High Street Businesses: Government Support

David Chadwick Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Government support for high street businesses.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. For decades, centuries and even millennia, towns and their high streets have been the focus of commercial and community activity—not just for the towns themselves, but for surrounding villages and rural communities. Whether it is for market day, celebrating great events such as VE Day, essential services such as banking and laundrettes, or spending time eating and drinking with friends and family, high streets and urban centres have long offered so much. However, across the country, our high streets and their businesses are struggling as never before. Too many, sadly, are falling into disrepair, with empty shops, cracked pavements, antisocial behaviour and crime, and streets strewn with waste.

Such issues are seen across the country. The 2025 Simply Business “SME Insights Report” on small and medium-sized enterprises found that more than half, or 63%, of small businesses believed that the high street as we know it will be obsolete in the next 10 years. This debate is an important opportunity to set out why central Government support is essential for high street businesses to thrive.

My constituency has three towns. I will say a little about the challenges and opportunities that they each face, before covering three key themes on the support that they and other high streets and businesses need. Didcot is the largest town in my constituency. It has seen huge housing growth in recent years, a trend that continues with the ongoing development of Valley Park. The town centre does not have a single focus, such as a traditional market square. Instead, it has two key areas: an older high street called the Broadway and a new retail park called the Orchard Centre.

Both the Broadway and the Orchard Centre face the challenges of antisocial behaviour and shoplifting; far more co-ordination between police, local authorities and businesses is needed. Didcot Broadway contains a range of shops, cafés, takeaways and restaurants. I thank Little India for the fantastic paneer jalfrezi that I got for a takeaway on Monday evening. Broadway also has the wonderful Mulberry pub at its western end. The Broadway forms the centre of the town, but businesses face many challenges, including the presence of the popular Orchard Centre retail park close by.

Amer Siddique, owner of Snack@Teas, formed a group of local business owners and is a passionate advocate for investment in the Broadway and town centre. I shall explore a number of those business owners’ concerns in my speech. Didcot’s last bank closed this year, despite the town’s population having grown to more than 32,000. It remains to be seen how well a proposed banking hub will fill that void. Parking in the town is a big concern as well, as a result of the rising population, although I am pleased that the Orchard Centre listened to vociferous local concerns and changed its mind on introducing car-parking charges.

In the east of my constituency, Wallingford is the smallest of the three towns, but more than makes up for that with its history, which goes back to Anglo-Saxon times. Its town centre high streets have a range of small businesses, full of character, such as the independent Wallingford Bookshop and Le Clos, a wine bar also offering amazing food, including tarte flambée with a range of toppings—baked flatbreads originating in the Alsace region of France. A key challenge for an ancient town is how to accommodate car traffic and parking to maintain visitor levels, given the large towns and cities fairly nearby. There is also frustration in Wallingford that NHS criteria seemingly prevent more than one pharmacy being able to serve the town.

Finally, Wantage is the second largest town in my constituency and the birthplace of King Alfred. In Wantage, the great Market Place is lined with independent shops, cafés and restaurants, with a retail park in the town centre, too. Wantage’s Argos store has been shut for two years, and New Look has now closed its doors as well, so vacant premises are a concern and many existing businesses highlight the crippling impact of significantly increased business rates—including the Vaults bar and pizza restaurant, the Kings Arms pub and the Bear Hotel, the last of which reports a doubling of its business rate charges. Consultation and debate are ongoing about how to further improve Wantage Market Place, which is dominated by car parking and bus stops. Special events that see Market Place closed to traffic, including the annual Dickensian evening, are popular and see the place filled with visitors.

The three towns, and their high street businesses, have three themes at the heart of their challenges and concerns, the first of which is the growing burden of business taxation and costs. Local businesses are feeling hammered by rising costs and barriers to their growth and hiring people; they feel there is an unfair playing field, given that online businesses are not taxed in the same ways and to the same degree. They feel that business rates are a flawed tax that is not directly related to either income or profit. Businesses in my constituency feel that recent Government changes to business rates have done little to ease the difficult situations they face, and certainly fall well short of the radicalism that was at least implied in Labour’s 2024 manifesto.

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

I salute the speech that my hon. Friend is giving; I am seeing the same situation play out in my constituency. Brecon has one of the most beautiful high streets in Wales, with its gorgeous Georgian buildings, but local businesses are telling me exactly the same thing. They are taking an absolute hammering from this Government’s decision to push through business rate revaluations. Does my hon. Friend agree that that is a real concern? Does he believe that the VAT cut to hospitality that the Liberal Democrats are calling for would at least help to restore some activity, life and profit to our hospitality businesses?

[Olly Glover]

I agree that such a VAT cut would help, because it is not just business rates that small businesses on high streets are facing. On top of business rate increases and the burden of value-added tax, they are also paying for increased labour and payroll costs, including the higher national living wage and increased employer national insurance contributions. Some of those measures are understandable, and they will of course be welcomed by some, but the story I hear from my high street businesses is that the cumulative impact of all these things in a small space of time is creating challenges. Many businesses are also still servicing debts from the covid-19 pandemic, such as repaying bounce back loans, which further restricts their finances to ride out the current challenges or invest in the future.

Electricity, wage costs, business rates and general taxation are adding up to a perfect storm when combined with ongoing cost of living pressures for consumers, which affect demand. Constrained finances in high street businesses have a knock-on effect on their capacity, meaning that owners are particularly reluctant to hire entry-level or younger workers. That is exacerbated by the recent compression of the wage floor with changes to national insurance contributions and the national living wage.

While recognising the benefits of such changes for workers, businesses raised concerns in Alan Milburn’s interim report, “Young people and work”, saying that these pressures make them consider reducing staffing altogether, or hiring fewer, more experienced workers. This affects the flexibility of the businesses to staff correctly against fluctuating footfall, and reduces opportunities for entry-level workers. Labour is effectively one of the few remaining adjustable cost bases within owners’ control, and it is suffering accordingly.

High street retailers continue to adjust to the changing nature of consumer behaviour, such as online competition and destination shopping. There is a lack of consistent support available to high street businesses at a local level to support retailers through these challenges, and I will come on to say a little bit more about that.

The second key theme is transport and access, which is a key challenge as a result of population growth and central Government housing targets. A growing amount of car traffic, competing for a constrained amount of car parking in town centres, creates real challenges, particularly in older towns such as Wallingford. That is why the reality is that more must be done to help those who can, and would like to, walk and cycle by providing them with safer and better options for doing so. For example, cycle parking can reassure them that their bicycle will be safe.

At this point, I should say that when we get into a debate about transport, it is often presented as an either/or between cars and public transport, walking and cycling. However, those things are not mutually exclusive. The Netherlands does not just have a globally leading cycling infrastructure and culture; it has the most comprehensive motorway in Europe, as well as a fully electrified mainline railway network. Public transport, walking and cycling are complementary to cars—we need both. Even small increases in the use rates of public transport, walking and cycling can help to ease congestion and free up parking spaces for those who need them.

Investment in roads, pavements and general town centre infrastructure is also a concern. Poorly maintained pavements can be a barrier for older residents and those with mobility issues, increasing the risk of falls and discouraging visits to the town centre. Improving accessibility would help to attract more visitors and support local businesses.

The third theme is local government funding pressures. Of course, many small businesses in my constituency, entirely understandably, look to local councils to help them with their high street and business challenges. I want to explain why local councils are too affected by central Government policy and face reduced budgets amidst growing costs.

With their origins in European Union funding streams, South Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse district councils have, until now, benefited from allocations from two funds: the UK shared prosperity fund and the rural England prosperity fund. Between them, those funding streams have supported more than 130 local projects across the councils so far. Projects were hugely varied, but they included grants to support businesses and community groups with a transition to more efficient and affordable energy use—pubs and cafés, for example. They also included providing capital investment into equipment that supports productivity gains, funding a huge range of business and skills support programmes, often targeting those most at need; developing a visitor economy support programme to support our market towns; and making several small-scale improvements to the public realm across the two districts.

Unfortunately, this Labour Government have decided to scrap those funds, and their replacements, Pride in Place and the local growth fund, are principally targeted at city regions and areas of high deprivation. The impact of the abolition of the two funds is not trivial. In 2025-26, the allocations from the two funds across the Vale of White Horse and South Oxfordshire districts were £1 million; in 2024-25, the total was £2.4 million. At the same time, changes to local government funding formulae mean that Oxfordshire county council will lose £24 million in funding over the next three years.

Those changes affect all three councils’ abilities to invest in high streets and support local businesses. They also make it harder for them to explore new ideas, such the ones requested by the town councils of the three towns I mentioned: grants to town and parish councils to invest in civic pride, such as floral planting, hanging baskets, more street cleaning and more ways to promote local shopping; or funding to employ town centre managers to link the town council with retail centres and independent traders.

I want to set out my key asks of central Government. Once again, the Government need to go much further in reforming business rates—a form of taxation that bears little resemblance to a business’s earnings. Does the Minister recognise that evidence submitted to Alan Milburn’s interim report into young people not in education, employment or training identified labour costs as a key concern? The Government, to their credit, have announced serious intentions in relation to energy prices, but what should be done in the meantime, particularly with no sign—very sadly—of war in the middle east abating?

Once again, will the Minister heed Liberal Democrat calls for a 5% cut to VAT for hospitality? Does he agree that taxation arrangements need modernisation, given the rising threat to physical businesses posed by online retail? Given rising demand and the same amount of space for car parking, do the Government agree that greater investment in public transport and walking and cycling infrastructure is needed to make it easier for people who need to drive to have the road space and car parking to do so?

What fresh, new ideas do the Government have to help our high streets? I have a few examples to consider. National “buy local” schemes would incentivise and reward people for spending their money locally. A “high streets back home” scheme would give people a clear route to invest in their own community, whether by restoring heritage building, supporting local enterprise or helping to secure community assets. The Government could give councils the power to designate independent shop zones, protecting and championing small locally owned businesses against the tide of chains and empty units.

Does the Minister accept that, for councils not benefiting from Pride in Place funding, including in Oxfordshire, the end of the UK shared prosperity and rural England prosperity funds constitute a cut to local government funding? That undermines their ability to invest in staff and initiatives to help small businesses improve town centres, and to award grants to businesses and community organisations to help them reduce their energy bills or upgrade their equipment. Our high streets and local businesses are critical to the successes of our towns and surrounding communities, and I call on the Government to give them the support that they deserve.

Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill

David Chadwick Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 21st May 2026 Commons Chamber

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

I start this contribution on a positive note for the steel industry. Last week I visited Kiernan Steel’s fabrication workshop in Llandrindod, Wales. Kiernan Steel is a tremendously successful Irish company that has brought much-needed jobs to Radnorshire, and its success shows how the rural economy can prosper if our businesses are encouraged and enabled to locate there. One thing there is no shortage of in mid-Wales is land, and if we make that land available to businesses that need it, they will create the jobs that our region and economy need.

The steel industry is critical to our wider economy—it is virtually impossible to build anything without steel. However, the steel industry requires a skilled workforce. I was encouraged by some of the Secretary of State’s comments about the skills shortages, because we have serious skills shortages. There are thousands of vacancies for welders alone, and their pay is shooting up as a result. Skills shortages throughout the steel industry are pushing up the price of building anything, particularly infrastructure. That is why the health of our steel industry matters. If we do not look after it, the costs for projects such as HS2 and the cost of delivering all the housing we need will continue to mount.

[Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)]

I was interested in the hon. Gentleman’s comment about the shortage of welders. Does he agree that the Government’s plan for construction colleges of excellence, including the one in Bury St Edmunds, will be crucial for the provision of welders?

[David Chadwick]

There are at least 6,000 vacancies for welders, so we absolutely need a lot more of them.

The skills shortages present opportunities to get future generations into well-paid and secure trades. Artificial intelligence cannot do welding yet, because it does not have any arms—yet. Our education system is not producing the skills that our economy needs, and our economy is suffering from that failure. Steel is strategic. It is part of our sovereign capability and part of British power. That is why steel matters.

As has been mentioned, the steel industry is affected by the geopolitical tensions that are so rampant across the world. Our steel industry has been hammered by the Chinese, who have flooded the international market with cheap Chinese steel and have run one of our biggest companies into the ground. China has wiped out our steel industry intentionally, yet today the Conservatives seem to be saying that they do not think the Government should do anything about it. Just yesterday they were complaining about our lack of defence readiness. Well, what do they think tanks and ships are made from?

Today, this Government ask Parliament to move heaven and earth to save steel in Scunthorpe. It is right to act—of course the Government should have the proposed powers—but people in Wales are asking one simple question today: where was this Bill in July 2024, when the blast furnaces at Port Talbot were switched off for the last time? When Welsh communities were crying out for help, Westminster shrugged its shoulders. That was despite Welsh Labour MPs and candidates, in the months prior to the general election, lining up in front of giant election posters that read, “Save our steel.” They said they had a £2.5 billion fund to spend on steel. Given that the Government have admitted to spending £1.3 million a day to keep the Scunthorpe plant going, how much of that fund is left to spend in Wales?

If protecting primary steel production is so important, why did they allow the biggest steelworks in Britain to be turned off? Welsh workers were told that nothing could be done. People in my constituency have lost their jobs because of this. When 2,800 jobs were wiped out in Port Talbot, there was no emergency Saturday sitting, no recall of Parliament, no emergency legislation and no sudden declaration that steel was a vital national—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. I call Melanie Onn.

Wind Farms: Protected Peatland

David Chadwick Excerpts

Tuesday 21st April 2026 Westminster Hall

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

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I thank the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) for securing this vital debate. I share many of his concerns. Mid-Wales faces a wave of wind farm proposals on a scale that would transform the landscapes that make mid-Wales so incredibly special. From Gilwern hill near Llandrindod Wells to Nant Mithil in the Radnor forest, Banc y Celyn, Garreg Fawr and Aberedw, our communities are being asked to absorb huge energy developments across some of the most unspoilt and environmentally sensitive parts of Wales.

Clearly we need clean energy. We need renewable energy and there are huge possibilities across Wales. Sir Alec, I know that you are a keen engineer and that you will be interested in the opportunities to develop tidal energy in Wales, and the bountiful opportunities to develop our offshore wind capabilities. However, destroying one of our most important natural climate defences in the process of developing onshore wind is reckless and irresponsible. That is the contradiction at the heart of wind farm development on peatland. Peatlands are not wasteland. They are among our most valuable ecosystems. They store carbon, regulate water and support biodiversity. When damaged they can release the very emissions that we are supposed to be preventing.

We already have evidence that such warnings are being brushed aside in Wales. The Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales—the Welsh countryside charity —uncovered internal Welsh Government documents that show there is serious ecological damage at existing wind farm sites. Peat soils are being excavated, dumped and

“left to oxidise, erode and degrade.”

Officials warned that further damage would occur, and that further public money would be needed to put that right. Despite all that, the Welsh Labour Government still approve projects such as the Garn Fach development in the north of Powys, on vital peatland that serves the catchment area of the River Severn—an area that we know is already vulnerable to causing severe flooding downstream. That decision sent a deeply worrying message: that promises to protect peatland can be overridden when it becomes politically convenient to do so.

When we look at the sites now proposed, the stakes become even clearer. Take Gilwern hill. Its open moorland is crossed by ancient drovers’ routes. It is home to species such as the curlew, the skylark and the red kite, and it is rich in archaeology. One of the specialities of Powys is the reintroduction and preservation of endangered birds. We have bronze age cairns and iron age hillforts that face not only turbines but access tracks, as previously mentioned, up to 100 metres wide cutting across the landscape.

At Nant Mithil, we have more than 4,500 acres of the Radnor forest, where the Welsh dragon supposedly lives—[Laughter.] Take my word for it; it is too dangerous. That landscape includes a special area of conservation linked to the River Wye, sites of special scientific interest and a network of public rights of way used by walkers and local communities. Around 80% of the site lies outside the Welsh Government’s own designated areas for wind development and yet they are threatening to allow Bute Energy to destroy it.

It is at sites such as Banc y Celyn and Garreg Fawr that the myth of low ecological value land is most clearly exposed. Those are not degraded or expendable landscapes; they are some of the last remaining habitats of their kind. Those ecosystems survive precisely because they have not been intensively managed. They have avoided the fertilisers and pesticides that have wiped out similar habitats across much of Europe. They support fragile and irreplaceable biodiversity, from waxcaps to breeding populations of curlew, skylark, cuckoo and raptor, as well as protected mammals such as the brown hare.

That is the crucial point: those habitats cannot simply be recreated somewhere else. They exist because of centuries of minimal human intervention. Once they are developed, they are lost for ever. In a global context, Wales is one of the last refuges for these species. We are told these are exceptional cases but when one exception follows another, people are right to ask whether any peatland or any sensitive habitat in Wales is truly safe. That matters not just for wildlife and landscapes but for the credibility of Welsh climate policy. How can Ministers talk about biodiversity targets while approving developments that official briefings warn could negate years of restoration work?

Wales needs a renewables strategy that commands public consent, protects irreplaceable habitats and recognises that not every hectare of land is suitable for industrial development. Otherwise, the Welsh Government risk undermining the very environmental goals they claim to champion. As I am sure we all agree, once those landscapes are gone, they are not coming back.

UK Steel Strategy

David Chadwick Excerpts

Thursday 19th March 2026 Commons Chamber

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

In 2024, Labour MPs across south Wales stood on a pledge to “save our steel”. They promised £2.5 billion for the steel industry, and they said that they had a plan. They began by saying that they would publish the steel strategy in spring 2025. Then it was autumn 2025, and now finally it arrives in spring 2026. We still do not know how much of that money will be spent in Wales. Will the Secretary of State confirm that to the House today?

In the meantime, British steel production has continued falling, and thousands of jobs have been lost across south Wales since the blast furnaces were turned off. I am not really sure that Labour understands the damage that its party’s failures are having across south Wales. Wales feels abandoned. Steel is in our blood. It is the backbone of our economy. But we are still losing jobs. Skilled workers such as welders are leaving, and tarmac companies are struggling to make asphalt. Consumer spending is falling. People in south Wales are fed up with broken promises. South Wales was promised that the electric arc furnace would be up and running by 2027, but we are now told that it will be 2028. Can the Secretary of State update the House on that deadline?

We need to see so much more urgency. Wales is desperate for the good jobs that the steel industry can provide. There is still—just about, if the Government move quickly—the opportunity to build a home-grown supply chain for the floating offshore wind sector. The Government have told me that they are not expecting to have that sector going until the mid-2030s. That is far too slow. That lackadaisical approach means that the energy that should be created through offshore wind will not be added to the grid until the mid-2030s. The Government must hurry up and deliver on their promises to south Wales.

[Peter Kyle]

The hon. Gentleman mentioned waiting for the steel strategy. The truth is that the steel sector has been waiting 80 years for a steel strategy, and this is the first time that one has been delivered. I think that showing a little bit of gratitude for what has been delivered today, on behalf of the sectors and businesses that he talked about, would be most welcome. I also point out that the 80 years over which there was no strategy included 2010 to 2015, when his party was in government.

Yesterday I was at Tata in Wales. The management, the ownership, the workers and the unions universally welcome this strategy and the £500 million that has already been put in to help transform the industry. That is the example of how we will move forward—with boldness, creativity and urgency.

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor

David Chadwick Excerpts

Tuesday 24th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Lisa Smart]

I very much agree with my hon. Friend. We have seen some press reports about civil servants who were doing their job and absolutely rightly questioning some of the expenses that were being put through, but they were overruled. That clearly is not good enough and not acceptable, and it is not what we should expect from our institutions and establishment. I completely agree about the importance of being clear about what we expect when somebody takes on a public role at cost to the taxpayer.

We should have very high standards. We should, as the hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) said, talk about how we can ensure that those with power are held to account. She was entirely right in the points she made about what we do with this information, where we go with it and how we build from here.

My hon. Friend the Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) made a really strong speech in which he gave very constructive suggestions to the Minister of measures that we Liberal Democrats would support in bringing about change to the system.

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

My hon. Friend will be aware that we are in the week of St David’s day, which is a terribly important day for all of us in Wales. In terms of accountability, she will be very aware of the long-standing stance that the Liberal Democrats have taken on the Crown Estate, which in Wales regrettably still has not been devolved. Its powers and funding have been devolved to Scotland, but not—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Can I just check whether the Member has been here for a while or just arrived? Members should not be intervening after traipsing in during a speech. I will allow Ms Smart to continue.

Postal Services: Rural Areas

David Chadwick Excerpts

Wednesday 4th February 2026 Westminster Hall

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

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I commend the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) on securing this debate, and on his excellent speech.

Last year, postal services became a source of real frustration, anxiety and, frankly, anger in Radnorshire. Across Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe, and right across rural Wales, we saw serious problems in the run-up to Christmas. Parcels were marked as delivered but never arrived, items were left at farm gates, on main roads or in full view of passers-by, Christmas presents went missing, and essential items were delayed for days or even weeks, and then marked as lost. When things went wrong, people found it almost impossible to speak to a real human being to sort it out.

I want to be clear that, in my opinion, those problems stem from the corporate leadership of Evri. The problem is a systemic one within their business model, and rural areas are feeling the consequences first and hardest. Constituents of mine in the Teme valley tell me that their experience with Evri was awful. One constituent told me that they

“have never received a single Evri parcel on time, most never ever arrive, and those that do are weeks or months late.”

My constituents tell me that they often pay extra for faster shipping, but they then have to spend significant time processing refunds and working with credit card companies to recover some of the lost money.

A frustration for customers is that they often cannot choose their delivery company. It is chosen for them by the retailer they are buying from. When a parcel company performs badly, consumers are simply stuck with the consequences. Consumer bodies back that up, and companies like Evri consistently rank bottom for customer satisfaction, yet too often nothing seems to change. That is where regulation matters. There must be clear, enforceable service standards for parcel deliveries, including in rural areas, on safe delivery practices, accurate tracking and proper access to customer support when things go wrong.

Consumers who have no choice over their courier should not be left navigating automated systems or vague updates when a parcel is lost or delayed. If companies repeatedly fail customers, especially in rural and hard-to-serve areas, there must be consequences—not just guidance or warm words, but real accountability.

For many of my constituents, Evri’s failures have meant money lost, ruined Christmases, wasted time and a growing sense that rural communities are once again expected to put up with worse service. Rural Wales deserves reliability, respect and accountability, not excuses. I urge Ministers to take this issue seriously, and ensure that parcel delivery works for every part of the country, not just the easiest ones to serve.

Meat Exports to the EU

David Chadwick Excerpts

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[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.

Coal Tip Safety and New Extraction Licences

David Chadwick Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd October 2025 Westminster Hall

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

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I thank the hon. Member for Caerfyrddin (Ann Davies) for securing this important debate. Our constituencies meet around a former coalmine, so it is fitting that we are working on this issue together.

The legacy of the coal industry is still all around us in Wales. Coal built our modern nation, but it also left deep marks on our land and our communities. Yesterday marked 59 years since the Aberfan disaster, when 144 lives were lost, including those of 116 children. Aberfan reminds us of what happens when safety is overlooked. We owe it to Aberfan and to every mining community to ensure that such a tragedy is never repeated.

Yet almost 60 years on, the dangerous legacy of coal still hangs over Wales. There are more than 2,000 disused coal tips across Wales, and several of the highest-risk sites are in my constituency. They stand as a stark reminder that the danger has not disappeared; it has simply been neglected. What that means for local residents is that each spell of heavy rain brings renewed fear. Recent landslips in Cwmtillery show that this risk is real, and it is growing as wetter weather destabilises former pits.

No community should have to live in fear every time it rains. That is why the UK Government must commit the £600 million needed to make our former coal tips safe. This is a problem that predates devolution, and the cost should not fall on the Welsh Government alone. These communities in Wales powered Britain’s wealth, and the responsibility for their safety must be shared by Britain as a whole.

The legacy of coal is written across the open scars on our hills. Across south Wales, open-cast sites have been left in limbo after operators walked away, leaving vast holes in the landscape and leaving the taxpayer to foot the bill. In my constituency, the East Pit mine between Tairgwaith and Cwmllynfell is a clear example. It was never restored because no proper restoration bond was put in place, and it is now a deep chasm filled with millions of tonnes of water—a monument to failure and neglect. That must change. We need stronger legislation so that open-cast mines are properly regulated and fully restored, with enforceable bonds to ensure that no company can ever again abandon a community.

Despite such injustices, what matters now is investment and delivery. We must look forward. Communities across south Wales deserve real progress and not more broken promises. The proposals from Reform UK to issue new coal licences are not a credible plan for our future in south Wales; they are a retreat into the past. To suggest that the answer for the valleys lies in reopening mines is not only wrong; it is deeply patronising. I come from a Welsh mining family and I am very proud of my roots in Maesteg, but I certainly do not want to undertake the same work that my great-grandfathers had to do, because I remember how they ended up.

Our young people do not want to be sent back down the pits. They want secure, well-paid jobs in clean energy and modern industries. The communities of the valleys are resilient, proud and determined, but that resilience should not be taken for granted. Promises of investment, which too often have been made and too often broken, must finally be delivered for south Wales. The people of the south Wales valleys have given more than enough, and we are still waiting for our new south Wales to emerge. We deserve safety, fairness and a future built on renewal, not nostalgia. Let us honour our past by investing in the future.

Jaguar Land Rover Cyber-attack

David Chadwick Excerpts

Tuesday 9th September 2025 Commons Chamber

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

Fundamentally, this is a question about resilience across British industry. These attacks are costing British industries millions of pounds a day. What are the Government doing to facilitate knowledge-sharing within industry to boost resilience and guard against operational technology attacks? I know from personal experience that people in the cyber industries like to share information together, but require a forum to do so.

[Chris Bryant]

The hon. Member is right. For that matter, I suspect that every single Member of the House will have had some kind of attempted cyber-attack, whether that is phishing or vishing or whatever it may be on their mobile phones, where something comes up that looks remarkably possible. Then you say to yourself, “Oh, no, HMRC probably wouldn’t ask me to do that.” I urge all Members, incidentally, to take their own personal cyber-security seriously, and the House provides facilities for that. One other thing that we can do is for all companies to follow the cyber governance code of practice and provide board training. The more that board members understand these issues, the better.

UK Modern Industrial Strategy

David Chadwick Excerpts

Monday 23rd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jonathan Reynolds]

Further education has had a difficult time over the past few years and we are starting to see the kind of investment that will make a difference. We need more business input into skills’ policy, which I think is the kind of work that my hon. Friend was talking about. I am more than happy to come up the road from Stalybridge to Rochdale one Friday, and we can have that conversation in person. There will be many bids from Greater Manchester for the capital that we are putting forward, and I look forward to looking at the bid that he mentions.

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

I commend the Government on reintroducing an industrial strategy, which is crucial for spreading out good jobs across the United Kingdom. In my constituency, the hospitality industry is crucial to our local economy as it boosts tourism, creates jobs and helps with rural regeneration, but it is struggling with sky-high energy costs. What is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that SMEs in all sectors of our economy, particularly pubs and restaurants, receive better support with their energy costs?

[Jonathan Reynolds]

This industrial strategy seeks to deliver more inward investment. For example, Universal is making an incredible investment in Bedfordshire, where is seeks to deliver the biggest theme park in Europe, creating 8,000 jobs in hospitality. People should recognise that there is a direct relationship between what we are doing here, what we are trying to get more of and the kind of benefits that the hon. Gentleman talks about. We have set a target of 50 million visitors by 2030, so such issues are represented in the strategy and, as I say, some of the issues that are not covered will be in the small business plan, which will come out imminently next month.