Mountain Rescue

Ben Maguire Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell; I am sure you will give us guidance if and when the Divisions come again, but it is a pleasure either way. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) for leading this debate so eloquently and bringing this important issue to the attention of everybody in the Chamber. It is an honour to follow the excellent speeches given by the hon. Members for Bolton West (Phil Brickell), for Stirling and Strathallan (Chris Kane) and for Strangford (Jim Shannon), and to precede the excellent speeches I am sure we will hear in the moments ahead.

For those of us in the Lake district, the mountain rescue service is undoubtedly the fourth emergency service. That is demonstrated in a very pictorial way, really, in the centre of Kendal: just north of the town centre, Busher Walk is a small street where the police station, ambulance station, fire station and Kendal mountain rescue headquarters all sit within a few yards of each other. They work very closely together, and the mountain rescue team are deeply valued, respected and seen as a partner by the other three emergency services. Of course, the difference is that the mountain rescue team are entirely made up of volunteers.

Across the county of Cumbria, we have 12 mountain rescue teams. Five of those are directly in my constituency: Coniston, Ambleside and Langdale, Kendal, Kirkby Stephen and Patterdale. An honourable mention goes to my constituency neighbour, the Under-Secretary of State for Education, the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), who is a member of the Patterdale team. As a Minister, he is unable to participate in this debate.

I also pay tribute to those working as part of the Keswick Mountain Rescue Team. Keswick is not in my patch, but it certainly serves a good chunk of it and we are very grateful. I will also mention the Bay Search and Rescue team, who look after the lowlands—as my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo), who is no longer in his place, referred to earlier—of the very dangerous and treacherous Morecambe bay sands. On top of that, we are served admirably by the North West air ambulance service and the Great North air ambulance service, which I was delighted to run my first London marathon for five years ago. It provides a wonderful service, and does so with the support of volunteers.

Mountain rescue teams have provided roughly 80 years of service to our country. Much has changed in that time, not least that, back in the 1940s, to raise the alarm that something had happened, one member of the team who had somehow found out that something was wrong on the fell would literally run around the town or village knocking on doors to get members of the team out to respond. Today, highly trained specialists have technical communication facilities available to them. Nevertheless, they still have in common—with each other, and with back then—the fact that they are volunteers who are dedicated and who are of their communities. They save lives and serve us admirably, and we are incredibly grateful to them.

In Cumbria, we have 20 million visitors a year. By our reckoning, that makes us the second most visited destination in the country after London. The lakes is a world heritage site. We have dozens and dozens of beautiful mountains and valleys—places that are utterly spectacular yet often dangerous. Volunteers working on call for mountain rescue teams put themselves at risk daily, and they balance the service they provide with their other lives, often in full-time occupations.

I almost hesitate to highlight, because it is such a grim and recent memory, that people who volunteer for mountain rescue teams not only often deal with the most tragic of circumstances but can sometimes fall victim to them. Our friend Chris Lewis, of the Patterdale Mountain Rescue Team, died in 2023. He had sustained serious injuries 18 months earlier when he was called out, as part of a team, to an incident on Red Screes near the Kirkstone pass. That is a reminder that those people who freely give up their time risk their lives for us on a regular basis. I pay tribute to Chris and everybody else who puts themselves out there to keep us safe.

I observe that since covid—other hon. Members have mentioned this—we have seen a change in the relationship between the people of our country and the lakes in particular, as well as the dales and other places. In many ways, that is very positive—people have chosen the outdoors and got a taste for the countryside, often without a lifetime of background in how to operate in a safe and sensible way.

I am proud to be an officer of the all-party group for volunteer rescue services and I am chair of the all-party group on outdoor learning, of which the hon. Member for Bolton West is an important and valued member, and vice-chair. I very much value working with him and others in that capacity.

I cannot overstate the value of being in the outdoors for people’s physical and mental resilience throughout life. We ought to be really pleased about that uptick in people, particularly younger people, wanting to take exercise and explore the fells, and yet a “but” is attached to that: mountain rescue teams report a significant increase in the number of call-outs over the past five years by people who are not familiar with the fells. Often they are younger people, sometimes not adequately prepared or without the right kit, and sometimes just not realising that the weather on the flat in Glenridding might not be the same as the weather on the top of Helvellyn. The consequences can be utterly fatal.

Those are the challenges that our wonderful mountain rescue teams have to deal with, on top of the fact—this is a subject for another Westminster Hall debate perhaps—that excessive second home ownership in the Lake district means that the resident population is not as big as it used to be, and the reservoir of people who could volunteer to be in mountain rescue is smaller than it once was. Those teams have more to do and a harder job to find and recruit the people to do it.

Mountain rescue teams, however, now face a new challenge. It has been referred to already, but I want to add my words. A proposed amendment to the Health and Social Care Act 2008 that stems, understandably, from the Manchester Arena bombing inquiry, would require any organisation providing first aid with a medical professional to register with the CQC. Mountain rescue teams not only respond to emergency call-outs, but provide valuable support to fell races, mountain bike races, country shows and so on. I know that myself—I am a regular participant in fell races and I must have done the Grasmere fell race 20 times now, as well as the Ambleside and Coniston races. Because of my knee injury, I had to miss last year’s Grasmere fell race, and I was missed—I got a text from one of the other participants, who was very sad that I was not taking part, because that meant this year his chances of coming last had become a little greater.

I utterly value the intervention and support of the mountain rescue teams in keeping us safe. We reckon, however, that CQC registration could cost an estimated £10,000 to £20,000 in total, admin charges included, for each of those mountain rescue teams. That is five in my patch, 12 across Cumbria and, I think, 47 across the whole country. That would mean that those volunteer-led teams simply could not sustain their level of operation. They would have to withdraw from those events entirely, and the events would have to take on professional and much more expensive cover by people who would not be able to get up the fell anyway. As has been mentioned by others, mountain rescue would still be called out if someone ended up involved in an accident halfway up or at the top.

All we ask of the Minister—I have also written to the Minister for Health Innovation and Safety on this point—is for the Government to introduce a proportionate, risk-based exemption for volunteer mountain rescue teams, so that vital community services are protected without disproportionate regulatory burdens.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

I fully endorse and support what my hon. Friend is saying. My brilliant Cornish search and rescue team have asked me to attend this debate to make exactly the same point, that if they are not exempted from that CQC registration requirement, they will face thousands of pounds in costs and lots of time in bureaucracy. Frankly, many of them would not continue in the search and rescue service, and we would see a huge gap. They provide a valuable service, as we have heard, so I join my hon. Friend in urging the Minister to look again at that. If she cannot provide an assurance to us, to our constituents and to our brilliant search and rescue and mountain rescue teams, I hope that she and her colleagues can come back to us later.

[Tim Farron]

I very much agree with my hon. Friend, who makes excellent points on behalf of his own communities in Cornwall.

I will finish by saying that we have written to the Minister for Health Innovation and Safety, because the issue is to do with the Health and Social Care Act. We are pleased to see this Minister in her place—she does a great job—but it gives a bit of a picture of one of the problems that we face on this issue: mountain rescue does not really have a home, and it needs one. We need a Minister who is specifically responsible for mountain rescue and indeed for other search and rescue provision. I urge, via the Minister present, that to happen.

Many of the things we have all asked today have been about sending messages to the Minister, or through the Minister to the Health Department, and we hope that they will be heard. I simply say to the Minister: “Let’s not needlessly place a burden on our outstanding search and rescue teams.” Our mountain rescue volunteers put themselves at risk to keep us safe. They deserve our gratitude and practical support. Let us help them, not hinder them.

Finance (No. 2) Bill

Ben Maguire Excerpts

Report stage
Wednesday 11th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Kirsty Blackman]

It is absolutely worth looking at that forum, but as the hon. Member said in relation to the new clause, people who are promoting schemes with no expectation that they will actually work should not be doing it on money-saving expert forums, or anywhere else. I agree that Martin Lewis has been very clear that he does not give advice online, and that people who, for example, say, “This is a Martin Lewis tip” are lying. It is worth highlighting that the way in which he has chosen to put forward tax advice or information is totally different to the way chosen by the financial influencers referred to in new clause 4. As I said, I am more than happy to support it; I would have just liked it to be wider.

We are happy to support new clause 11 on the uprating of agricultural relief, tabled by the Liberal Democrats. If the new clause and the uprating is not to be implemented, it would be incredibly useful to see the Government’s rationale for why they have chosen not to do annual uprating in a way that would be standard for the majority of other reliefs. What is the logic for that? As I was not on the Bill Committee, I am not as across this part of the Bill as I perhaps should be, so I am not clear what mechanism is in place to uprate the relief. Is it done under the negative or affirmative statutory instrument procedure? Will the House actually see a statutory instrument, or is a delegated authority given to the Minister? It would be helpful to have an idea of what the mechanism is, and whether, if inflation continues at the current rate or goes up again, the Government are likely to put in place an increase to ensure that agricultural relief continues to wash its face—to provide the relief it is supposed to.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

I wholeheartedly endorse what the hon. Member is saying in support of new clause 11 tabled by the Liberal Democrats. Lots of my farmers in North Cornwall are constantly telling me that they are pleased with the Government’s decision to change course on the family farm tax, but it is essential that they keep rising prices in mind, exactly as the hon. Member says.

[Kirsty Blackman]

I absolutely agree. With the uncertainty in the middle east just now, we are seeing an increase in fuel prices, which will heavily impact farmers, and fertiliser prices. Since Russia invaded Ukraine, fertiliser prices have gone through the roof and it has been difficult to get hold of at all, so farmers need support. We have always relied on growing food, but in this ever more uncertain world we really need to rely on growing our own food. This Government—and all Governments—need to consider whether we want to be self-sufficient, or anywhere near self-sufficient, in food, or we are happy to see our farms dismantled to create ever-larger, Australian-style sheep farms, with thousands of sheep on them and nothing else. We need to consider what future there is for our farmers and ensure that we are backing that future.

Tolled Crossings and Regional Connectivity

Ben Maguire Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall) (Lab)]

Meur ras, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am pleased to have secured a debate on this issue, which I have campaigned on consistently since becoming the Member of Parliament for South East Cornwall, and which has existed for many years before my time in this House. It is an issue that I hear about daily because of its impact on almost every aspect of local life. I want to thank local residents, community groups—including the Tamar Toll action group and Safe38—previous MPs, local councillors and Tamar Crossings for their efforts to improve our local transport connectivity.

South East Cornwall is a place that bridges the old and the new. Our communities continue to bring life to historic fishing villages and welcome thousands of tourists annually, while also looking to the future, with advanced defence capabilities, artificial intelligence and digital industries, and world-leading regenerative agriculture. To fully play our part in the next decade of national renewal, we must bridge the gap, both physically and metaphorically, between Cornwall and the rest of the country. That includes the seamless integration of my communities with the new Plymouth defence deal in order to unlock opportunity in one of the poorest areas in western Europe and ensure that South East Cornwall is fully connected to the growth, security and prosperity that the deal will bring.

At its heart, this issue is about how we connect to places and services, how communities function, and how nationally significant infrastructure is sustained. It raises a fundamental question about whether our current connectivity policies reflect the lived reality in rural and coastal areas like mine and whether historical funding models still work in a modern economy.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

Does the hon. Member agree that a real devolution deal, similar to those enjoyed by our Celtic cousins, must include a roads budget that is equivalent to the Cornish proportion of the strategic road network? Equating to around £95 million a year, it could easily make the Tamar toll free, at around £15 million a year, and leave further funds for urgent upgrades such as the A38 in her constituency, a Camelford relief road and—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. Interventions must be brief, but as it is so long before 10 pm, Members could make a speech if they so wish.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

I take up your kind invitation to make a short speech, Madam Deputy Speaker. I thank the hon. Member for South East Cornwall (Anna Gelderd) for making an excellent speech and raising this important issue.

I want to make a few brief points, particularly while we have the Roads Minister here. The national focus in recent times has been on train connectivity in the north, so I am pleased to see Cornwall, Devon and the wider south-west getting a proper share of the debate this evening. One point I want to make while the Minister is here is that National Highways does not currently contribute any maintenance moneys to the Tamar bridge, despite the fact that the bridge is a critical part of its roads network. I understand that it recently cost as much as £6 million to resurface the bridge, because the method used is complex, but not a penny spent was from National Highways; it used the tolls generated.

[Noah Law]

The hon. Member makes an important point about the lack of National Highways funding for the bridge, but does he share my delight at the £220 million investment coming into Cornwall’s roads from national Government? We are seeing record-breaking investment in our roads, but that is not to detract from the point he makes about the lack of funding for the Tamar bridge.

[Ben Maguire]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention, and hopefully he and I can make the argument to the Minister and her colleagues that some of that money should go to the Tamar bridge.

There are certainly other road projects across Cornwall. The hon. Member for South East Cornwall spoke passionately about the A38, which my constituents frequently raise with me, and hopefully that is another project that can be funded from the large amount of money we are hearing is coming to Cornwall’s road network. There are also much-needed safety upgrades at Plusha in my constituency. I have met the Minister on numerous occasions, so I know she is aware of the upgrades to the Camelford relief road, which have been promised for many years.

As I have mentioned, I really hope that a devolution deal will now be forthcoming in which we see the equivalent of the Cornish proportion of the strategic road network, which is around £96 million a year. This evening, we have talked about making the Tamar toll crossing cheaper for local residents, or potentially removing the toll altogether at a cost of around £15 million a year. In their devolution deals, our Celtic cousins enjoy a budget equivalent to the amount of the road network they have in their nations, and that would leave plenty of money left over for the A30 upgrade that the hon. Member for South East Cornwall mentioned, and for lots of other upgrades across Cornwall.

[Anna Gelderd]

I thank the hon. Member for making that point. It is important to recognise that the future costs of these projects in Cornwall include maintenance, electrification and lots of other elements. That means we must work together with concrete resources to make sure that cheaper tolls are delivered for local people.

[Ben Maguire]

I absolutely agree with the hon. Member.

Finally, my Launceston constituents in North Cornwall frequently use the Tamar bridge crossing, on which they rely to access healthcare at Derriford hospital in Plymouth, so they absolutely have to make that journey. It is not a shopping trip or a leisure trip; they really need to make that journey. It takes around two hours by public transport to get to the hospital, and it takes almost one hour to get there by car, which is still quite staggering. On top of the fuel costs and the costs of running a car, they have to pay this £3 charge, and that is before we get to the extortionate cost of the hospital car park once they arrive. I urge the Minister to factor that into the Department’s thinking, because this is not just about leisure trips. We are talking about vital healthcare.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lilian Greenwood]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. I will make a diversion to the south-east of England to say that the Government are committed to delivering the lower Thames crossing, which is the most significant road-building scheme in a generation. It will provide access to more than 400,000 jobs within an hour’s commute of local communities, and of course it will ease congestion at the Dartford crossing. Although the charging regime for the lower Thames crossing has not been set, like other crossings in England, such as the Dartford crossing, it will have a charge applied in order to cover the cost of providing the infrastructure, and the development consent order made clear that it is our intention that both tolls will be equal when the lower Thames crossing opens.

Turning back to the south-west, a question was raised about the role of National Highways. The A38 on either side of the Tamar bridge is the responsibility of National Highways as part of the strategic road network, but the bridge itself is not. However, while the Tamar crossings themselves are not the responsibility of National Highways, it does make an operational contribution each year towards the Saltash tunnel tidal flow system, which is monitored by the board that manages the bridge and the ferry.

We saw the completion of the essential major road network scheme in Cornwall linking St Austell to the A30 last July and look forward to progression of the Manadon interchange scheme in Plymouth, which will benefit so many people using the road network. The Government are committed to supporting local authorities in maintaining and renewing the local highway network, which is why by 2029-30 we will commit over £2 billion annually for local authorities to repair and renew their roads and fix potholes, doubling the funding since we came into office.

[Ben Maguire]

I humbly ask the Minister to write to the Cornish MPs so we can see what proportion of that £2 billion—I think she said by 2030—might come to our region. Perhaps then we can see how it might contribute to reducing, or maybe even removing, the tolls on the bridge.

[Lilian Greenwood]

The hon. Gentleman will be delighted to hear that Cornwall will benefit from up to £221 million of that £2 billion over the next four years, alongside over £24 million of local transport grant capital for maintenance and enhancements.

Of course we do not just need better roads; better links through high-quality public transport are also essential. People have a right to expect cohesive, reliable bus networks, enabling them to travel easily and comfortably to get to work, to school, to social clubs, to shops, and to see friends and family, and of course to visit hospitals and other health facilities, as a number of colleagues have mentioned.

As my hon. Friend the Member for South East Cornwall said, under the previous Government many thousands of bus services were lost, leaving communities cut off and reducing people’s opportunities for travel and all that that means. That is why, despite the challenging financial position this Government inherited, we are investing over £3 billion for the rest of the spending review period to support local leaders and bus operators across the country to improve bus services for millions of passengers, including those living in rural areas. This is additional funding to the more than £1 billion we are already providing this financial year. We are also giving the certainty that local authorities and bus operators need to build their networks longer term through multi-year allocations under the local authority bus grant, totalling nearly £700 million per year. That puts an end to the previous short-term approach to bus funding, enabling councils to plan their spending more strategically, ensuring that outcomes for passengers are always the top priority.

Cornwall council will receive over £30 million of this funding from 2026-27 to 2028-29, in addition to the £10.6 million it is receiving this financial year. On top of that, we continue to see the benefits yielded by our decision to extend the £3 national bus fare cap until March 2027, making bus journeys consistently more affordable for passengers. As my hon. Friend has said, in many of these areas people have low incomes, and that is why it is so important that we are cutting the cost of bus travel.

Additionally, we are funding bus franchising pilots to test the viability of different franchising models so that we can understand how these can deliver better bus services, including in rural locations. That includes a pilot in Cornwall, and I await the results with interest.

Active travel infrastructure to improve walking, wheeling and cycling routes remains essential. Following on from almost £300 million that the Government provided for active travel schemes up to 2026, we announced an additional £626 million for such infrastructure in a four-year settlement to help local authorities further improve active travel facilities and support network planning. Cornwall council will benefit from over £4.5 million of this funding.

Connectivity through reliable rail services is equally important, and I acknowledge hon. Members’ concerns about resilience on the rail line in Cornwall and Devon, particularly given the recent adverse weather. Network Rail is responsible for maintaining the railway network and has established processes in place for ensuring that it is safe to use when incidents happen. It continues to work closely with rail operators to help affected passengers and restore services as quickly as possible.

We announced in the November Budget that for regulated fares rail, passengers will not be faced with the increased cost in rail journeys that they have become accustomed to year on year. We are freezing regulated rail fares until March 2027 for the first time in 30 years. Meanwhile, 26 class 175 trains are being introduced on to Great Western Railway routes in Devon and Cornwall during this year. They will replace older diesel units, improve capacity and reliability, and free up rolling stock for wider use across the south-west, providing resilience across the network. The introduction of these trains on the Newquay branch line is part of mid Cornwall metro, doubling the frequency of trains on this branch and connecting rural communities to employment and education in Truro and Falmouth. As part of our commitment to improving digital technology for passengers, we secured funding to fit all mainline trains with low-earth orbit satellite technology to upgrade on train wi-fi.

My hon. Friend rightly brought to my attention in recent correspondence road safety issues—in particular, the need to reduce speeding in rural areas. The Government recently released the first road safety strategy in more than a decade, setting out our vision for a safer future on our roads for all. This strategy sets an ambitious target to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on British roads by 65% by 2035, with measures to protect vulnerable road users, updated vehicle safety technologies and a review of motoring offences. I know that these are particular concerns in rural areas, which are disproportionately places where fatal collisions occur.

In overarching support for delivering everything I have mentioned today, and to gain and maintain momentum in driving forward better transport for everyone, our forthcoming integrated national transport strategy has been informed by extensive engagement with the public and our stakeholders. It will set out this Government’s vision of putting people at the heart of everything we do, better connecting places and working in partnership with local leaders and experts to deliver. It will help drive improvements in the experience for all users of the transport system and empower local leaders to deliver good transport that is right for their communities—place is at the heart of our strategies.

I would like to turn now to tolls and, in particular, the Tamar bridge and Torpoint ferry, which I will refer to as the Tamar crossings, as these are tied together under the Tamar Bridge Act 1957. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South East Cornwall for continuing to support local people who have understandably expressed concerns about increasing toll charges and network congestion, as many of them pay these charges to access essential services, which can be a financial burden. I recognise that the Tamar crossings are a very important issue for her, her constituents and the constituents of my other hon. Friends here this evening.

As we have already heard, the Tamar crossings are jointly owned and operated by Cornwall council and Plymouth city council, and between them they carry 16 million vehicles on the bridge and 2 million on the ferries each year. The crossings are operated together as a joint service and funded by users through toll income. No funding is received from the owners of the crossings, and there is no specific central Government funding stream for the upkeep of tolled crossings such as Tamar. In fact, over 20 road and ferry crossings in England have tolls or charges, and it remains Government policy that river and estuarial crossings normally be funded by tolls, recognising the extra cost of their construction and maintenance, as well as the benefits for users in connecting places that would otherwise require lengthy journeys.

Although increases in toll charges are understandably disappointing for the public, they remain essential to ensure the long-term sustainability of the crossings’ operation, which itself is essential to secure strong regional connectivity. The Tamar crossings are not alone in this; tolls and charges have increased or been introduced in many places over the past 12 months, including across the Humber, Mersey, Thames and Tyne.

Raising tolls is not done lightly. Rigorous processes are in place for assessing proposed toll increases. Applications can be made by asset owners to the Secretary of State not less than 12 months from the date of the previous increase, or a refusal to approve an increase, and the proposed change must be advertised in the local media before public consultation. Where objections are received but not resolved, a public inquiry is arranged, after which the inspector in attendance submits their recommendation to the DFT for a decision.

Issues relating to the crossings, including the tolls, are determined locally by the Tamar bridge and Torpoint ferry joint committee, established by the 1957 Act. The joint committee’s view is that, owing to inflation and other issues, there is a need for additional income via the toll. Given the cost of living pressures for so many people, I recognise that this is challenging, but it is vital to the future of the crossings. My fellow Ministers and I welcome any suggestions from the joint committee for improving the operation of the bridge and ferry services, and I commend its ongoing work in developing and delivering the Tamar 2050 plan, which aims to provide users of the crossings with a more stable and certain future.

I know that the Tamar crossings will become even more essential following the announcement last September that Plymouth had been named as one of five key national defence growth areas in the UK defence industrial strategy. I hope that my hon. Friends the Members for South East Cornwall and for Plymouth Moor View (Fred Thomas), in particular, welcome the fact that DFT officials are working collaboratively with the councils of Plymouth, Devon and Cornwall, alongside National Highways, Network Rail, Peninsula Transport—the sub-national transport body—and many others, to ensure that transport challenges in the south-west, including those concerning the Tamar crossings, are identified and addressed over the coming years through a joined-up approach, which I support and welcome enormously. I am sure that colleagues will have heard the call for more cross-Government working on these issues, and I hope that my remarks today will assure them that it is happening.

I will close by sincerely thanking my hon. Friend for securing this debate and allowing me to address the House on such important issues for communities in South East Cornwall and, indeed, across the country more widely. I wish to reassure the House that this Government are providing record levels of investment in roads, rail, buses and active travel projects across the country to connect people to jobs, education and opportunities. We will continue to drive forward improvements in transport, demonstrated by our multi-year investment to help support economic growth and our wider plan for change. I look forward to working closely with my hon. Friends in delivering our integrated national transport strategy, and to continuing to make transport provision better for everyone, right across the country.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 1

Ben Maguire Excerpts

Monday 12th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dan Tomlinson]

There were some forensic questions in that not brief intervention, but of course I appreciate it, and I look forward to trying to go through—[Interruption.] I am trying to answer the questions, okay? [Interruption.] It is a bit difficult when Opposition Front Benchers continue to barrack me while I am trying to answer the questions that a Back-Bencher has asked. If the right hon. Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins) wishes to continue to hector me from a sedentary position, she may, but we will not have any time for me to answer questions.

On the points raised by the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore)—let me dial down the temperature; congratulations for getting to me—and on how the spousal transfer is used in the inheritance tax system, we are replicating that in the treatment of the spousal transfer for APR and BPR. That is the way the transfer is set out in the inheritance tax system. We are not doing anything different or novel here. We just debated the thresholds, which will be set at current levels and will not be uprated in line with the changes that we are making to other taxes. The hon. Gentleman also asked about interest. As I said, where inheritance tax is due, those liable for a charge can pay any liability on the relevant assets over 10 annual instalments, if they like, and that will be interest-free. I have been through the numbers. Only 185 additional estates claiming APR are expected to pay more in 2026.

To conclude, the reforms get the balance right between supporting farms and businesses, fixing the public finances, and funding our public services.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

I would like to pick up on the point raised by the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) about the ludicrous situation where a farm that is worth £5 million if it is owned under a certain ownership model will not be subject to tax, but a farm worth less than that could be subject to tax. Graham, a farmer from my constituency, visited my surgery on Friday. He is in that exact situation. He is a sole trader slightly over the £2.5 million mark. We ended up discussing for more than 10 minutes whether he should marry his long-term partner to get away from this tax. Does that not illustrate just how ludicrous the situation is, Minister?

[Dan Tomlinson]

This is the normal way that inheritance tax assets are taxed. There is not just APR and BPR, and the changes coming in in April; other assets are passed on through inheritance. We are applying the same treatment here; this is the standard way that inheritance tax is set for various assets.

As I was saying, these reforms get the balance right between supporting farms and businesses, fixing the public finances and funding public services. They reduce the inheritance tax advantages available to some owners of agricultural and business assets, but those assets will still be taxed at a much lower effective rate than most other assets—a £6 million estate owned by a couple, for example, could have an effective tax rate of just 1.2%, which can be paid, interest-free, over 10 years.

Those opposing these reforms in full will be voting for a status quo in which the very largest estates pay a lower average effective inheritance tax rate than the smallest estates—a status quo where the Exchequer sees £219 million in tax relieved from just 117 estates claiming APR, and £558 million in tax relieved from just 158 estates claiming BPR. That is not sustainable, and it is certainly not fair. I therefore commend clause 62, schedule 12 and Government amendments 24 to 29 to the Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Charlie Maynard]

I guess we will have to check our social media accounts.

[Ben Maguire]

I would like to slightly correct the record there. We are having a technical debate about who opposed the tax first. I remind the Committee that it was the Conservative party that negotiated those disastrous New Zealand and Australian trade deals that decimated farming in my North Cornwall constituency.

[Charlie Maynard]

I thank my hon. Friend. [Interruption.] Would you like to intervene?

Road Safety Strategy

Ben Maguire Excerpts

Thursday 8th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Lilian Greenwood]

I thank my hon. Friend for his support. Clearly, local authorities can and should draw on historical collision data when assessing road safety measures, but proactive measures to reduce risks should not be contingent on a fatal or serious incident occurring. Local authorities have the power and the funding to carry out interventions, so it is vital that they listen to the concerns of local people and act to prevent serious incidents before they occur, rather than just responding to them afterwards.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

Ryan Saltern was hit and left for dead by a drunk driver in 2019. The perpetrator received a four-month suspended sentence. In 2021, Ryan’s family launched their Ryan’s law campaign to increase sentences for hit-and-run offences, and in October I introduced a Ryan’s law amendment to the Sentencing Bill. We all know that there can be lots of talk in this place, but not always much action. Last year, I met the road safety Minister with the family; she clearly listened and has now acted, and I thank her. I pay tribute to my incredible North Cornwall constituents Mark and Helen, Ryan’s parents, and Leanne, his sister, for never giving up—they are a true inspiration. Once the consultation closes, how long will it take the Minister to bring draft legislation to the House?

[Lilian Greenwood]

I thank the hon. Member for the work that he has done to support the Saltern family. It was humbling to meet Mark, Helen and Leanne, and to hear about their work supporting other victims of road traffic collisions. As he knows, we are consulting on strengthening the law around those who fail to stop and report a collision. What happened to Ryan is tragic and I am keen that we act as quickly as possible. Where legislation is required, we will have to wait until parliamentary time is available, but I am determined to act.

Rural Fuel Duty Relief

Ben Maguire Excerpts

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[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.

Finance (No. 2) Bill

Ben Maguire Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 16th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Robbie Moore]

rose—

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

rose—

[Adam Thompson]

In the interests of time, I will not give way again.

These are income streams that are overwhelmingly enjoyed by the highest earners, and it is, by and large, the already well-off who will pay more under the Bill. Its provisions include changes to national insurance relief on pension contributions through salary sacrifice schemes—again, a mechanism primarily used by the highest earners. They include reforming council tax, so that someone living in a £10 million mansion in central London does not pay less council tax than a terraced house owner in Ilkeston and Long Eaton. They include a new surcharge on homes worth more than £2 million, which will be paid by fewer than 1% of homeowners. This Budget was for working families, for the everyman and the everywoman, for children and for young people. It was not a Budget for millionaires, billionaires, slum landlords, investment bankers, or the bosses of big corporations.

--- Later in debate ---

[Robbie Moore]

Absolutely. All I advocate, as I am sure my right hon. Friend does, is that this Government simply engage with and listen to our farming community. It is not just our farming community that is hit by the IHT changes; it is family businesses more widely.

[Ben Maguire]

I want to point out the case of a North Cornwall farmer called Will Harris, who gave up an engineering job at £60,000 a year to provide food security and put food on our tables. His income is about £30,000 a year, but the tax his children may have to pay would be £500,000—or £50,000 a year, which is almost double the farm income. He is terrified and can hardly sleep at night for thinking, if something happens to him, what will happen to his teenage children and their farm.

[Robbie Moore]

The hon. Member makes an excellent point, and not only Cornish farmers, but those right across the country are being impacted by this Government’s decisions. He also makes the excellent point that many of our farming businesses are incredibly highly geared, given the level of debt associated with their businesses, and are not returning a level of income to even contribute towards paying an IHT liability at 20% over and above the £1 million threshold. They will therefore be subject to a death tax that they will simply be unable to pay.

Oral Answers to Questions

Ben Maguire Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

10. If she will hold discussions with farming representatives on the potential impact of changes to agricultural property relief and business property relief on farmers.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

20. If she will hold discussions with farming representatives on the potential impact of changes to agricultural property relief and business property relief on farmers.

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

Ministers from Government Departments have met organisations including the National Farmers’ Union, the Tenant Farmers Association, the Country Land and Business Association, the Central Association of Agricultural Valuers, the Ulster Farmers’ Union, and the NFU in Scotland and Wales. I also met farmers in the north-east of England only last month. After listening and considering the independent Centre for the Analysis of Taxation report, the Government believe that the approach we have set out is an appropriate one.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dan Tomlinson]

Just a few weeks ago, I met farmers to discuss this and other important issues. The Government believe that even though this tax is a difficult change—I do not shy away from that fact—it is the right change to make, because it is a method of raising revenue in a fair way that helps contribute to restoring the public finances.

[Ben Maguire]

I kindly ask the Chancellor to please respond to my joint letter on Cornwall’s future funding, sent last week, which asks her to meet all Cornish MPs without delay. Alternative proposals to this damaging family farm tax—such as a clawback scheme, as proposed by the NFU, or increasing the threshold to £5 million—would raise more in revenue than the Government’s current plans. In contrast to her speech this morning, the Chancellor now has the opportunity to do both the right thing and the popular thing. The mental health toll on farmers is becoming completely unsustainable, so please, Chancellor, rethink this damaging policy.

[Dan Tomlinson]

I would be happy to meet the hon. Member and Members from across Cornwall to discuss the issues raised in the letter to the Chancellor.

Inheritance Tax Relief: Farms

Ben Maguire Excerpts

Monday 10th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I stand to speak on behalf of the 800 signatories of this petition from my constituency, and I also speak in this debate as chair of the all-party group on dairy. Almost all of the financial advice that farmers had sought until the Budget had included APR relief in their financial planning and how they would pass on their family farms to the next generation without this ill-thought-through tax. These changes will hit hundreds of family-run farms, many of which have been proudly looked after generation after generation by the same family. I must add that the mental health of my North Cornwall farmers has plummeted since this was introduced.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

Farmers in my constituency have told me that the Government’s changes to agricultural property relief have damaged their mental health, and some of my constituents have taken their own life. Does my hon. Friend agree that, rather than worsening the mental health crisis in farming, the Government should address it by scrapping this family farm tax, investing properly in rural mental health services and establishing a national working group on suicide prevention, focusing on agricultural and veterinary occupations?

[Ben Maguire]

My hon. Friend will not be surprised to hear that I completely agree and wholeheartedly support those suggestions.

The changes have not even taken effect yet, but their harsh effects are already on show. If no full U-turn is on the horizon, surely we can urge the Minister, with one voice, to look for an alternative to this ill-thought-through tax. The change will not hit the wealthy investors that the Government have taken aim at.

[Mr Carmichael]

I do not think I can listen to many more people say that. When I questioned the Prime Minister at the Liaison Committee before Christmas, he specifically said that what rich people do with their money within the rules was a matter for them, and that the policy did not have a target audience. Does that not point to an inconsistency in messaging among the Treasury and Downing Street?

[Ben Maguire]

As always, my right hon. Friend makes a very good point. I urge the Minister to look for alternatives. We have heard about the Liberal Democrats’ proposal for a working farm test. Other hon. Members have suggested some kind of clawback scheme in cases in which the farm is sold within, say, 10 years of inheriting it.

I will draw my remarks to a close, because I know that other hon. Members want to come in. This family farm tax will raise around £500 million a year—not an insignificant sum—but is it a price worth paying to kill farming in this country and, crucially, risk our food security? The Liberal Democrats have proposed restoring the cut that the Conservative party made to the big bank levy in 2016. That would have raised around £4 billion a year, which certainly puts this family farm tax into perspective.

Farming and Inheritance Tax

Ben Maguire Excerpts

Wednesday 4th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Tim Farron]

I am going to crack on now and not take any more interventions because, with help from Members on either side, I have already taken up nine minutes of this place’s time.

I want to give the House a final run-through of some of the consequences of the terrible failure of the Conservative Government on farming. In the last five years alone, livestock farm incomes have dropped by 41%. Year on year, there has been a drop in sheep numbers of over 4%, and a 6% annual drop in the number of dairy farms. We lost 440 dairy farms last year alone. So that is where we are, and that is before we get into trade deals or the attack on rural services, healthcare and dentistry. I am also going to quickly make a reference to Brexit because, without a doubt, our leaving the European Union and the terrible deal that the Conservative Government signed us up to have had the biggest impact of all on agriculture.

Madam Deputy Speaker, you would think that the new Labour Government had a massive open goal in front of them, given what they inherited from the Conservatives. They had a massive open goal, with no goalkeeper between the posts, but somehow the ball ended up in row Z. I find it almost impossible to countenance how they have managed to fluff that opportunity.

I want to talk about two people in my constituency who gave me a really useful insight into the family farm tax in the last couple of days. Both of them gave me four separate case studies. The first was a land adviser who talked to me about four farms. Their story was about shrinking businesses as a result of the family farm tax, and about the potential reduction in the value of land, which would mean that they would not be able to invest in their businesses and there would not be the tax yield that the Government were banking on. Another, a local accountant, gave me four anonymised case studies of local family farms in my communities. Of those family farms, only one was earning above the minimum wage, and three were earning significantly below the minimum wage. In those four cases, two would have to sell parts of their farm and two would have to sell their entire farm to pay the inheritance tax.

The next question is: who would those farms be sold to? The hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) spoke a moment or two ago about the proportion of farmland being sold into private hands, into private equity and so on. Farms will go into those hands even more—as if a neighbouring farmer is going to buy that land when they are in the same predicament.

We are seeing hard-working farmers, on less than the minimum wage, having to sell off their land to private equity. Is that a very Labour thing to do? The hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) spoke about Labour not getting the working class in the countryside, and this is a perfect example. It is not too late for Labour to learn.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

It seems clear that, as with the winter fuel allowance changes, the Government have missed their target here. As my hon. Friend rightly says, it seems obvious that large landowners will have the ways and means to avoid this tax. Does he agree that there should be some form of working farm test?

[Tim Farron]

Yes, and the Government should have been thinking about these things. We heard from the Minister that lots of planning and diligence went into this before it came out of the Chancellor’s mouth on Budget day, but it does not feel like it, because there is a whole range of issues that could have been considered in advance.

There is something that will do more immediate harm to farming than even the inheritance tax changes, and that is the Government’s decision to summarily reduce basic payments by 76% in a single year. This will have a direct impact, in particular, on tenant farmers who rely on that money and will end up missing their rent payments. We will see evictions as a consequence.

The Government have trumpeted the £5 billion over two years, which my basic maths tells me is £2.5 billion a year. I am always careful, or nervous, about making confident predictions, particularly in this place, but my confident prediction is that they will not spend that budget. If the basic payments are cut by 76% without the new schemes being up and running to replace them, the Government will not spend that money. By underspending, this Government will end up in the same mess as the last one.