(2 weeks, 1 day ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Butler. I congratulate the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood) on securing this debate. It is unusually cruelly timed, as I feel that I have not stopped sweating in about three days and quite frankly I can think of nowhere I would rather be than on a beach in West Dorset.
I am not alone in that. Our Jurassic coast, our rivers and fields, our chocolate box villages and historical market towns attract millions of visitors each year. This landscape underpins a vital part of our economy: hospitality. Our pubs, cafés, hotels, holiday parks and B&Bs support thousands of jobs and provide livelihoods for families across West Dorset.
In West Dorset, 85% of local businesses are micro-enterprises. Those small businesses are the backbone of our tourism industry. They create jobs, keep high streets alive, and provide essential services. Rising costs driven by inflation, energy, staffing and tax are now threatening their survival.
In 2024, West Dorset recorded more than 4,200 sewage spills discharged into our rivers and seas for more than 48,000 hours. Tourists are now checking pollution alerts before they swim. In an area where tourism brings in more than £320 million and supports more than 5,000 jobs, it is unacceptable that inaction by the Government is putting our hospitality businesses at risk.
It is fascinating that the vast majority of the tourism businesses in West Dorset are microbusinesses. Can my hon. Friend think of a worse policy for those businesses than reducing the NI threshold to the level it was reduced to in the Budget? Can he think of a policy that would do more economic damage to the hospitality sector in his constituency?
I would struggle to think of a policy that would be worse for microbusinesses.
Meanwhile, transport and parking infrastructure across rural West Dorset is stretched to breaking point, something made worse by the 42% surge in population during peak season. If visitors cannot reach our businesses or cannot park, it is local traders that will lose out. As my hon. Friend just mentioned, in April we saw a rise in national insurance contributions and an increase in business rates—that was the other thing I was struggling to think of that might be worse for small businesses. Since then, more than 220 pubs have shut down. I heard directly from The George in West Bay in my constituency, which has seen its business rates increase from £8,000 to £27,000 a year. That is basically its entire operating profit margin.
UKHospitality reports that a third of businesses in the sector are now operating at a loss. Most have had to raise prices, cut hours, lay off staff or cancel investment. As I am sure the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney), will outline, we would replace business rates with a commercial landlord levy. We would keep the 75% business rate relief for hospitality and freeze the small business multiplier until the new system is in place.
We are also calling for a dedicated Minister of State for tourism and hospitality to give those sectors the leadership and support that they desperately need. In places such as West Dorset, hospitality is the economy. For every small business that closes, we lose part of our community. We need action. We need to stand up for hospitality businesses, because when they thrive, all of West Dorset thrives.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberWell, I have been listening; I spend a lot of time in the Chamber. Yes, there is an element of Punch and Judy, but the reality is that there are 650 of us here who want great legislation to support our communities and make sure that people can get on with their daily lives without the burden of having to think about legislation. They want us to get on with it on their behalf.
On tax rises, we have seen the leak of the Deputy Prime Minister’s letter to the Chancellor. I remain concerned that any ambition to increase taxes is another death by a thousand cuts for our small businesses. We need certainty and support from this Government, saying to people, “Go and be ambitious.” If people are risk-averse, there will be a structural problem for us on our high streets and for our small businesses. That means that we will not create the world’s next unicorn because those ambitious people will already have left our country to generate their income in a better financial climate, typically in the middle east or other parts of Europe.
I was touched by the hon. Gentleman’s story of his father’s role in contributing to the economy. I hope that he will be present in the immigration debate later this afternoon to make the same points about the vital work of immigrants contributing to wealth creation in the UK.
The hon. Gentleman mentions NICs and the other headwinds facing small businesses. One small business in West Dorset has seen its business rates go from £8,000 to £27,000. If we want to help small businesses grow, surely we have to stop taxing them so much.
I have always thought that business rates were totally outdated. They generate a significant amount of money for the Treasury, so it is resistant to reform without knowing for certain how it will fill that significant black hole.
We have not spoken about hospices and the effects of NICs increases on the charity sector. Others have spoken about the winter fuel allowance. All these things affect our most vulnerable individuals, and the community groups and charities that fill a massive void that the state or the private individual do not. My worry, which is increasing, is that we are doing things that will have unintended but significant consequences.
We chose this subject for debate to ensure that the Government heard loud and clear from across the House that where they do the right thing, we will support them, and where they need to adjust their direction of travel—I will not say “U-turn”—we will support them. It benefits no one, and provides no benefit to our communities, if we just chuck political grenades.
I will end my remarks on the loss of business confidence. Small businesses are closing, investors are leaving, inflation is rising and confidence is collapsing. I know that there is a direct lack of business experience on the Treasury Bench, but that is neither here nor there. I know that there are various economists, think-tankers and so on in the Minister’s party, but I urge him to listen to those who run businesses of whatever shape or size, because that life experience brings them value in this place. My hon. Friend the Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew) created a business that employs 1,000 people. That is real life experience; he knows how the Government’s decisions would have influenced the projections and ambitions of his business. I know from my continuing conversations with businesses that they are looking to shrink and be secure rather than expand and be ambitious. That is not what the UK is about; we are outward-looking and globally ambitious. I wish the Government success in getting to that point.
(2 months ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) on securing this important debate. She has been an advocate for carers throughout her parliamentary career, and I thank her for all her hard work.
Unpaid carers are the backbone of Britain’s social care system. They carry out remarkable and irreplaceable roles, often with little help and too often at great personal cost. I would like to tell the story of one of my constituents, Sarah. She spent nearly 30 years as a full-time carer for her son, who has profound and complex needs. He suffered neurological damage before and during birth, and although he is verbal, he has severe autism and behavioural challenges, which, through no fault of his own, have dominated the lives of everyone around him. Sarah’s story is one of lifelong dedication and unconditional love. For years, her son’s unpredictable behaviour dictated his family’s routine. He was excluded from multiple schools and, later, from supported living settings because his needs were too challenging to manage in shared environments. He now lives with one-to-one professional carers. The support that he receives is of a high standard, but it costs as much as all the benefits he receives.
Sarah no longer qualifies for carer’s allowance because her son no longer lives at home. However, as a mother she remains deeply involved in his care. Over the years, she has given up work. She is approaching 60 with no pension or savings and with health problems of her own. On top of that, she now supports her elderly in-laws and ageing parents. Like so many others, she is a carer several times over—unseen, unpaid and exhausted. Sarah described herself to me as simply “broken” from years of having no room to breathe or recover.
Sarah contacted me not just because of the long hours of care or the loss of income, but because of the fear caused by the Government’s proposed changes to disability benefits, especially the personal independence payment. Her son relies on PIP; the suggestion that that support could be taken away or turned into a voucher system has devastated Sarah’s mental health. She told me that she cannot sleep and feels physically unwell from anxiety.
Carer’s leave is designed to support those who give so much of themselves to care for family and friends, but we must ensure that that support is not undermined by other policies. When carers are able to share some of their responsibilities with professional services and return to work, they should encounter stability, not the prospect that they will have to return to full-time caring because of sudden changes. However, proposals such as the changes to PIP risk having exactly that effect, which causes immense anxiety among the very people who we claim to be helping, including Sarah, who worries whether her son will be affected or not.
Carer’s allowance is just £81.90 a week, which is the lowest amount for a benefit of its kind. Worse still, carers are being punished for going even slightly over their earnings threshold. Tens of thousands of carers are being asked to repay thousands of pounds each, and often through no fault of their own. Indeed, many of them did not even know that they had gone over the threshold, and in many cases it was the Department for Work and Pensions that had failed to update their records in time. That is yet another example of carers being treated as an afterthought.
I am immensely proud that the Liberal Democrats, thanks to the hard work of my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife, passed the Carer’s Leave Act 2023. The Act gives 2 million employees across the UK the legal right to at least one week of unpaid carer’s leave each year, which was a crucial first step, but now we must go further and make that paid leave.
Caring is vital, emotionally draining and complex work, which deserved to be recognised as such. That is why we should introduce paid carer’s leave and consult on extending the eligibility for it. We should also give unpaid carers a statutory guarantee of regular respite breaks, and not just when a council can afford them. We should also increase carer’s allowance by at least £20 a week, with higher earning thresholds and a taper, so that people are not penalised for doing extra hours at work.
Sarah’s story is not unique. Her exhaustion, her fear and her resilience are echoed in stories in millions of households up and down the country. We owe it to her and to every unpaid carer to stop taking them for granted.
(3 months, 4 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate the hon. Member for Glenrothes and Mid Fife (Richard Baker) on securing this debate.
Dorset does not enjoy the kind of large shipyards that the hon. Member outlined, but the marine industry is vital to Dorset’s economy. It generates £483 million in gross value added and supports more than 8,000 jobs. Importantly, 71% of those jobs are in boatbuilding, reinforcing the sector’s importance to the region. Local shipyards and boatbuilders provide high-quality, skilled employment in coastal communities; they offer well-paid jobs in areas where such opportunities are often limited.
However, the industry is at a crossroads. The shortage of skilled workers in the area is now the single greatest barrier to growth. We must do more to attract and retain talent in the sector. One key opportunity lies in supporting women in boatbuilding. Historically, women have been under-represented in this industry. It estimates that only 2% to 5% of hands-on yard workers are women. However, initiatives such as Women in Boatbuilding are changing this. Women in Boatbuilding has played a transformative role, particularly in Lyme Regis, where it has helped the Boat Building Academy, which I recently had the pleasure of visiting, to achieve a 50:50 gender split on its flagship boatbuilding course. Women in Boatbuilding not only promotes diversity, but drives economic growth. By making shipyards and boatyards more inclusive, we widen the talent pipeline, ensuring the industry’s long-term sustainability. With the right support, more women will enter the profession, leading to greater innovation, a stronger workforce and a more resilient industry.
Supporting new talent is vital, but we must also protect the heritage of traditional boatbuilding. The National Shipbuilding Office recognises that the leisure sector accounts for 14% of the UK’s shipbuilding industry, yet traditional boatbuilding is being neglected. In 2023, traditional wooden boat building was added to the Heritage Crafts Association’s red list of endangered crafts, highlighting the urgent need for action. Without intervention, we risk losing centuries-old skills that have built and maintained iconic vessels—from Dunkirk’s little ships to HMS Victory. These crafts not only preserve our maritime history, but contribute to our economy.
The solution is clear: we need central support and funding dedicated to preserving traditional boatbuilding skills. Without that, apprenticeships remain inaccessible outside the south-west, skilled labour shortages will worsen and our internationally admired shipyards will struggle to compete. Dorset has a proud maritime heritage and a thriving marine industry, but it needs investment, skills development and a commitment to inclusivity to ensure its future success. We have the talent, expertise and global reputation. Now we must ensure that this industry has the resources to grow, to innovate and to inspire the next generation of boatbuilders. Let us invest in our shipyards, our workforce and our maritime heritage before it is too late.
(5 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I would also like to thank my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) for securing this important debate.
The wonderful towns of West Dorset may be small, but they are mighty. The resilience of our local businesses cannot be overstated. The Liberal Democrat-run town councils have done a brilliant job in supporting the high streets and working with local businesses to help them to recover from the ravages of covid. Our towns of Bridport, Dorchester and Sherborne have seen encouraging signs, but we should be clear that there is still much work to be done to ensure their long-term success.
In Bridport, where footfall is rising, the town boasts an impressive array of independent retailers, markets, pubs and cultural venues such as Bucky Doo Square. Bridport and West Bay enjoy 596,000 day visits a year, and up to £49 million in tourism spending, including £10 million on shopping alone, driven in no small part by the packed calendar of community events. Retail unoccupancy in the town is just 7%, significantly below the national average of 14%. However, even with that success, the number of vacant shops remains above pre-pandemic levels, and we cannot afford complacency.
Dorchester’s Sunday market draws over 10,000 visitors, leading some businesses to extend their opening hours. That is a positive step, but we must build on that momentum. Seasonal fluctuations remain a challenge in West Dorset, and without Government support, the improvements we have seen risk being undone. Sherborne, too, has shown the ability to attract new businesses with cultural events, such as its Abbey concerts, the Literary Society’s festival, the Sherborne International Film festival and the Sherborne festive shopping day, helping to bring more people to the town.
There are also challenges in Sherborne; its last remaining bank is soon set to close and be replaced by a banking hub. That transition highlights the ongoing struggle to maintain essential services in rural communities. There must be clear action, because business rates and rising national insurance costs are placing additional pressure on small enterprises which have already weathered so much. Our local producers, farmers and microbusinesses, which form the backbone of West Dorset’s economy, need targeted support to navigate the economic challenges.
Our high streets are not just places to shop; they are where communities come together. In Bridport, R. J. Balson & Son was established in 1515 and it is the oldest butcher’s in the country. Family-run businesses and local markets instil a sense of community belonging, and those businesses need our help, not just from consumers who we must urge to shop locally rather than online, but from Government policies that recognise the unique challenges of high street communities.
I apologise to the hon. Gentleman, but he has only just rocked up to the debate, so if he will forgive me, on this occasion I will not give way. If there is a specific issue about which he wants to write to me, I would be happy to look at it.
Hon. Members will know that the FCA engages with banks and building societies to ensure that the impacts of branch closures on customers are properly considered. Where firms fall short, the FCA can and will ask for a closure to be paused or for other options to be put in place. Some banks also provide pop-up services, with a community banker visiting a library or a community centre to offer support where other options are not available. I understand that that has been the case in the constituency of the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross following the announcement of the closure of the Bank of Scotland branch in Golspie, and that Lloyds Banking Group will be providing a pop-up community banking service on a regular basis to support local people with banking services.
For a number of reasons, we are beginning to look at what else the Post Office can do to improve its banking offer, and I hope to say a little more about that in a moment. When the local high street bank closes, the alternative option for accessing everyday banking services in person is the post office. As our economy has modernised and evolved, so too have our local post offices. Today, they are much more than just a place to send letters and parcels. They increasingly act as basic high street banks, but also as access points for some Government services and, in many places, as community hubs for an array of different activities, generating tremendous social capital in our communities. So it is right that the Government hold the Post Office to account to ensure there is enough provision across the country. We protect the post office network by setting minimum access criteria. At all times, we want 99% of the UK population to live within three miles of a post office and 90% to live within one mile.
The Minister seems to be outlining very succinctly the failure of the banks to provide a service and the importance of post offices in providing services. I am struggling to understand why the Government are punishing the Post Office with national insurance contribution rises while maintaining the Tory tax cuts for the banks, so will the Minister explain why we are rewarding the people who are failing us and punishing those who will now provide this service to us?
The hon. Gentleman will know that the Government had a very difficult fiscal inheritance and had to make some very tough choices in the Budget back in October.
We continue to provide a subsidy to the Post Office of some £50 million to ensure that the loss-making parts of the network can be maintained. Indeed, just before Christmas we provided a further £37.5 million to support the Post Office network this year. We are working with the senior leadership team at the Post Office on future opportunities, beginning with banking, so that the company can increase its product offers and commercial revenue while reducing its costs, as well as improving the service to all our constituents.
I heard the specific concerns raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar, whose constituency includes Stornoway, about the future of the directly managed post office in his constituency. No decisions have been made on the future of all the directly managed branches, but I know he will continue to campaign on the issue.
We want our post offices to form part of healthy, bustling high streets. Like the post office itself, our high streets have had to adapt quickly to the post-covid economy. High streets have faced more than their fair share of challenges in recent years, in terms of vacancies opening up—an issue that my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket referred to. That is why in December we brought forward new powers for councils, which can now force landlords to rent out unsightly, vacant, boarded-up properties via high street rental auctions. The new regulations will make town centre tenancies more accessible and affordable, giving local businesses and community groups a right to rent valuable space on their local high street. I welcome the fact that Bassetlaw, Darlington and Mansfield are already working with us as early adopters to help to learn how the new power can be used to make a difference.
We have also announced our intention to introduce a new community right to buy, empowering residents to address decline and protect valuable spaces such as pubs, theatres and cinemas, and thereby keeping those assets in the hands of the local community. We are investing in further initiatives to boost town and city centres, including by maintaining the high street accelerators that bring together the local community, businesses and property owners to work in partnership with their council to regenerate and revive local high streets.
My hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe referred to our work to improve and reform the business rates system. That was a key manifesto pledge that we are beginning to deliver on, with permanently lower tax rates for retail, hospitality and leisure properties, including those on the high street, from 2026-27. We have published a discussion paper to explore what else we can do in this space.
My hon. Friend the Member for South West Norfolk referred to issues to do with digital connectivity. He will be pleased that we are committing over £500 million next year to deliver Project Gigabit and the shared rural network to roll out broadband and 4G connectivity, which will support growth in rural areas and beyond.
Digital connectivity is one consideration for rural communities but, as hon. Members have rightly pointed out, physical connectivity is another. For people in far-flung communities, especially those without a car or family living nearby, getting to the high street can be extremely difficult. We recognise that challenge and are responding in turn with more than £650 million for local transport outside city regions in 2025-26. The Department for Transport will say more about how that funding will be used shortly.
We are also providing more than £1 billion of funding to support and improve local bus services and keep fares affordable wherever we can. In December we introduced the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill that will put control over local bus services back in the hands of local leaders right across England. It is intended to ensure that bus services reflect the needs of the communities that rely on them.
I thank the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross and all Members who participated in this debate for their contributions. High streets are the beating heart of all our communities. The services they provide are essential for the people and businesses they serve. As a Minister with a key interest in this area, I look forward to continuing to work with hon. Members to help to improve local high street services in their communities.
(5 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I absolutely agree with the hon. Member’s points. I am not against solar energy—far from it—but we need to be smart about how we implement it and all the associated infrastructure. Why not require all new homes to be fitted with solar panels, as proposed by my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) in his sunshine Bill? Why not use the vast roof spaces of warehouses, public buildings and car parks? These are sensible, minimally intrusive ways to contribute to our net zero goals.
I will confess that before being elected to this place, I spent 10 years in renewable energy finance. It is a common claim from certain activists and newspapers that we should put solar on commercial buildings. I do not disagree with that. The problem is the economics of it do not stand up from a finance perspective. Until the Government step in to guarantee a minimum amount of value for export, rooftop solar will never stack up. Neither will carport solar. That is why investors will always go for utility-scale. Does my hon. Friend agree that if we actually want to see a catalyst, if we want to see a change, if we want to see farmers growing crops and not solar panels, the Government need to step in and regulate the market?