Coastguard Volunteers: Remuneration and HMRC Guidance

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

Diolch o galon i holl wylwyr y glannau am eu gwaith. [Translation: Heartfelt thanks to all the coastguards for their work.]

The economy of Gwynedd is highly dependent on tourism, especially our coastal communities in the Llŷn peninsula and on the Meirionnydd coast, as well as in the uplands of Eryri. To give a snapshot of the impact on population numbers, the year-round population of Abersoch in Llŷn is 600, but that increases to 50,000 in the summer. The volunteer rescue services and the salaried blue light teams are under immense pressure to deal with these numbers, even as things stand. Keeping the public safe under such pressures requires a close-knit response from people who know their local coast and country like the back of their hand, who are prepared to turn out at short notice and who are fully trained to bring a professional response to an ever-changing environment and hazardous challenges.

Gwynedd has eight coastguard stations at Aberdaron, Abersoch, Bangor, Barmouth, Criccieth, Landwrog, Porthdinllaen and Tywyn, and there are at least 80 volunteer coastguard rescue officers in the county. The coastguard rescue teams at these stations provide essential emergency response capability along the Welsh coastline, including search and rescue, missing person operations, flood response, and cliff and mud rescues. They co-ordinate with North Wales police and transport police, North Wales fire and rescue service and the Welsh ambulance service, and with volunteers from the Royal National Lifeboat Institution and mountain and cave rescue teams. They even attended the Talerddig train accident in 2024, where there was a fatality. The public do not distinguish between the services. They see emergency responders, they see uniforms and kit, and they trust them—sometimes with their lives.

[Amanda Martin]

Portsmouth coastguard rescue officers responded to 171 incidents last year, and I rise to express my admiration of them and of the coastguard rescue officers in the right hon. Member’s constituency. Does she agree with me and my constituents that the Maritime and Coastguard Agency had a number of options available to it, but it chose to blatantly ignore those options and instead put the burden on the shoulders of the CROs and their families, which is just not good enough?

[Liz Saville Roberts]

I agree entirely. A CRO suggested to me that we should look at the model for retained firefighters. I wonder whether that is something the Minister might consider. Obviously, there will be issues with that model, but other models have been suggested by the CROs.

I have already cited the evidence showing that we need CROs. Now, let me pass on what they have told me about the proposed changes. Teams will be put under extra pressure when—not if—some members cannot attend incidents because they will be out of pocket, whether they are working or for another reason. The exact same issue will arise in respect of essential training sessions. We risk losing officers with decades of experience, skills and local knowledge. Emergency response times will increase when neighbouring teams are called in because local officers are not available; we already know that that happens with the fire service on occasion. Recruitment will be hit as new team members are required to do 10 days’ training without remuneration. This will reduce the pool of people who can afford and are willing to do this work. CROs already feel isolated and ignored; their morale will fall even further.

I will also quote what one CRO told me, and I have been careful here because CROs do not want their names to be put on the record. We have already heard that they are being threatened by their management, which is frankly appalling, although it gives us a role here as MPs to say the words that really should be coming from their own mouths. This CRO told me their work involved

“People sacrificing time that could be spent with family to go out in all weather, at any time of day or night, to carry out all manner of rescues, from a dog on a cliff to recovering dead bodies.”

That is what these people do.

I have already tabled written questions about whether the Government have assessed how many CROs are likely to leave the service, the impact on public safety and the long-term sustainability of the coastguard if it were to operate on a wholly volunteer model. The Government have not provided any answers to those questions. I therefore ask them again to the Minister, and I look forward to hearing his response. Diolch yn fawr.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Keir Mather]

Those considerations and how they would affect the lives of CROs are not immaterial, although I know that the hon. Gentleman is not saying they are. It is my understanding, although I am happy to be corrected if this is not the case, that to transpose that relevant scheme into a wholly different part of the voluntary sector would have primary legislative implications. We would need to work through them; it could not be done simply by wishing to do it.

I have set out why the MCA was compelled to accept the court’s judgment. Having done so, it needed to take immediate action to comply. Based on operational judgments and the desire to continue to preserve the important volunteer model, the recommendation was to move to a pure volunteer system that paid expenses, so that CROs did not have to choose between being a CRO and their primary employment. That was never a perfect decision, but to do nothing was not an option. As that decision has been communicated to CROs, it is only natural too that it would not and could not be a perfect fit for all who serve, which has been powerfully articulated today.

In the time since the decision was made, I have listened to and reflected on the points made by colleagues, including during this debate. I understand the very real concerns that have been raised about the potential impact of this change on the operational capacity of the coastguard rescue service. I hope that I have gone some way to addressing those concerns, but it is important to recognise that the alternative—moving to a worker model—would require a fundamentally different model and would likely lead to CROs having to leave the service, which would not in itself necessarily guarantee response capacity.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

Will the Minister give way?

[Keir Mather]

I am afraid that I will not take any more interventions; I have to get through my remarks.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

It is about impact assessments.

[Keir Mather]

I have given way plenty of times.

This is a complex challenge that we must all work through together. We do not want employers to be unable to continue to support their employees to volunteer. We do not want to see CROs tangled in a mire of employment obligations that make the choice of going to a rescue a difficult one. We all understand that the court judgment changed the legal status of CROs, and that treating people who signed up to be volunteers as workers does not necessarily solve the problems they face, and in fact could create many new ones, but we also all recognise the tremendous contributions of these volunteers. We have heard powerful testimonies about the sacrifices that they make day in, day out.

I thank the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland for allowing these issues to be so comprehensively discussed, and fellow Members for their excellent points. I assure them that the debate has resonated strongly with me. I will reflect on what has been raised and I will consider in the long term how our coastguard volunteers can be recognised. I have heard the deep concerns of the CRO community, and I want to carry on working with them, trade unions and colleagues across the House in the future to work through these issues. I thank everybody for their contributions today.