cradle of Christianity in the UK. The Faith Museum, the only one of its kind globally, opened in Bishop Auckland in 2023 and tells the 6,000 year history of faith, including Christianity, in the UK. It is based at Auckland Palace, the home of the prince bishops of Durham, who were the most important men in the kingdom after the king at the time.

The town forms part of the camino ingles, or English way, a route trod by pilgrims since the middle ages. We have an Anglo-Saxon church, one of the oldest in the country, down the road. Following a community archaeological dig, the 14th century ruins of Bek’s chapel were discovered outside the palace. The eponymous Bek served not only as bishop of Durham, but as patriarch of Jerusalem. The palace is also home to the famous Zurbarán paintings “Jacob and his Twelve Sons”.

The connection between Bishop Auckland and Spanish art is perhaps best exemplified by the Spanish Gallery, where hon. Members will find the greatest collection of 17th century Spanish art anywhere in the world outside Spain. It was opened by the now King, alongside Queen Letizia of Spain, in 2022. Bishop Auckland’s pedigree in the world of art does not stop there. Our town’s proud industrial heritage is on display at the Mining Art Gallery, showcasing work of local artists such as former mineworkers Tom McGuinness of Witton Park and Norman Cornish from nearby Spennymoor, two prevalent figures in British social realism. The museum was founded by my constituent and neighbour Bob McManners to showcase his collection of art.

The town also punches above its weight in the performing arts. Stanley Jefferson, of Laurel and Hardy fame, was educated at King James I grammar school, while his father managed the Eden theatre. Renowned classical composer Edward Elgar played “The Music Makers” in 1913 at St Peter’s church, and dedicated it to his friend Nicholas Kilburn, the organist. Is it possible that the rousing English anthem “Land of Hope and Glory” was also played for the first time in Bishop Auckland?

Witton Park features the start of the Stockton and Darlington railway, the world’s first passenger railway, which celebrated its bicentenary last year. More than that, nearby West Auckland won the first world cup. It is suggested that the organisers had invited Woolwich Arsenal, but the initials WA meant the letter went to West Auckland—though we know it was really because they wanted north-east grit. Picture the scene: people clubbing together to send their boys off to Turin, selling what they had and huddling round the radio to listen. What is more, the team went on to win the cup—not once, but twice. Jack Greenwell from Crook Town went on to manage Barcelona, and Bishop Auckland’s football team lent players to Manchester United after the Munich air disaster.

We also have the food festival, the Bishop Auckland heritage festival and so much more. I have covered history, faith, industry, music, arts, food and sports; frankly, no town tells the cultural story of Britain like Bishop Auckland.

15:13

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) for securing today’s important debate. I wholeheartedly support this competition; it is vital to celebrate our towns. I want to talk about my own town, Reading, and the incredible potential of turning Reading Gaol into an arts and heritage hub. I will also mention a number of other aspects of culture and heritage from our town, including its Georgian and Victorian history, the legacy of Jane Austen and other aspects of town life.

I am lucky to represent a wonderful, diverse and tolerant place, the second largest urban area in the south-east and one of England’s largest towns. It is also the site of the medieval Reading abbey, where King Henry I was buried—like Leicester, we potentially have a king in a car park, although he has not been excavated yet. Henry was buried in the abbey, when it existed—after the Reformation, it was closed, and its stone was taken and used for other things. We are not sure exactly where his remains lie; it is believed to be either under the wall of the jail or possibly in what is currently the prison car park. One day, I hope we will be able to celebrate his history and the link with him in a fuller and deeper way, rather like our colleagues in Leicester were when they discovered their own king.

The jail was built on the site of the abbey in the 19th century. It is famous for being the place where Oscar Wilde was so sadly incarcerated at the end of that century. It was opened for art’s use a few years ago by a charity called Artangel, and going inside was absolutely incredible. Imagine walking into this incredible Victorian jail—like me, some people are old enough to have seen “Porridge”, while others may have seen it on UK Gold—which was designed by George Gilbert Scott, the same architect responsible for the Albert memorial and St Pancras station. Imagine looking along the metal walkways and into the individual cells, which are used for art installations, and going into Oscar Wilde’s cell. It is an incredibly powerful experience that brings art and history to life, and I hope that we can see this wonderful old building used in this way in the future. I should also pay tribute to Banksy for drawing a picture of an escaping prisoner on the outside of the jail, which people currently visit to take selfies with, and which caused a massive stir several years ago.

There are many other aspects of art and culture in our town, and it is worth considering the other literary links between Reading and figures in English literature. This year is the 250th anniversary of the birth of Jane Austen, who was educated at what became Abbey school in Reading, and I had the privilege of attending a ceremony at the school to mark that. At least one and possibly two of her books are inspired by her time at school in Reading, including one of the less well-known ones, “Northanger Abbey”, which I had to read as an A-level English literature student, along with “Persuasion”. Her time in Reading is an important part of our local culture and history.

We also have links to Thomas Hardy. One of his novels partially features the town, and his novel “Jude the Obscure” is set in Oxford—a much lesser place. Reading has many other interesting historic links. It goes back to Saxon times and has a large number of Georgian and 19th-century conservation areas, which I would like to celebrate.

I look forward to hearing the Minister talk more about towns and how the competition would work, and to working with colleagues across the country and hearing more about this wonderful competition.

15:17

[Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) on securing the debate. Being from and representing a constituency in the Bradford district, I would like to take the opportunity to share some of the amazing highlights of our year as the city of culture. I particularly hope that some of the impacts I describe will be useful to those who are considering applying for the town of culture competition or hoping to be successful in it. It is a fantastic development.

Although we talk about the city of culture, it was really the whole district. Towns in my constituency of Shipley and Bingley were very much part of the Bradford 2025 experience, which celebrated both our rich history and the dynamic contemporary culture found across the Bradford district. Some people may not be aware that it is already designated a UNESCO city of film. It also hosts a wonderful collection of works by Bradford-born artist David Hockney at Salts Mill. That is a brilliant example of culturally led regeneration, which some hon. Members here may be interested in. Salts Mill is in Saltaire, which is also a world heritage site and which now hosts the Peace museum, a fantastic historical collection.

The year started in Centenary Square—it was minus 10° —with a celebration called RISE, showcasing some amazing spoken word poetry, as well as acrobats. It concluded in Bingley in my constituency with Brighter Still and fantastic stories of hope celebrating the diversity of people who are born and raised in Bradford or who have moved there and made it their home.

In the few minutes I have, I want to highlight the sense of community that that generated. With more than 5,000 events across the whole district, audiences in excess of 3 million, 650 local artists and organisations, and participatory projects that brought in some 87,000 people, there was something for everyone. We had Our Patch co-ordinators on the ground working with community organisations to involve them in everything from creating skate park murals to rap songs. That has resulted in eight in 10 residents now saying that the city of culture programme made them feel proud of where they live.

On top of that, we had a national profile. Great collaborations with the likes of the BBC meant that we hosted the “Antiques Roadshow” and “Songs of Praise”, and at some point in the year 38% of the UK population watched part of something featuring Bradford. Furthermore, the Turner prize 2025 exhibition is in Cartwright Hall—outside of London for the first time—and it has not quite closed yet.

Being the city of culture also brought huge economic and social benefits. With more than 2,700 volunteers involved as youth ambassadors, the hope is that the legacy of the city of culture will be the opportunities it gives our young people to gain skills in the creative industries, which West Yorkshire Mayor Tracy Brabin has made a critical priority in the West Yorkshire industrial strategy.

I conclude by asking the Minister to support the legacy of the city of culture in Bradford, and to congratulate the directors, Shanaz Gulzar and Dan Bates, who were honoured with MBEs in the new year honours for their fantastic work. I wish all colleagues here much success with their bids.

15:21

[Connor Naismith (Crewe and Nantwich) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss, and to speak in the debate.

Towns such as Crewe show exactly why the UK town of culture competition matters. For too long, places such as Crewe felt the consequences of decisions taken outside of their control: under-investment, economic mismanagement, rising costs and, of course, the devastating loss of High Speed 2. However, I am pleased to say that Crewe is turning a corner, and I am confident that 2026 will be the year—long overdue—when my constituents can lift their heads with pride in their town. We are seeing investment, ambition and real pride returning to our town centre, driven by our community and entrepreneurs, and supported by the economic stability that this Labour Government are delivering.

Culture is at the heart of our renewal. The strong and established Crewe cultural forum brings together Cheshire East council, Crewe town council, the Lyceum theatre, our libraries and archives, local businesses, the NHS and community partners. Through our successful Arts Council England placemaker project, the Crewe//Makes Artspace, we have already demonstrated that Crewe can collaborate and think big about culture. I am particularly pleased that those cultural institutions at the heart of our town will lead Crewe’s bid for UK town of culture.

That ambition is visible on our high street. The Crewe Market Hall has been reborn as a thriving hub for food, drink and entertainment. I was pleased to enjoy the festive pantomime at the Lyceum theatre—a jewel in our town, and Cheshire’s only surviving Edwardian theatre—and I will be back there in January to watch Russell Howard. It is now complemented by Lyceum Square, a purpose-built space for cultural events that has already hosted many events, including the Crewe Day festival, Crewe-on-Sea, Crewe Pride and many more. These institutions anchor a growing cultural quarter. The former Dorothy Perkins and Burton unit on Market Street—once another empty shell and a blight on the high street—now hosts CreweCreates, a vibrant space for arts and culture. That shows what can happen when creativity meets opportunity.

This year will see further developments in Crewe with culture at their heart. Spring will see the opening of the Dome youth zone, and later in the year Crewe will become the joint home of the Cheshire archives. Those two projects promise to breathe new life into our town centre. Together they encapsulate perfectly the point that several hon. Members have made: culture is about reflecting on our heritage, but also proudly embracing our future.

Crewe has the partnerships, infrastructure and working groups ready to move quickly, as soon as the town of culture competition formally launches. We have a proud heritage, a strong story to tell and a cultural future that we are desperate to seize. I look forward to the Minister saying more about what the competition will entail.

15:25

[Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) for this opportunity for us all to talk about the UK town of culture competition and the benefits it can bring to our communities. It will be a pleasure to speak about my towns and my hope that they will consider a submission, but it has also been wonderful to hear about other towns, and the real pride in our local places.

This will be a hotly contested competition—not just in this room, but in my constituency. I have four towns, but I will talk about the largest, Coalville and Ashby-de-la-Zouch. They are separated by just six miles and have an amazing opportunity to go forward as a UK town of culture. They are both located in the heart of the national forest.

As I said in my maiden speech, Coalville is named appropriately, as it is at the heart of the coalmining industry in Leicestershire. The cultural heritage is centred on its industrial past and its hope for the future. The town has invested in the market square, which is called Marlborough Square. It was a central gathering place for the community, initially as a public market for farmers and producers, before evolving into a livestock hub in the 1840s. More recently, this lovely square has hosted some amazing family events, organised and supported by the local district council and our vibrant voluntary sector. Coalville’s culture was clear to see at the Midland Red bus 100th anniversary event earlier this year, which was held just a stone’s throw from Marlborough Square, at Snibston, the home of a theatre, a coalmining museum, a café and a park. In the centre of Coalville is the beautiful Mother and Child statue, and there are art installations across the town.

Coalville has so much potential to be the UK town of culture. However, it will have to fight off local competition from the second largest town in my constituency, Ashby-de-la-Zouch. A great market town originally known as Ashby in 1086, it was renamed in the 18th century after the La Zouche family. Around that time, Ashby castle was built. The town’s beautiful historic buildings line Market Street, which is a thriving shopping destination. It was a pleasure to be shown around the original features in the lovely Tap at No. 76, which was built in the era of Queen Elizabeth I. Not long after I was elected, I also had the privilege of visiting the archives at the fantastic volunteer-led Ashby Museum. If anyone makes a pit stop there, I am sure they will enjoy the museum.

Ashby’s rich history has been kept up throughout the generations. There is an active business improvement district and a great town council with an annual programme of events. That includes the Statutes, which is now in its 806th year, and the new soapbox derby, which is in its second year, to name just a couple of the great events that happen.

I have not had the opportunity to talk about my smaller towns of Ibstock and Castle Donington, but I am sure they will forgive me. This competition will be really important for our towns, and I will encourage my district council and others to consider how we get this amazing opportunity for growth and investment into my towns in North West Leicestershire. Will the Minister consider whether there is an opportunity to expand the competition to a wider range of towns, and perhaps include a UK town of industrial heritage and a UK market town of culture? Then I would be able to pick two towns in North West Leicestershire.

15:29

[Liz Jarvis (Eastleigh) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate the hon. Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) on securing this debate. The Liberal Democrats recognise the vital role that towns and communities throughout the United Kingdom play in shaping our rich and diverse cultural heritage. As a member of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, I firmly believe that art, music, drama and sport bring people together across generations and backgrounds and that they are an essential part of any thriving society.

Crucially, culture also delivers tangible economic benefits. Investment in the cultural sector creates jobs, supports freelancers and small businesses and provides training and development opportunities, particularly for talented young people who may not see a traditional academic route as the right path for them. That is why the Liberal Democrats support sustained investment in our cultural capital and in nurturing the next generation of talent—so that people in every town can enjoy the benefits of sport, music and the arts. We believe that the cultural contribution of each town should be recognised, and that adequate funding must be available to support cultural programmes in every part of the United Kingdom.

We have heard so many wonderful examples of our cultural heritage today, including from my hon. Friends the Members for Chesham and Amersham (Sarah Green) and for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade), and the hon. Members for Southport (Patrick Hurley) and for Shipley (Anna Dixon). I am proud to be the MP for Eastleigh, the home of Hampshire cricket with the Ageas Bowl, which is both a world-class cricket venue and, in recent years, a growing events venue hosting acts such as Rod Stewart, Little Mix and the Arctic Monkeys. The Point theatre in Eastleigh puts on its own fantastic productions year after year, hosts national stand-up comedians and has been one of Arts Council England’s national portfolio organisations for the past decade. We are also home to the Bishopstoke Players, the Concorde club in north Stoneham and Thornden Hall in Chandler’s Ford. People from across Hampshire flock to Eastleigh every year for the Asian Welfare and Cultural Association’s Mela event, Eastleigh Pride and the family-friendly festival Eastleigh Unwrapped.

However, despite this strong cultural offer, Conservative Hampshire county council has cut back funding for the Hampshire Cultural Trust, reducing its annual grant by £600,000 from April 2027. Arts and culture projects have been stopped in their tracks. This is incredibly short-sighted. I very much welcome the town of culture initiative, but I hope the Minister will agree that if we are serious about levelling up opportunity, pride and participation, cultural investment must reach every town. I look forward to seeing which towns will throw their hats into the ring to be cultural town of the year, so that we can all recognise and the celebrate their unique stories.

15:32

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate the hon. Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) on securing this important debate on the UK town of culture competition. Let me begin by welcoming the announcement of the UK town of culture programme. The UK city of culture initiative, first launched in 2009, is now in its fifth iteration and has supported places such as Derry/Londonderry, Hull, Coventry and most recently Bradford. In each case, the investment has proved to drive regeneration, attracting investment and visitors, all while showcasing the unique character, heritage and creativity of those places.

Hull’s year as city of culture generated an estimated £300 million for the local economy, attracted millions of visitors and created thousands of jobs, apprenticeships and freelance opportunities. Coventry saw renewed confidence and investment, while in Bradford, more than 5,000 events took place during the year, with around 51 million spent. Within the first six months of Bradford 2025, more than 11,000 schoolchildren benefited from the education programme, and 40,000 local people participated in cultural events. My colleagues visited Bradford during that year to join in one of 5,000 events that took place. The success of this scheme shows how well-funded support can have a transformative impact.

The UK town of culture rightly recognises that smaller and medium-sized settlements have powerful cultural stories to tell—we have heard a great variety of those today—and a vital role to play in our national life. Market towns such as Shrewsbury have long acted as bridges between rural and urban communities, serving as hubs for seasonal celebrations, sport, county dance and local trade. In my constituency on the Isle of Wight, our island’s towns are increasingly recognised as destinations for film and the creative industries. We have vibrant organisations, including Ventnor Exchange, Monkton Arts and the new Department venue in Ryde, plus of course Brading Roman Villa. Shanklin theatre, a historic building, survives only through the tireless volunteer efforts of local people. I enjoyed the local pantomime “Dick Whittington” there only last week with my children.

Building on the success of the city of culture programme, the ambition to break down barriers to opportunity, drive local economic growth and create jobs is one that we strongly support. However, the last iteration of the city of culture competition demonstrated that the scheme could be open to places beyond cities, with examples including Wrexham, which bid as a town, and County Durham, which submitted a bid covering the entire county. Wrexham even became a city midway through its bid. This shows that the programme could already accommodate a broader range of places, without necessarily creating a town of culture competition separately. It raises the question: is it necessary to establish a separate competition when towns were allowed to bid in the last round?

Experience from the previous city of culture competition shows that the places that performed best were those with strong local authority leadership and capacity. The most recent competition, with 20 entrants, was the largest ever. Although expertise is spreading across local government, not every council starts from the same place.

[Anna Dixon]

The hon. Gentleman talks of the importance of local authority leadership in city of culture success. Will he join me in congratulating Bradford council on having the vision to apply to be the city of culture and on having taken the risk to invest in it and then crowd in further investment, which has benefited the whole district?

[Joe Robertson]

I am happy to join the hon. Member in congratulating the local authority in Bradford on its bid. She illustrates very well the point that I am trying to make: there is a financial risk in undertaking the process and, indeed, the risk of not being successful. For smaller towns with less financial might, that could become a considerable issue, so will the Minister commit to supporting local authorities—in particular, smaller ones—in their capacity to bid and succeed in a separate towns competition?

Further to that, a long-standing challenge of the scheme has been the uncertainty about funding, with prize money neither guaranteed nor clearly set out at the point of launch. Although we welcome the approach taken under the previous Government, which enabled runners-up to receive £125,000, the current Government have not yet extended that commitment to the town of culture competition. In the past, even unsuccessful bidders, such as Sunderland, received support that helped to strengthen local partnerships and build capacity in their communities. If the Government introduce a separate towns competition, they must clarify whether funding will be guaranteed immediately for winners and runners-up, particularly for towns that may have less capacity to absorb financial uncertainty.

For many towns that are unsuccessful and receive little or no funding, cultural institutions remain at risk. Much of our cultural infrastructure depends on local authority funding, and discretionary spending on culture is often the first casualty when councils face financial pressure. If we are serious about supporting towns through culture, local authorities must be given the financial tools and flexibility to protect cultural and heritage assets.

This initiative must also be understood in the wider context of the pressures facing our cultural, creative and heritage sectors. Towns’ unique characters are driven by their high streets and small businesses, ranging from historic pubs and craft workshops to independent creative venues and local cultural organisations. Yet this Government’s punitive tax regime places increasing burdens on these organisations. Higher employer national insurance contributions, reduced business rates relief and rising wage costs all fall heaviest on small businesses, which have the least capacity to absorb these costs. We have already seen too many local businesses close over the past year, so how will the Government ensure that the very organisations that we rely on to deliver cultural programmes—indeed, they form the cultural fabric of this nation—are not priced out of existence, thereby reducing investment into the local area?

Thanks to the previous Government’s £2 billion culture recovery fund, many arts and heritage organisations were finally back on their feet, yet this Government’s job tax has hit them hard. I welcome the continuation of tax relief for theatres, museums and galleries, but the Department for Culture, Media and Sport’s resource budget remains flat in cash terms, which of course represents a real-terms cut. At a time when 98% of adults agree that museums are important to UK culture, it is deeply concerning that the Government continue to fail to commit funding to major levelling-up cultural projects, despite announcing a UK town of culture competition, which we welcome.

15:40

[The Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts (Ian Murray)]

As always, Ms Furniss, it is a great pleasure to see you in the Chair. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) for securing what I think has been a very enjoyable debate. It has not just been a debate about the town of culture; I think it has actually been the largest lobbying exercise from MPs that we have seen in this Parliament. It has been a geographical trip through everyone’s wonderful constituencies. We heard from my hon. Friend about everything from yarn bombers to mosh pitters, in the form of Led Zeppelin and Robert Plant. Of course, he has invited the President of the United States to come and visit his wonderful green lands—I am glad about his intonation on that.

I pay tribute to the Halesowen Abbey Trust for its work on the Leasowes walled garden, which demonstrates the civic pride that my hon. Friend talked about in his opening speech. As he mentioned, culture is a shared language. Whether we are talking about yarn bombers, heavy metal, mosh pitters or some of the wonderful heritage buildings around the country that we have heard about, one thing is for sure: we all have that shared cultural heritage that we want to preserve. It is not just about celebrating the past; it is about shaping the future, as many of my hon. Friends and others have said.

I also pay tribute to Colin Brookes of Halesowen Town FC, and pass on our sympathies to his family. Those kinds of individuals drive local projects, institutions and organisations. Without those personal commitments from people like Colin Brookes, none of these institutions would continue to exist; we rely on local people’s passions for that. It was not just a great speech from my hon. Friend; it was also a superb oral application form, which I hope Hansard will just pop, verbatim, straight into his application form for the town of culture competition.

This scheme will be delivered across the UK and in collaboration with devolved Governments. As we have already heard, the UK town of culture competition builds on the city of culture model for cultural placemaking, which was first launched in 2009, as the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Isle of Wight East (Joe Robertson), said, and is now in its fifth iteration. Derry/Londonderry, Hull, Coventry and now Bradford have benefited from the lasting and transformative impacts, including more than £1 billion of additional investment added to local economies of past host cities, increasing jobs, tourism and that local cultural pride.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) mentioned, Bradford 2025 has delivered a wealth of significant benefits, not just for Bradford itself but for the wider region. The highlights of its time as UK city of culture include delivering more than 5,000 events across all 30 district wards and attracting more than 3 million people with its world-class cultural programme. It commissioned and involved more than 650 local artists, involved 87,000 individuals in participatory projects, 2,700 volunteers—the Colin Brookes of this world—with more than 5,500 people benefiting from training, and engaging more than 160 schools and educational settings.

The direct positive impacts on people’s lives in the local community are clear, as we have heard. More than 80% of people surveyed said that Bradford 2025 had a positive impact on their wellbeing; it made eight in 10 residents feel proud of where they live; and more than 70% of residents felt more connected to the people in their communities. I therefore echo the congratulations of my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley to the Bradford city of culture directors, Shanaz Gulzar and Dan Bates. I thank them for all that they did, and thank everyone who participated in that.

[Anna Dixon]

I thank the Minister for his congratulations. Bradford council has already committed about £13 million over the next five years to the legacy, but much more is needed for capital projects, such as the Bingley town hall creative workshop. Would the Minister agree to meet me and representatives of Bradford council to discuss how we secure the legacy of Bradford 2025?

[Ian Murray]

I am very happy to take up that invitation to meet with my hon. Friend and representatives to see how that legacy is lasting, because the legacy is actually the most important thing from the city of culture scheme. I hope there are also huge legacies from the town of culture scheme, not just for the successful town but for all the applicants. It may give another boost to all of that cultural heritage and cultural futures in those areas.

When the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport launched the UK town of culture, she said that

“every place has a story worth telling”,

and we have heard those stories this afternoon. I have been struck by the depth of what has resonated from hon. Members. My hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen said this is about telling the story of the past and today, but also about shaping the future. Indeed it is.

We have heard lots of wonderful stories. I will run through some of those, rather than going through what the town of culture will be about, because everyone seems to be reflecting. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) dropped a bombshell, and told us that he tries to get Strangford into every debate—who knew? He is a great champion of Strangford. My hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham) talked about the history of opening up the arts to everyone —that is what the town of culture is about; it has to be about art for all—and reminded us not to forget about rural areas and those on the periphery, which I think is really important and what this is all about.

Turning to the town of Amesbury: we had heavy metal from Stonehenge, Romans and Saxons and Spın̈al Tap in a four-minute speech; who would have known we would have got there today? My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner) talked about “The Great Pottery Throw Down”, which I thought was more Greek than Stoke-on-Trent. She talked about the art, music, charities and heritage, and the Longton carnival in the Stoke-on-Trent area.

We heard from the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) about the £60,000 of funding to help develop the approach for shortlisted candidates. It is critical that there is that support to ensure that we develop some of those. There is also £60,000 available for longlisted city of culture candidates so that they can develop their proposals. I join in congratulating Wimborne as Dorset’s town of culture 2026. I would love to visit if I possibly can, but only if I get to see “Legally Blonde: The Musical”—I will maybe go down there to do that.

My hon. Friend the Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley) talked about the Prescot Cables FC, and the story he tells is a story from many places across the country. Who would have thought that William Shakespeare, fleeing the plague, would have turned a bus stop into a playhouse for young people being trained, and for cultural heritage and outreach to schools? One of the key things he said, which drives the town of culture and the city of culture—indeed, it drives the Secretary of State and me in terms of culture across the country—is that change can happen. A big catalyst for change is arts and culture; it is a great advert. My hon. Friend also gave a great advert for Southport’s year of culture in 2026. I cannot remember the website, but I am sure it is in Hansard for everyone to refer back to.

The hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Sarah Green) talked about the whole competition empowering local people, and Chesham being a coiled spring champing at the bit to get their application in. Who knew that Bishop Auckland was the home of the calendar, and therefore the home of time itself? My hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) made a reference to Laurel and Hardy, and the “Land of Hope and Glory”, which I think is a great combination to have there.

My hon. Friend the Member for Reading Central (Matt Rodda) spoke about turning the Reading Gaol into a cultural and arts centre. I think that is absolutely fantastic, bringing arts and history to life. And who knows? The car park might be a famous royal cemetery. Rather than sending the town of culture prize pot to Reading, maybe we should just send a couple of spades and a digger, and we could do it on that basis.

My hon. Friend the Member for Shipley went through all those issues, and re-emphasised the fact that Bradford, as the city of culture, had something for everyone. Crewe and Nantwich is the home of the Cheshire Archives. It is absolutely fantastic to have those there, but the key thing is arts and culture being a catalyst for town centre regeneration. I think that is key. We tend to forget that arts and culture can be that catalyst: they can bring people together and regenerate footfall in our city centres.

Finally, we heard how hotly contested this competition will be in North West Leicestershire. I am not going to look at my officials when I say this—I do not know who will actually go through the application forms, but how they are going to determine who will win is quite extraordinary, given what we have heard this afternoon and the applications. I would say, to everyone who has spoken this afternoon and to anyone who is interested in the competition, to apply. There is such a rich heritage of culture and arts in every single corner of the country—north, south, east and west. We should celebrate that, and the kinds of celebrations we could have from that can be through this competition. The competition will not just be about winning, although I am sure that all Members present today will want their own town to win; just taking part in the competition will be a big celebration of arts and culture.

I will respond to the specific question by the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham about the timeline for the competition. For now, I can merely say that we will launch the competition very shortly. Of course the first town of culture will be in 2028, so the timeline, as Members can see for themselves, is relatively short. Consequently, we will launch the competition as soon as we possibly can.

Each place has a unique story. However, there is also a shared conviction that through culture and creative industries we can share the stories of towns, and celebrate the contribution of towns to our national story. That is why the town of culture award is so important. I thought that the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Isle of Wight East (Joe Robertson), was slightly curmudgeonly when he asked if we need a town of culture competition; I think he has heard today why we need it. Even if it is just an opportunity for local people, local arts and culture organisations and local MPs to talk about and champion their local area, that in itself is something we should champion.

Our vision for the UK town of culture competition is that the public know we see and value the contribution that towns make to our national story, and that there are benefits for all those who are able to tell their own story. At the end of the competition, a cultural programme will be delivered that draws on the best of art, heritage and creative industries, underpinned by compelling local stories that will be shaped by local people, delivered through local partnership, and designed to leave a lasting legacy through strong cultural infrastructure, increased participation in culture and the creative industries, and a renewed sense of local pride. Indeed, we know that that is what the award does. One of the key things that the Secretary of State and I are very keen to see happen is the bursting of the bubble between there being talent everywhere and opportunity not everywhere. That is something we want to build upon.

This has been a tremendously enjoyable debate and I look forward to all the applications coming in. I do not look forward to having to assess the applications, but I encourage people to get them in, because we know that our national story is not written by one city or one institution. It is not written by one town or one organisation. It is written in the places across the United Kingdom and shaped by the generations of people who have lived, worked, created and contributed there. The UK town of culture competition is an invitation to celebrate that story and invest in it, to ensure that in the future it continues to be told with creativity, confidence and pride.

[Gill Furniss (in the Chair)]

I call Alex Ballinger to wind up quickly, because we expect a vote at 4 pm.

15:51

[Alex Ballinger]

I will just say that it has been an absolute pleasure to hear all the pitches from various Members about the many beautiful, interesting and historical towns in their areas; indeed, it feels like I now have my bank holiday weekend plans for the next 20 years all sorted out. I look forward to visiting many of those places, although I also heard mention of a couple of cities—Truro and Bradford—sneak into our discussion. I think that cities have their own competition, so please allow us to compete among ourselves.

I thank the Minister for laying out so clearly the reasons for the competition. We are, of course, still keen to hear details; indeed, we are chomping at the bit to hear them, as we are to get our applications in. I say to those towns that are ultimately not successful in the competition that just going through this process is positive—it has been for the community groups in my area, and I am sure that that is the case across the country. I say a big “thank you” to DCMS. We await both the competition process and the celebration of Halesowen that is surely coming soon.

[Gill Furniss (in the Chair)]

Thank you all very much for a really respectful and interesting debate; it has been one of the best that I have chaired—and you all behaved and came in on time, which is always a pleasure.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the UK Town of Culture competition.

15:53

Sitting suspended.

Meat Exports to the EU

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Relevant documents: Fourth Report of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, UK-EU Trade: Towards a resilient border strategy, HC 1297; and Oral evidence taken before the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee on 9 December 2025, on Animal and plant health, HC 611.]

16:17

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered meat exports to the EU.

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I am grateful for the opportunity to open this debate on the export of meat to the European Union, and in particular on the ongoing difficulties faced by farmers and producers in constituencies like mine when exporting to markets such as Germany and the Netherlands.

This debate matters, because a system that worked well for Welsh agriculture has been replaced by one that is more expensive, more bureaucratic and far less reliable. It has become clear that, although progress has been made, a fully settled and implemented common sanitary and phytosanitary arrangement is not yet in place, and will not be in place in the immediate future. As a result, exporters remain subject to many of the same requirements introduced after Brexit, and those requirements are having real consequences on the ground.

Right now, there is only an intention to negotiate a framework for talks and announcements about what might happen in the future. But intentions do not move meat across borders, announcements do not pay veterinary bills, and frameworks do not stop lorries being delayed. That is what Welsh farmers are struggling with right now.

Before Brexit, exporting Welsh lamb to Europe was straightforward: there were no export health certificates, no mandatory veterinary sign-off and no routine border control checks. Welsh lamb moved freely into its natural markets, allowing farmers to plan, invest and grow with confidence. Since Brexit, that has changed completely. Today, a single consignment of lamb can require export health certificates, official veterinary approval, customs declarations and SPS checks at EU border posts. Every step adds cost, delay and risk, especially for a perishable, time-sensitive product.

[Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right: an SPS agreement would be an enormous opportunity for communities like his and mine that export to the European Union. But there are already significant divergences between the United Kingdom and the European Union, so does he agree that, if that SPS agreement is to be negotiated, then it is essential that the Cabinet Office does so much more than it is doing at the moment to consult and to bring British agriculture along with it; otherwise, the agreement will be full of unintended consequences?

[David Chadwick]

I agree with my right hon. Friend. The Government would do well to listen to his wisdom and knowledge, and indeed to that of the farmers, because they are the people experiencing these problems at first hand.

[Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Highgate) (Lab)]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[David Chadwick]

I am going to continue for a bit.

Welsh lamb is not a niche export; it is foundational to the rural economy. Welsh food and drink exports were worth £813 million in 2023, with around three quarters going to EU markets. The EU remains the destination for around a third of Welsh lamb exports, around 90% of Welsh beef exports and the vast majority of Welsh dairy exports. Markets such as Germany and the Netherlands matter because they are the natural entry points into the European food system, but lamb cannot sit at borders while paperwork is argued over. A delay of hours can strip value from a load; a rejected consignment can wipe out profit for a week. Farmers tell me it is now easier to export lamb thousands of miles away than to our nearest neighbours. That is not control; it is self-harm.

No doubt Ministers will point to headlines claiming that red tape has been slashed, but the reality for farmers tells a different story. Export health certificates are still required, veterinary sign-offs remain mandatory and checks are still taking place. Costs are still being borne by producers, and that eats into their profit margins. Because there is no settled SPS agreement, enforcement continues to vary from port to port and country to country.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing the debate. To add to the complexity of the matter—there is always more complexity —on 1 January, new rules for veterinary medicines took effect in Northern Ireland, meaning that 40% of veterinary medicine pack sizes available to NI farmers could be discontinued due to the requirement for separate authorisations from Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Does he not agree that the large part that Northern Ireland plays in the supply of lamb and meat—worth up to some £4 billion—must be considered as part of the UK’s discussion with the EU? We should not be taken as a third nation—that is no solution. I hope that the Minister will be able to answer that question.

[David Chadwick]

The economic impact of this issue is being felt across the United Kingdom, and that is because there is still no settled SPS agreement. That has resulted in uncertainty, and uncertainty is poison for trade. Many smaller producers have already been cut out of EU markets, unable to cope with the administrative burden and added cost.

There is also a clear imbalance in how trade is being managed. Under the border target operating model, checks are meant to be risk based, yet medium-risk products of animal origin imported from the EU into Great Britain face physical inspection rates of around 1%, while equivalent UK exports to the EU face inspection rates of between 15% and 30%. That is not a level playing field. It places heavier costs on UK farmers, while leaving them exposed to unfair competition from imports.

That imbalance is compounded by repeated delays to the UK’s own border controls. The transitional staging period for the border target operating model has been extended again, this time to January 2027—the sixth delay already. Farming unions have warned that, without effective border checks, the UK remains vulnerable to animal disease. Those concerns have been echoed by Parliament’s own Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.

None of this is accidental. These barriers exist because the UK chose to leave the single market. That choice was driven by a Conservative party that was willing to sacrifice British farming, and it was championed by Reform, who promised farmers frictionless trade while delivering friction at every stage of the export process. Welsh farmers were told that they would keep their markets, that nothing would change for them and that they were taking back control, but what they got was more paperwork, higher costs and fewer buyers. In Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe, farming underpins entire communities. When lamb exports become uneconomic, investment stalls, confidence drains away and young farmers begin to question whether there is a future for them. Rural Wales is hollowing out through constant, grinding pressure on farming communities and the wider supply chains that they support.

Efforts to restore relations with our nearest trading partners and pursue an SPS agreement with the EU are welcome, but such an agreement must be developed in close collaboration with industry, and it must be delivered urgently. Farmers cannot wait indefinitely while negotiations drag on. Any agreement should be concluded as soon as is practical and no later than the end of this Parliament, in order to protect market access and prevent further damage to the sector.

Welsh farmers were promised certainty, continuity and opportunity. Instead, they got the Conservatives’ and Reform’s Brexit, and a deal that still does not exist. This debate is about facing that reality, owning the consequences and finally doing right by the people who feed this country and sustain our rural communities. Backing Welsh and British farming means more than slogans; it means restoring access to markets.

16:24

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate the hon. Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) on securing this timely debate on meat exports to the EU and thank him for his remarks. I agree with him that our farmers and processors produce world-class beef, lamb, poultry and pork. I completely hear and recognise his remarks about the importance of lamb in Wales and his constituency—he called it foundational for our economy.

The EU is still our biggest market and, despite recent challenges, demand for British meat remains strong. In 2024, British meat exports to the EU hit a record £1.65 billion, driven by growth in key markets such as France and the Netherlands. In the first 10 months of 2025, red meat exports to the EU reached £1.3 billion—up 16% on 2024.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

In 2019, the amount of fresh beef exported to the European Union was almost 100,000 tonnes, whereas five years later it had dropped to less than 80,000 tonnes. Does the Minister suppose that a revised SPS agreement could get fresh beef exports to the EU back to where they were in 2019?

[Kate Dearden]

I thank the hon. Member for his question. I am going to get to the SPS agreement, and I will reflect on his comments when I get to that part of my speech.

[Tulip Siddiq]

When the Minister speaks about the SPS agreement, will she also comment on animal welfare? Of my constituents in Hampstead and Highgate, 87% voted to remain. I have had an overwhelming number of communications about animal welfare being at the heart of any SPS agreement with the EU, so will she please talk about that?

[Kate Dearden]

My hon. Friend makes an important point on animal welfare in the SPS agreement, which I will get to.

The figures I mentioned show the strength of this sector and why smooth, predictable trade with the EU really matters. The Department for Business and Trade has been working hand in hand with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and with industry—led by the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board—to drive meat exports, and will be supporting meat exporters at SIAL Paris, the largest European trade show for food and drink, in October. We also have two DEFRA agri-attachés, based in France and Spain, actively working with DBT staff to unblock market access issues for food and drink producers exporting to Europe, including exporters of lamb and meat.

The Government’s goal is clear: to make trade with the EU cheaper and easier while keeping high standards. That is why we are pursuing the UK-EU SPS agreement, which will create a common SPS area to cut border friction and boost competitiveness. Negotiations on the agreement have already begun. This is a major step forward. The deal will deliver real benefits, scrapping export health certificates for most consignments—saving up to £200 for each one—and ending routine SPS border control checks so that fresh meat moves faster with less paperwork. It will also reopen the EU market for trade in products like fresh sausages and burgers. These changes will strengthen supply chains, cut costs and help meat exporters grow.

We are not lowering standards. Border regimes protect animal and public health, and every consignment must meet rules for entry. I am really proud of the Government’s animal welfare strategy, which colleagues across the House welcomed. The European Commission recently announced tougher checks on food, animal and plant products, including more audits, closer monitoring of non-compliant goods and a new taskforce for import controls. Those reinforced checks reflect long-standing EU policy. For British exporters, the message is clear: meeting standards is essential, and we will keep supporting businesses to get it right. Every consignment faces documentary, identity and sometimes physical checks before it can be allowed into the EU. Our strategy is to make those interactions faster and more predictable by cutting the need for certificates and routine checks through an SPS agreement, while giving traders clear guidance to keep standards high.

I need to be clear that the Government are not seeking a customs union with the EU. Our focus is on SPS, food safety, animal health and plant health. We will stay outside the EU customs union. What we want is a practical alignment where it makes sense, including to cut friction in meat trade while keeping control of our own rules.

We must keep the industry competitive while negotiations continue, and EU markets can still buy high volumes and premium cuts from Britain. In 2024, beef exports to the EU rose in value by almost 11%, with volumes up by nearly 5%. That shows the strength of British quality and brand recognition in the EU. In the first 10 months of 2025, British export values grew further, even with tight domestic cattle supplies. For lamb, France remains our biggest market, and overall export value is up. These figures prove that with smoother borders our exporters can do even more.

[Jim Shannon]

I do not want to put the Minister in an awkward position—it is not the way I do things—but I asked a fairly complex question, in support of the hon. Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) but also to highlight the peculiarities of the Northern Ireland farmer, about the fact that, through some of the veterinary medicine controls, we will find ourselves disadvantaged and perhaps unable to sell our beef and lamb to the UK and, ultimately, the EU. If it is helpful to the Minister, I would be quite happy for her to come back to me with an answer.

[Kate Dearden]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. As he knows, the negotiations are ongoing and we cannot comment on them. We are working hard to cut red tape for exporters. I will be happy to follow up with him on his specific point, and I thank him for raising that important issue.

Agrifood exports to the EU remain below 2018 levels in real terms. That is why practical steps such as an SPS agreement matter. They tackle the real-world frictions that hold back meat exports.

Although the focus of the debate is exports to the EU, colleagues know that Great Britain has introduced risk-based controls on imports, set out in the border target operating model. Those apply to goods entering GB and do not change EU rules for our exports. They ensure a level playing field and protect biosecurity, which is vital. Medium-risk EU animal products entering GB face documentary checks and risk-based identity and physical checks at border control posts, and high-risk products face full identity and physical checks. That is proportionate risk management that mirrors the system that our exporters encounter at EU posts, and shows our commitment to safe, fair trade.

DEFRA has worked closely with processors, hauliers and certification bodies to prepare for SPS talks and keep trade moving. We have expanded guidance on required standards and on intensified official controls for sites facing extra checks. We regularly meet the British Meat Processors Association and other trade groups to explain processes, gather feedback and fix issues quickly. Our goal is simple: to help businesses meet EU requirements the first time, so consignments are cleared without delay.

Our meat exporters have shown real resilience. The Government’s job is to cut unnecessary barriers, keep confidence in our systems and open up opportunities in our closest markets. An SPS agreement with the EU is a practical way to do that, and I am glad that we are leading the way. It will cut costs and paperwork, reducing delays and helping British businesses to sell more, while protecting standards and respecting our independent trade policy. This is about a sensible alignment that benefits farmers and processors across the UK, and I look forward to working with Members across the House, our European partners, industry and stakeholders to deliver an agreement that makes a real difference to meat exporters, strengthens our crucial supply chains and supports jobs and prosperity in every part of the country.

Question put and agreed to.

16:35

Sitting suspended.

Rural Fuel Duty Relief

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

16:39

[Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the Rural Fuel Duty Relief scheme.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I am pleased to have the opportunity to introduce this debate, especially in the new year at a time when many people across the country will be watching the pennies closely.

As hon. Members representing rural constituencies will be aware, the rural fuel duty relief scheme was announced more than 15 years ago and supports people living in some of the most remote rural communities in Britain. Under the scheme, a 5p per litre tax relief on unleaded petrol or diesel is granted to specific filling stations in a small number of rural postcode sectors. That relief must be passed on to rural motorists, helping many with their commute, school run or weekly shopping. The scheme benefits around 125,000 local residents and many visitors across the United Kingdom.

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

Not a single part of Wales benefits from the rural fuel duty relief scheme, while rural areas in England and Scotland do, simply because of how the previous Conservative Government designed it. Does my hon. Friend agree that that unfair anomaly should be corrected and that the scheme should be extended to places such as Powys?

[Ian Roome]

I agree with my hon. Friend that more people could benefit from the scheme. I am sure the Minister will take note of that in his response. As I said, the scheme benefits around 125,000 local residents and many visitors across the UK, including the remote parts of the Scottish islands, Cumbria, Northumberland, North Yorkshire, the Isles of Scilly and Exmoor. That includes residents in my constituency of North Devon, who live in areas around Lynton and Lynmouth, Parracombe and Brendon, including many living in upland areas within the boundaries of Exmoor national park.

The tax relief is targeted at highly rural areas. A brief glance at a map shows that these are some of the most isolated and indispensable filling stations across the country. If someone forgets to fill up at Barbrook filling station in my constituency, while heading out over Exmoor, it is nearly 20 miles to the next fuel stop at Wheddon Cross or Minehead. When the rural fuel duty relief scheme was introduced under the coalition, and approval under EU state aid rules was granted in 2012, the relief was set by the Government at 5p per litre. That 5p per litre remains unchanged today in 2026, despite more than 30% of its purchasing power being eroded over that time because of inflation. An update to the scheme is now long overdue.

According to research by the Rural Services Network in 2023, transport difficulties in highly rural areas force households into paying high costs for motoring, which contribute significantly to rural poverty. A car is needed for daily life and for someone who earns a modest wage that is expensive. The research estimates that for every 10% decrease in public transport speed relative to motoring in any area, the average household pays more than £400 more for transport each year.

[Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that the relief scheme could be complemented by a pumpwatch scheme, whereby the petrol price comparison platform has rapid publication of all fuel costs for forecourt prices? That is approved by the Competition and Markets Authority and the RAC estimates it could take up to 3p off a litre, in addition to the specific rural relief scheme that he mentions.

[Ian Roome]

I know there are various apps that do that. There should be more awareness of them among members of the public.

Fuel duty is only part of the expense of running a vehicle, but many who fill up in areas impacted by the scheme have simply no transport alternatives. In my constituency, the households that benefit are 20 miles from their nearest train station, and bus passengers receive only the most limited bus service. Every January, those passengers are also hit by annual price increases from bus companies, which put extra strain on the cost of living.

The scheme is not particularly expensive. In the published list of non-structural tax reliefs, the Treasury estimates that the rural fuel duty relief scheme costs only around £5 million per year, and its uncertainty rating is considered low, yet during the past decade the scheme has been a roaring success. Barbrook filling station in my constituency tells me that this tax relief has made a massive difference to the viability of its business, keeping open an essential local service for many rural residents, local farmers and tourists.

[Mr Angus MacDonald (Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire) (LD)]

In my constituency, the price per litre of unleaded is 160p. When I was in Northern Ireland over Christmas, places were selling at 125p. We have a 35% premium on the cost of living where I live, and fuel is major part of it. In my constituency, there is a big question as to whether the 5p is actually getting to the customer or being kept, and I hope that the Minister will address that.

[Ian Roome]

Fifteen years ago, Barbrook in my constituency was officially one of the most expensive places to fill up in England, but thanks to the scheme it has stayed competitive on price, as a small business that employs four people all year round, in an area where employment can be highly seasonal. During the summer, Barbrook’s fuel deliveries increase to several tankers per week because of extra demand, driven mainly by tourists visiting Exmoor national park and the famous North Devon coast on holiday.

I am also told that Barbrook filling station rescues many of those visitors—people who do not understand the extra challenge of driving long distances on small rural roads, or who do not plan for the extra fuel consumption of their journey. Many rural communities already suffer from very sparse public services, and fuel for transport is an important part of anyone reaching essential healthcare, such as their local hospital or dentist. As I know from speaking to chemotherapy patients at North Devon district hospital, where I worked before I was elected to this House, access itself is half the battle.

My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I—including my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael), my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) and others—champion the real needs of rural communities, as do colleagues who are here today. We have argued for the rural fuel duty relief scheme’s importance and for extending it to many more rural parts of the country.

However, support for the scheme should really be cross-party. By my count, at least 11 directly impacted rural constituencies are represented by MPs from Labour, the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National party. There are also many neighbouring rural constituencies with villages that rely on a filling station just over the border that is supported by this tax relief.

Since 2011, it has become a feature of Budgets under successive Governments that fuel duty will be frozen. That has benefited motorists across Britain, yet in March 2022, a further 5p cut in fuel duty was introduced and then held in place, even as the value of the rural fuel duty relief scheme continued falling in real terms. That means that in recent years we have gone backwards: many of our most rural taxpayers have effectively increased their support to motorists in some of the best connected parts of the country. Motorists in urban communities not only benefit from having more public transport alternatives but often have numerous filling stations to choose from—all competing on price, to the benefit of local people. By contrast, many of my constituents count themselves lucky to have even one filling station in their area.

The Government have stated that economic growth across the country is their top priority for this Parliament. In parts of the country that are distant from major infrastructure projects, such schemes are an important measure, supporting small businesses, farming and tourism, helping young people to access opportunities, and helping patients to access essential healthcare. At a time when the Government are increasingly under fire for their policies towards rural and farming communities, updating the rural fuel duty relief scheme would be one way for them to demonstrate their concern about those families who live in rural areas and the problems they face in their daily lives.

[Brendan O’Hara (Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber) (SNP)]

I sincerely thank the hon. Member for securing this debate. My constituency of Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber is 10,500 sq km in size, with 23 inhabited islands; it is absolutely vast. Life is difficult for people living in rural areas and anything that we can do to make life a bit easier for them should be considered. Does he agree that the scheme should not only be further extended to cover more people in rural areas, in order to stop the scourge of depopulation, but that the value of the scheme, which has declined by 35% since 2012, should be restored by this Government as soon as possible?

[Ian Roome]

I agree with the hon. Gentleman and thank him for that input.

When so many people are struggling with the cost of living, schemes like this one are a concrete example of how tax relief can have an out-sized impact. A relief of 5p per litre would be welcome anywhere, but it is particularly valuable to those constituents of mine who have no choice but to drive, in an area where gross median wages are £84 a week less than the national average.

Just last week, the Prime Minister stated that the Government would spend this new year proving to people that they can support them with energy costs, warm homes and the cost of living. My constituents see their fuel costs displayed digitally on a sign by the side of the road every single day. The rural fuel duty relief scheme makes a material difference to many of my constituents and to tens of thousands of people in rural communities across the United Kingdom.

I will close by asking the Minister some questions. Does the Treasury recognise that time and inflation have effectively bled the funding of the scheme by around 30% since it was introduced? Will the Government consider updating the value of the scheme in the coming year to rectify that gap, at least in part? Just a few weeks ago, it was highlighted in the Treasury Committee that the Treasury lacks a suitable review process for existing tax reliefs. What more can be done to ensure that in the future small but important schemes such as this one, which are a lifeline in rural areas like mine, do not get left behind again?

16:49

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Thank you very much, Ms Furniss, for again inviting me to speak early. It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship. I also thank the hon. Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) for securing this debate on a very important issue.

When we look at the price of petrol at the pumps and consider that the price per barrel has dropped significantly, the question we all ask is when the dividend will come down to those who drive on the roads of the United Kingdom. Perhaps the Minister can put that question directly to the firms responsible.

This is an important issue, and it is clear that there are stipulations within the current legislation that do not extend to other rural parts of the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, I am here today to support the hon. Member for North Devon, who is renowned for being assiduous and committed on behalf of his constituents—well done to him.

There is a strong case for extending the provision of the rural fuel duty relief scheme to some rural parts of Northern Ireland that have similar problems to those referenced by the hon. Member for Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber (Brendan O’Hara). Just as in North Devon, a considerable number of areas of counties such as Fermanagh, Armagh and Down are sparsely populated. Furthermore, residents in these areas rely heavily on private vehicles because public transport is extremely limited. I am contacted weekly by constituents regarding rural bus services, so this issue is real and is felt throughout many areas in Northern Ireland.

Historically, we have witnessed a significant fuel price difference between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, sometimes as much as 15p to 25p per litre. There are times when rural Northern Ireland has significantly higher fuel prices, and families who live close to the border travel into the Republic of Ireland to get fuel as it saves them so much money. People in rural areas that do not have such access cannot do that.

I support local, and I always have. I live in a rural section of my constituency, too. I choose to support local businesses when buying fuel, rather than going to the likes of Asda where the fuel might be cheaper. Independent rural businesses have no choice but to charge more, given that they are in less populated areas. I believe there is a duty on those who can to support their local independents.

Fuel is a huge expense that many families and individuals are not able to avoid. The hon. Member for North Devon made a point about the 5p a litre rebate simply not stretching as it needs to. He clearly outlined that case, and the Minister will perhaps listen. It has not increased in line with inflation since 2010, losing around 35% of its actual value. There is no doubt that a review is needed to ensure that rural drivers across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland can benefit.

I am conscious that other hon. Members wish to speak, so I will not go on too long. Lower fuel costs can achieve better access to education, healthcare and services for rural residents who should not be left behind. At a time when money is tight and so many feel the stretch, there is more to be talked about and more that we can do. Again, I urge the Minister to engage with his counterparts to protect rural drivers in Northern Ireland as well as on mainland UK. The same benefits should apply to all rural areas of this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

16:56

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss—apologies for not informing you of my intention to speak. I congratulate the hon. Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) on securing this important debate on an issue that affects lots of rural seats, including my own in Na h-Eileanan an Iar.

The 5p a litre discount—“Danny’s discount”, as we called it on its introduction in 2012 when he was Chief Secretary to the Treasury, shamelessly promoting his own constituency and other rural areas—was widely welcomed in the Scottish islands, and it has been adjudged a success, although forgotten by many. If I had been a Lib Dem, I would have taken out posters at every rural fuel station affected to tell people that they were getting 5p off every litre.

Since then, duty seems to have been mostly frozen in Budgets, which means that the rural fuel duty discount has been frozen as well. As the hon. Member for North Devon correctly pointed out, had it gone up by inflation the discount would have gone up as well. I had the Library do some research, and it estimated that in 2021 the scheme cost the Treasury only £5 million. Had it been increased by the consumer prices index, it would have gone up by 2p—£2 million—to 7p a litre. It was extended by the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition in 2015 and now affects 12 seats. The hon. Member estimates 11, but I estimate 12: four Labour, five Lib Dem, two SNP and one Conservative. The Conservative one is the seat of the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak).

There should be wide cross-party support for a review of the rural fuel duty discount, as my colleagues in Scotland have attested. I checked today, and the cheapest fuel I could get in Stornoway, the main town in my constituency, came in at £1.34 per litre. In Glasgow it is £1.28. Far from being a rural fuel discount, there seems to be an urban fuel discount in Scotland, and I am sure that is true of other parts of the UK. So I join colleagues from across the House in calling for a review of the scheme, and perhaps some gifts in forthcoming Budgets, or a signal from the Minister that such a review will be carried out.

16:59

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) on securing this important debate. Constituencies like mine, which borders my hon. Friend’s constituency, are among the most rural in this country.

My constituents rely on their cars to cover vast areas to get to work, to take their children to school and to attend vital healthcare appointments, and they quite literally pay the price when it comes to the cost of fuel. People living in rural areas such as North Cornwall spend, on average, £800 a year more in fuel costs than those living in urban centres. These people make about 75% of their journeys by car. In Cornwall, about four times fewer people than in the rest of England are able to travel to work via public transport. Fuel can in some cases be 10% to 15% more expensive at the pump in Cornwall, compared with other areas. If we extrapolate that across a full year or several years, adding in our increased reliance on our cars, my North Cornwall constituents end up facing astronomical costs, at a time when money is extremely tight.

Under Liberal Democrat proposals, we would double the number of areas covered by the rural fuel duty relief scheme to include places, such as Cornwall, that are in dire need of respite in the face of these extremely high fuel prices. The Government, in the recent Bus Services Act 2025, missed a clear opportunity to ensure that vital healthcare routes have statutory protection, as schools and other education routes do, to ensure proper access to healthcare in Cornwall’s hospitals and GP surgeries.

I have just got off the phone to Go Cornwall Bus, which explained to me once again that this Government are not providing enough bus funding. The logical conclusion is that we have to use our cars for essential trips such as for healthcare. These are not leisure trips; they are essential. My constituents have no other options. They are forced to drive for hours to access hospital and GP appointments in north Devon, Truro, Derriford and elsewhere.

Additionally, we would introduce an official, Government-funded pumpwatch scheme, which my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) mentioned. That would allow Cornwall’s commuters to compare fuel prices at nearby petrol stations to prevent them from being ripped off. As we have heard from so many Members, prices vary across the country and sometimes within the same region. Northern Ireland already has a comparison scheme in place and, as a result, benefits from some of the lowest fuel prices in the country, as my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire (Mr MacDonald) said.

Will the Minister kindly confirm whether he and the Government will adopt our proposals to double the number of areas included in the rural fuel duty relief scheme and launch an official pumpwatch programme? Please, Minister, give those proposals the consideration they deserve.

17:02

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Furniss. My constituency of Honiton and Sidmouth is predominantly rural. Residents live in villages, small towns and hamlets, rather than urban centres. It is classified as such by the Office for National Statistics—that is, as a rural or rural town constituency. Of course, the people I represent do not need to consult the Office for National Statistics to know that, because they need only look in their wallet.

A Department for Transport survey found that people living in rural villages and hamlets travel about 2.5 miles for every mile travelled by residents of an urban area. Put simply, rural life is more expensive. People pay more for journeys to school, work, the shops and essential services.

Fuel costs more in rural areas. A UK Government road fuel review found that rural motorists typically pay between 1p and 2p more per litre because there are fewer filling stations and less competition. The Countryside Alliance estimates that rural households spend between £700 and £800 more each year on fuel than their urban counterparts. And of course there are alternatives in urban settings as public transport is much more readily available. In many parts of Devon, public transport simply is not an option.

Let me take, for example, the West of England rail line in east Devon. Its services were reduced by 50% for months across the autumn, and it desperately needs investment—a passing loop—to enable services to run on time. Regular public transport on trains and buses is not an option. Many villages have no bus service at all.

The rural fuel duty relief scheme currently applies to just 21 areas across the UK. The Liberal Democrats propose that it should be expanded to 20 new areas to support motorists in rural communities. A Government assessment in 2013 concluded that the original scheme was successful in keeping pump prices down in, for example, North Devon, as my hon. Friend the Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) identified.

For isolated and rural communities across the UK it is imperative that the Government act on their past advice and extend the scheme to tackle the systemic disadvantages faced by rural residents.

17:05

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under you, Ms Furniss. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) on securing this debate and making a very strong case, of which I hope the Minister will take heed.

I will return to some of the prehistory, because I have campaigned on this issue for so long. I congratulate my hon. Friends the Members for North Cornwall (Ben Maguire) and for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord), and the hon. Members for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton), for reinforcing the very strong points advanced by my hon. Friend the Member for North Devon in his opening remarks.

My hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) made an interesting intervention about useful pump comparison apps and sites. One of the places that was originally designated to receive rural fuel duty relief was the Isles of Scilly in my constituency, and I campaigned for it at the time. When the relief was announced in March 2012, it was very welcome. However, I am afraid that having comparison apps on the Isles of Scilly is pretty meaningless because there is only one pump and no competition. I do not think it can be argued that the monopoly supplier is taking advantage of that monopoly, because it is very much keyed into the community and has been running it as a public service.

When the relief scheme was originally established, I asked the supplier, Ian Sibley of Sibley’s, which provides fuel for road use as well as for marine use on the Isles of Scilly, how he obtained his fuel. He basically takes tanks over to the supermarket in Penzance and has them ferried back, so he is buying fuel at retail prices and selling it on. We can see that it is and has been impossible for him and his business to be in any way competitive in those circumstances, and he has had to transfer the fuel to local people on the islands without taking much of a cut to cover the costs of freight and providing the service. We can see how difficult it is to provide this service in such locations.

It is also worth reflecting on the justification for the relief, because it is all about equity and fairness. I know that some people will say, “Hang on, are you not campaigning to combat climate change?” Indeed I am, as are others present here today. Those same people may ask if it does not contradict everything we are campaigning for when we say that we want to reduce fuel costs. It is not.

This is about geographic equity across the country. It is about wanting to make sure that in addressing the cost of living crisis, which has been going on for many years, we also address the geographic inequity in the prices that end up being charged in such remote and rural locations. It is not relevant to undermine the case in any way by comparing it with the vital campaign to combat climate change.

To go into the prehistory of it, on 8 January 2002 and 15 January 2003, I brought debates to the Westminster Hall Chamber on the issue of rural and island transport. Indeed, my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) and Alan Reid from the Scottish islands made a very strong case for the importance of seeking equity in this regard, not only in terms of fuel duty but in relation to private car users and to community bus users and projects.

After that campaigning, I was pleased that the coalition Government agreed with the Liberal Democrat policy of investigating, as they put it, measures to help with fuel costs in remote rural areas, starting with pilot schemes. Indeed, in October 2010, they announced a 5p fuel duty discount for Scottish islands and the Isles of Scilly. In those days, that of course required EU approval—even post Brexit, any kind of parafiscal support or state-aid issue still requires some consideration and regulation, because it needs to meet competition rules.

Obviously, the case for the discount was made—the unfairness was acknowledged—and in March 2012, it was brought in. The pilot schemes were established, including on the Isles of Scilly as I mentioned. In October 2013, the project was, as promised, reviewed and it was identified to be working well, so the Government announced that they were going to expand the schemes to 17 additional rural areas in May 2015. I raised a petition to make west Cornwall one of those areas. It got 2,500 signatures, and I presented it to Parliament in December 2013, but unfortunately the Government did not agree to do that in August 2014, which was a pity. I do hope the Government will look at an extension.

There is still a cost difference between the Isles of Scilly and the mainland in excess of 30p per litre. It is a very difficult administrative scheme to follow through. It does create some administrative pressures on the small businesses that operate it, but I hope the Minister will accept the request to review both the amount of the discount and the geography on the basis of evidence of need.

17:13

[Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) for securing this important debate and everybody who has spoken in it. There is a very strong message coming through about how much rural communities need this relief and how much they suffer.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) mentioned, rural life is more expensive, and that is because of the friction of distance and the scale of distance. This relief goes a long way to offsetting that expense, and it has been a huge help to communities, but it is becoming less and less of a help because it has not gone up with inflation or anything else, and that sits on top of all the additional pressures that our communities are under that are really stretching household budgets and causing a lot of trouble. That is the root cause, so we ask the Minister, in responding to this debate, to address whether the Government will consider uprating the scheme in line with inflation.

Secondly, if we look at the state of public transport infrastructure in this country after years of under-investment by the last Conservative Government, it is quite clear that there are many more areas, as many of my colleagues have pointed out, where people have no real alternative but to use cars for day-to-day journeys. That is far more widespread than just the 21 areas that currently benefit from the scheme.

Research published by the County Councils Network in 2024 found that the frequency of rural bus services in England had reached a historic low, with more than a quarter of rural routes having been lost in the preceding decade. In remote areas of Scotland, some of which benefit from the rural fuel duty relief scheme, low connectivity is having a clear negative impact on the population, as my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire (Mr MacDonald) mentioned earlier today in this debate and in the Chamber.

National Records of Scotland’s “Population estimates by urban rural classification”, which covered 2001 to 2021, showed a population decrease by 1% between 2011 and 2020, compared with increases of 3.1% nationwide and 8.4% in accessible rural areas. The population of rural small towns decreased by 3.6% over the same period. The implication is that the lack of connectivity and affordable transport is hollowing out those communities, and the reduction in real-terms value of the relief scheme is playing a part in that.

The Government’s Bus Services Act 2025 will make some positive change, and I support the aim of revitalising rural bus services, but with the best will in the world we cannot turn this situation around overnight. New transport infrastructure takes months and years to create—my colleagues and I are trying to bring back a rail link in west Oxfordshire—and rural drivers up and down the country are struggling with this problem now.

To address the problem, the Liberal Democrats have called for the number of areas covered by the scheme to be doubled, so an additional 21 areas across the UK would benefit from the relief. That expansion should be supported by a clear consultation and evidence base to determine the areas that could receive the new relief: perhaps Devon, Cornwall, Cumbria, East Anglia, Yorkshire and Shropshire could benefit, alongside rural Wales, more of rural Scotland and, of course, Northern Ireland.

17:15

[James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) on securing this debate, and I thank all hon. Members for the contributions that we have heard. It was a Conservative Government that introduced the rural fuel duty relief scheme in 2019, and that was in recognition of the fact that remote communities face higher pump prices due to the high cost of transporting and distributing fuel.

The scheme was subsequently extended again in 2015 to include more areas across England and Scotland, providing a welcome 5p per litre reduction in prices to help families and businesses in those areas, particularly where they might have only one filling station to choose from. The scheme recognised that rural communities, especially isolated ones, face challenges that justify targeted support. As we have heard from hon. Members, it has proved effective and needed.

In the main Chamber, my right hon. Friend the Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins), the shadow Environment Secretary, has been setting out the support that the Conservatives have consistently provided for people in rural Britain; many of my colleagues are speaking in that debate. In government, we demonstrated our commitment to those who live and work in the countryside, including my North West Norfolk constituents.

Our fuel duty record underlined that. As well as the rural fuel duty relief, we froze fuel duty every year from 2011. In March 2022, we went further and introduced a 5p cut to fuel duty across the board. That was not merely about tax policy; it was about recognising that, for rural communities, a car or a van is a lifeline, not a luxury. It connects farmers to markets, helps children get to school, helps people get to work or health appointments and keeps rural enterprises in business. Every penny added to the cost of fuel has a multiplied effect in areas where public transport is limited and journeys are longer.

Our support for rural communities extended far beyond fuel duty to infrastructure and supporting agricultural businesses, recognising their vital contribution to our country and to the social fabric—what a contrast to what we have seen under this Government. The Government say that the cost of living is their priority, but they are adding to the costs for families and businesses. Inflation was at 2% when the Government came in, and they have nearly doubled it. The much-vaunted promise of £300 off energy bills is nowhere to be seen.

In her Budget, the Chancellor announced that Labour would end the 5p fuel duty cut that we introduced. That measure will take effect from September this year, and will see the average family pay £100 a year more. The Road Haulage Association estimates that it will add more than £2,000 a year to the operating costs of a heavy goods vehicle. From April next year, the Government will scrap the 16-year fuel duty freeze that we introduced, and inflation-linked rises will follow. That marks the end of the support offered to motorists through the freeze since 2010, which has saved them £120 billion. That puts in context the modest £5 million or so cost of the rural fuel duty relief.

In November, the Chancellor also announced her pay-per-mile tax on electric vehicles, which is set to cost drivers an extra £255 a year. It is little wonder that the RAC has said that simply keeping vehicles on the road has become a significant financial challenge. The Prime Minister has been boasting about the £3 bus cap—a cap that he increased by 50%. Whether it is fuel duty or public transport, the Government are making things harder and more expensive for rural communities.

Rural communities are not only being punished at the pump. In the debate, we have heard reference to the family farm tax, which breaks up the farms that form the backbone of our rural communities. The modest change that the Minister has announced is welcome as far as it goes, but given the damage that the tax will do, the Conservatives are committed to reversing it entirely.

As well as the increases to fuel duty, business rates will increase, hitting rural pubs and businesses. UKHospitality estimates that an average pub will pay an extra £12,900 over the next three years. The Minister was sent out to defend the farm tax, and he said there would not be changes, but then there were. At Treasury questions, I called on the Chancellor to look again at business rates increases, and the Minister ruled that out then, but we read today that there may be changes. Apparently the Business Secretary has even noticed the damage that the increases will do—presumably not after discussing them in a pub, given that many Labour MPs have been barred. Will the Minister therefore confirm whether the Government are considering making those changes, as the sector and many across the House have called for?

The rural fuel duty relief scheme reflects an approach to governing that recognises the distinct challenges and vital importance of our rural communities. We introduced the scheme and extended it, and throughout our time in government we demonstrated that we understand and support those who live and work in the countryside. Given that it is now more than a decade since the scheme was last expanded, and given its modest cost, I fully support a review of the relief. The Treasury often says that it keeps taxes under review, but this measure deserves a proactive review, and I hope that the Minister will commit to one.

By contrast, this Government’s tax rise after tax rise make life harder for rural businesses and rural people. Against a backdrop of weak growth and rising unemployment, Labour’s approach sadly threatens the fabric of our rural communities. Those rural communities deserve much better.

17:23

[The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Dan Tomlinson)]

It is a pleasure to speak under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I am grateful to the hon. Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) for securing this debate and speaking so passionately in support of rural communities and the people in his constituency, who I know he has much honour in representing. I thank him for securing the debate and giving Members on both sides of the House the chance to contribute on this very important topic.

This Government recognise the importance of rural areas for the UK economy, and will continue to consider how they can best support those who live and work rurally. Although my Barnet constituency, which is in the very north of London, lacks the beaches and moors of the hon. Gentleman’s, it does contain 14 farms and have some rural areas, because of the large bit of green belt that extends into north London. Like all Ministers, I am fully committed to ensuring that the tax system works for everyone, whether they are in rural or more urban parts of the country.

Fuel duty is an important source of Government revenue and provides vital funding for public services and infrastructure. It raised £24.4 billion in 2024-25; as has been mentioned, fuel duty rates have been frozen since 2011, with a further, temporary 5p cut introduced in 2022. Fuel duty rates are therefore now, in real terms, about 40% lower than they were in 2011. Pump prices are at their lowest level since 2021, before Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine led to soaring prices and the introduction of the temporary 5p cut.

At the Budget, therefore, the Chancellor announced that the 5p cut would first be extended until the end of August, with rates then rising gradually, returning to March 2022 levels by March 2027. As well as that extension to the freeze, the planned increase in line with inflation for the coming financial year will not take place. Those decisions on fuel duty will save the average car driver across the country £49 in the coming financial year, compared with previous plans.

The Government also recognise the importance of competition between retailers in the road fuels market. Liberal Democrat Members, including the hon. Members for North Cornwall (Ben Maguire) and for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) and others, mentioned a pumpwatch scheme. Sadly, that reveals that we need to communicate even better about some of the ideas put forward by Government: at the Budget, the Chancellor confirmed that from spring 2026, UK consumers will be able to compare prices more easily through the Government’s new open-data fuel finder scheme, which I believe will achieve aims similar to those of the pumpwatch proposal. It will help to encourage competitive pricing among retailers and is expected to result in further savings for drivers of potentially up to £40 a year.

The Government, however, are well aware that fuel costs can be higher in certain more remote areas, so the rural fuel duty relief scheme provides a 5p per litre reduction to benefit motorists buying fuel in those areas. The areas included in the scheme demonstrate certain characteristics, such as pump prices being much higher than the UK average, remoteness leading to high fuel transport costs from refinery to filling station, and relatively low sales meaning that retailers cannot benefit from bulk discounts.

As mentioned by many Members, the scheme provides about £5 million in support per year, with about 165 fuel retailers registered with His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to claim the relief. The hon. Member for St Ives (Andrew George) mentioned the administrative costs, and I am interested to hear more from him and from any businesses that have ideas about how I, as Minister with responsibility for HMRC, can seek to reduce any of the administrative burdens that those 165 retailers may face.

One area included in the scheme is the EX35 postcode, which is part of Exmoor national park and in the constituency of the hon. Member for North Devon, who secured the debate. I confirm that the scheme in fact covers not just 11 or 12 constituencies, but 16—some of the postcodes sneakily cross over constituency boundaries, so that 16 Members of the House of Commons represent constituencies of which at least some elements are covered by the relief.

[Andrew George]

The Minister raised the issue of the administrative burden. I was referring to an occasion when an operator of the scheme was late in his submission to HMRC, in which case he was refused the rebate, which he had been taking. In such circumstances, he had to appeal. I was simply demonstrating the rigidity and lack of humour, as it were, in the system. We are talking about extremely small businesses that find the additional administrative burden quite onerous.

[Dan Tomlinson]

I note, as I am sure others in the Chamber will, just how forensic is the hon. Member’s understanding of some of the small businesses in his constituency. That is to be very much commended. If he would like to write to me on that point, I would certainly like to raise it with HMRC. Of course, it is not appropriate for me as a tax Minister to get involved in individual tax affairs. That said, the general point is about administration, and the extent to which we are getting the balance right between ensuring that we stick to the rules as set out, and having an appropriate level of flexibility. That is something that I would happily raise with the Department, if he were willing to write to me.

The hon. Member for North Devon and many others have suggested that the Government should increase the rural fuel duty relief in line with inflation. As I set out earlier, since the relief’s introduction, it has remained at 5p, but the main fuel duty rate has also remained at the same level—or, more recently, has fallen. I am aware that there are differences across the country, and there may have been differentials in the increase in fuel prices in some areas. However, the fuel costs are broadly the same as they were in 2011, if not slightly higher; it was roughly 130p for a litre then, compared with around 135p now.

[Brendan O’Hara]

The hon. Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton) made the point that getting this rebate was one of the few successes of the coalition Government. The reason there was no political reward for it was that, at £1.60 a litre in rural Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber, it does not feel like a benefit. If the Minister will not make it index-linked, can he tell us what mechanism the Government have put in place to check that this rebate—albeit scant—is actually reaching the consumer? It does not feel as though it is for people living in rural communities.

[Dan Tomlinson]

Other Members, including the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), have asked the same question; I was going to come on to it, but I will happily do so now. As a Department, HMRC requires retailers to keep records evidencing that the 5p saving is being passed on to customers, but I would be happy to look in more detail at how that is done. Maybe we can catch a word in the Tea Room to discuss it in more detail, because the Government want to make sure that that is happening and that the 5p cut—although we can debate whether it should be higher—is passed on to consumers in full.

The Members who spoke in the debate have deep knowledge of their constituencies and have often talked about their trust in their small local businesses, many of which will be running the garages or forecourts in the more rural areas, such as the middle of the moors. I must say that the hon. Member for Strangford is doing a very honourable thing in going to more expensive garages to support the local businesses. That is a very commendable act; I must say that it is not one I always engage in, as I like to find a good price, but I commend him on it.

While fuel duty costs are broadly the same, I admit that they are slightly higher than they were in 2011. However, as foreshadowed by the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for North West Norfolk (James Wild), the Chancellor keeps all taxes under review; decisions on future fuel duty rates and rural fuel duty reliefs will always be made in the round and in the context of the public finances. That said, I have noted with interest all the points made today and again thank the hon. Member for North Devon for securing this debate and giving me the chance, as the Minister with responsibility, to reflect on these important issues.

A number of Members have also suggested that the Government should increase the number of areas in scope of a rural fuel duty relief—I can sense a potential Liberal Democrat local election campaign, although I would not possibly want to comment. I was going to say that neither I nor my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ealing North (James Murray)—I checked—had received any formal representations to expand the coverage of the relief since the start of this Parliament, but of course I have received some comments on that during the debate. There are no current plans to amend the list of eligible locations but, if Members strongly feel that their constituencies fall into the categories in the scheme’s rules, I will always welcome representations, and they should feel free to write to me.

[Richard Foord]

If the Minister will not consider the geographical expansion of the rural fuel duty relief scheme, with a view to the Government’s introduction of the electric vehicle excise duty in April 2018, might he consider a duty relief for the existing areas, but applying to the electric fuel duty?

[Dan Tomlinson]

That is not something that we are actively considering. That said, the details of the eVED scheme are to be consulted on in detail. We are still a number of years from its introduction, and there will be many fine decisions that need to be made in the coming months ahead of its implementation, and I note the representation that the hon. Gentleman has made today.

[Andrew George]

Will the Minister give way one more time?

[Dan Tomlinson]

I will happily do so, although I am sure that hon. Members would like me to make some progress, too.

[Andrew George]

On the question of geographical coverage, and given the Minister’s comment that he has not received representations about further areas for inclusion, I urge the Government to review the scheme and to take an objective measure themselves of where else it might extend to, rather than inviting us to form an orderly queue in pleading for our own areas, which could result in a system based not on need, but on political advantage.

[Dan Tomlinson]

I am always glad to take interventions. The hon. Member’s point is noted and I acknowledge his request. I ask Members to get in touch if they believe that an area meets the criteria. As the hon. Member has noted, there are not hard and fast rules here—there are not specific criteria within each of the categories that are considered in the round—and the Government do not intend to change to having hard and fast rules. I would be worried that that might lead to more complexity and change within the system, meaning that if one area’s prices tipped slightly above or below, we might get into contestation of whether the additional costs of transporting fuel to certain places tips over or above the threshold. I hope that Members who have views on where relief should be extended to will bear with the current, less-rigid process.

I was going to say, in a slightly light-hearted way, that the hon. Member for Witney (Charlie Maynard) suffers somewhat in tax policy debates, in that I know his constituency well, having been born and brought up in west Oxfordshire. As part of my joyful travelling to and from seeing my family there, I often fill up in his constituency, which is often cheaper than doing so in north London. I noted that the hon. Member was magnanimous in calling for the scheme to be extended not to west Oxfordshire, but instead to other areas represented by his Liberal Democrat colleagues.

I should mention the important speech made by my hon. Friend the Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton)—he will have to teach me how to pronounce his constituency, as that was the first time I have said it. His is one of the constituencies that does benefit from the relief. I am glad to hear Labour Members talking clearly about the benefits that the relief provides for constituents in some of the most rural parts of the whole country.

Again, I commend the hon. Member for St Ives for his engagement with businesses. We heard about the garage on the Isles of Scilly and how it gets petrol to and from. I think I have covered most of the points raised. If Members have a burning desire to ask me to clarify something, I will, but I am sure we all want to make some progress.

Let me make a couple of further points before I conclude. The fuel duty system supports rural areas in other ways as well. Households and non-commercial premises are entitled to use red diesel for heating and electricity generation, which includes off-grid homes in remote and rural locations that have limited alternatives. Red diesel is subject to fuel duty, which is 10.18p per litre compared with the 52.95p for diesel used on roads. Farmers also retain the entitlement to use red diesel in machinery and vehicles used for agricultural purposes after that was withdrawn from most sectors under the previous Government in 2022.

Several Members discussed the need to ensure that public transport maintains a level of affordability. At the end of the last year, the Government confirmed a long-term investment of over £3 billion over the next three years to support local leaders and bus operators across the country to improve bus services for millions of passengers. That includes multi-year allocations for local authorities under the local authority bus grant. From 2026-27, we have revised the formula to include a rurality element for the first time to ensure that the additional challenges of running bus services in rural areas are taken into account.

I was surprised that there was no mention of potholes in a debate about transport, but I know that they are of particular concern to those in rural areas that are more prone to frost, meaning that ice gets inside the tarmac and the road breaks up. By 2029-30, the Government will have committed more than £2 billion annually for local authorities to repair, renew and fix potholes on their roads. That doubling of funding since we took office will mean that we can exceed our manifesto commitment to fix an additional 1 million potholes a year by the end of this Parliament.

The Opposition spokesperson mentioned the electric vehicle decision that the Government announced at the Budget. We remain fully committed to the electric vehicle transition, which will drive growth and help the country to meet its climate change objectives. Our public charging network is growing rapidly. We had more than 87,000 public charge points as of December last year, and, in the year ending 1 October 2025, the number of charging devices in rural areas had increased by 26%. In addition, the Government announced at Budget 2025 the immediate roll-out of a package of support worth £3.6 billion to help motorists to switch to cleaner and greener cars, to support the automotive sector through the transition to EVs, and to bolster British industry.

The Government are dedicated to supporting and promoting rural areas, particularly by providing support for transport costs, such as through the rural fuel duty relief scheme. I very much look forward to further discussions—perhaps even further correspondence—over the course of the Parliament about how we can continue to do that. I thank the hon. Member for North Devon for securing the debate and all Members in the Chamber for their contributions.

17:41

[Ian Roome]

I will be brief, Ms Furniss, because I know we are almost out of time.

I thank the Minister for his response and I appreciate his taking the time to engage with me and others on this issue. While we do not expect the Government to commit themselves ahead of a future Budget, I know that my constituents value the support that the scheme provides to very rural areas, and it would be good to see progress towards restoring the funding to its former level.

I also thank all Members for their contributions—what a debate! We have covered from the top of Scotland down to the Isles of Scilly and Land’s End, which is absolutely fantastic. We have heard representations from Wales, Northern Ireland and England, obviously, so what a great and inclusive debate it has been, from across the whole of the United Kingdom and all our rural constituencies.

Fuel is very much part of my constituents’ daily lives. It is an unavoidable cost; personal transport is much needed, because there is no regular public transport in any of the EX35 area, and people cannot walk to bus stops because of the terrain and the rurality.

Many accusations have been thrown at the Government over the past year to claim that they do not care about rural areas. When the next fiscal event arrives later this year, updating the scheme for 2026 will be a chance to counter those claims, at very little cost compared with other schemes. I therefore hope that the Government will take that opportunity, on behalf of communities that are often forgotten, to deliver good news at the pumps for rural people.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the Rural Fuel Duty Relief scheme.

17:44

Sitting adjourned.