Mountain Rescue

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Lisa Smart]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving a shout-out to those involved in lowland rescue. I know there is a whole search and rescue community, including those who look at caves and other environments, and I am glad that he gave me the opportunity to thank all those involved in the great work of lowland rescue.

As climate change leads to more extreme weather events, rescue teams are increasingly a de facto fourth emergency service. The 24% rise in call-outs over five years reflects the growing popularity of outdoor activities. That is to be welcomed, but it puts real pressure on rescue teams, and social media is a significant driver. The chief executive officer of Mountain Rescue England and Wales, Mike Park, has spoken of a shift in the types of visitors to upland areas, as people are drawn to locations by striking footage online without always understanding the conditions or the hazards involved. Chief superintendent of North Wales Police Owain Llewellyn described an “almost unprecedented” rise in visitors to the Eryri national park as a direct result of social media posts and a corresponding increase in call-outs.

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

Will the hon. Lady give way?

[Lisa Smart]

If only for a correction of my pronunciation, I would welcome an intervention.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

I thank the hon. Lady very much for mentioning Owain Llewellyn of North Wales Police. Of course we see immense increases in the population present in the North Wales Police region; given the present police funding arrangements, it is very challenging to deal with those tourism pressures, which are only increasing. Does she agree that, alongside volunteer rescue teams, the funding for all emergency services needs to reflect the reality of population pressures?

[Lisa Smart]

I strongly agree with the right hon. Lady on making sure that all our emergency services are properly resourced to do the job that we rightly expect them to do. I also agree that the organisation of our police forces across our whole country should reflect the differing needs in urban and rural areas—although there are some overlaps—and that police should be resourced to address them.

The British Mountaineering Council has been direct about what the increase in outdoor activity means for teams. It has warned that the current situation is “not sustainable” and has raised serious concerns about volunteer wellbeing and the risk that teams could reach a point where they are unable to respond safely to every call. That is not a scenario that any of us should be willing to accept.

Mountain rescue teams in England and Wales receive no direct Government funding. They rely entirely on donations, fundraising and legacies, and each team costs between £50,000 and £100,000 a year to run. In the year ending December 2024, Mountain Rescue England and Wales had total income of just over £1.2 million, against expenditure of nearly £1.3 million, so it is already running at a deficit while managing nearly 3,800 emergencies in a single year. Compare that with Scotland, where the Scottish Government provides £300,000 a year to be shared between 27 teams. Notably, that grant was introduced in 2003 under the Scottish Liberal Democrat-Labour coalition. That demonstrates that when political will exists, direct public investment in these services is entirely achievable.

The previous UK Government did provide occasional grants to mountain rescue teams in England and Wales, including in 2020, when 11 teams received one-off grants totalling just under £150,000, and this Government have taken some positive steps. The 2025 autumn Budget included the exemption of search and rescue vehicles from vehicle excise duty but, although that was warmly received, it does not address the structural funding gap that these organisations face.

In June last year, the all-party parliamentary group for volunteer search and rescue was established, and it has since set out a clear case for what further Government action should look like. The most significant proposal is that search and rescue volunteers should receive the same status as Army reservists and special constables. That would result in paid leave from employers for search and rescue training and recompense for loss of earnings when attending a call-out during working hours, because at present, a volunteer responding to a call-out on a random weekday afternoon may be losing wages to do so. That is a real barrier to recruitment and retention that the Government have the power to address. The APPG has also called for Crown indemnity insurance cover for search and rescue teams, a dedicated Minister to engage with volunteer search and rescue groups and a VAT exemption on vehicles, building on last year’s vehicle excise duty announcement. The Liberal Democrats fully support those proposals.

There is one issue in particular that I want to raise, which requires urgent action. It was brought directly to my attention by a member of the Kinder Mountain Rescue Team; along with the Glossop team, that team covers my Hazel Grove constituency and the surrounding areas, which include some of the best walking routes in existence. At a Delegated Legislation Committee last week, my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) raised some changes being made to Care Quality Commission registration during a discussion on amendments to the Health and Social Care Act 2008. The Government have moved to regulate independent medical care at temporary sporting and cultural events. Previous exemptions that allowed some medical providers to operate without CQC registration have been removed.

--- Later in debate ---

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

I congratulate the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) on securing this debate, because it has been very interesting. There have been speakers from every nation and region of the United Kingdom. This issue is significant to us all.

I beg your patience, Ms Lewell, but I will, of course refer to Eryri, which is the mountain region that I represent much of. It is one of the busiest and most hazardous mountain regions within the United Kingdom. In 2025, we had around 600,000 visitors. Sadly, however, there are fatal incidents every year, due to falls, exposure and incidents in water. Of course, it is the mountain rescue volunteers who play such a key role in interacting with the emergency services, in rescuing people and in dealing with dangerous incidents, many of which are tragic.

I will refer to just two of them today. In February, there were two very young men—they were aged 19 and 20 —from Norfolk who tragically died on Yr Wyddfa, the Snowdon range, after a really huge winter search and rescue operation that involved multiple rescue teams, in conditions that involved snow and ice, and severe exposure. We have to recognise the diligence and the commitment of the people who go out in such difficult circumstances.

There are also falls from ridges and from scrambles, particularly in the areas that are risky in Snowdonia, or Eryri. I will put those areas on the record, because it is important that people are alert to the risks there. I am talking about places such as Crib Goch and Tryfan, where there is no marked path. I am also talking about the Watkin Path pools, where—sadly—two young women died last June. I am also talking about Glyder Fach and Glyder Fawr.

Such deaths are so difficult for the people involved with the search and rescue teams, but my heart goes out to the families of people who have lost loved ones. This area is very important; it is full of leisure activity and is part of our economy in north Wales. The emergency services and the volunteer rescue services both play their part in making the places that I have mentioned as safe as possible. There are 11 mountain rescue teams in Wales. Six of them are in my constituency: Llanberis, Aberglaslyn, South Snowdonia, Aberdyfi, North East Wales, the North Wales Cave Rescue Organisation, and Ogwen, which is in the Bangor Aberconwy constituency, but serves the same mountain massif.

In addition, and to give people an idea of how significant the rescue services are in my constituency, there are the RNLI stations at Porthdinllaen, Abersoch, Pwllheli, Criccieth, Barmouth and Aberdyfi. Again, they all serve the leisure industry of tourism, which is so critical to the constituency. We have the search and rescue helicopters at Dinas Dinlle, which are run by Bristow on behalf of the coastguard.

Of course, this situation is demanding for the police as well. Earlier in the debate, it was mentioned that the population in parts of a constituency can go up by five times in the high season. That is not reflected in police funding, but none the less it is something that the police have to respond to.

We should also notice, of course, the timing of this debate, given that we will soon have the May bank holidays. For many of us here in Westminster Hall, if the weather is good, those bank holidays will be some of the busiest times that we have in the season, and they will probably also be times in which the search and rescue teams will be called out.

I will talk particularly about two of the rescue teams operating in my constituency. First, there is Llanberis, who are the busiest rescue team in the United Kingdom. Last year, they responded to 360 call-outs, which was 10% of all the incidents in England and Wales in 2025. Of course, they work with other rescue teams as well, but their busiest day last year was 12 July, when 716 incidents were recorded in north Wales. Sadly, the number of fatalities is rising too—from 18 in 2024 to 23 in 2025. Evidently, the work that these teams do is absolutely critical, but the sheer pressure on them as they perform their role needs to be recognised, both in the UK Government and in the Welsh Government, as well as the fact that they are so critical for our local economy.

There is another rescue team that I want to mention. It told me that although all the mountain rescue teams face funding challenges, when it comes to North Wales Cave Rescue Organisation—the problem is in the name—it is far less visible than the other rescue teams. I have seen the areas that it has to deal with in my constituency: we have old mines, slate caverns, quarries and natural caves over towards the east of north Wales.

Again, I am going to put those on the record because these places seem to attract people. Blaenau Ffestiniog’s old slate caverns attract people on social media and are extremely dangerous; I want to use this debate to put that warning out. In Cwmorthin, Rhosydd and Wrysgan, people can go on what sounds like a wonderful adventure underground—from one side of the mountain to the other through the caverns—but it is extremely dangerous. People are putting themselves and others at risk. It is not a glamorous activity for Instagram and not something that people should do without professionals and experts.

I am a member of the APPG and I support its manifesto. I welcome the Minister to her place, but I am very much aware that she can speak only on behalf of the Department for Transport. What we are talking about today cuts across many Government Departments and the message needs to go back to them.

My final point, as raised by Owain Llewellyn of North Wales police, is about whether we can find a way of addressing the temptation that people feel through social media. I referred to Instagram, where people see wonderful pictures and want to emulate them and be part of that lifestyle. Can we somehow have a conversation with the social media platform providers about how to get across to people that although it looks so good on a phone or on a device, “You need to be safe, because for your families, it could be a disaster”—and of course for the teams that come out?

I want to express my greatest appreciation and gratitude to all those involved in the voluntary rescue. Without them, I do not know how we would keep people safe in such wonderful and precious places.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

Thank you for agreeing to chair this important debate, Ms Lewell. Like others, I congratulate the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) on securing it.

We have heard a huge amount of unanimity across the political divide about our support for mountain rescue and the analysis of some of the challenges that it faces. Frankly, mountain rescue is easy to ignore because it operates by definition in remote areas, but there is something else: it is operated by people who are typically self-sufficient, independent and tough volunteers, and as a result it is a self-sufficient, independent and tough organisation. Those are not typically the kind of people who put their hands up and say they want the Government to do something for them, but—and this is an important “but”—when someone needs mountain rescue, it is the most important organisation in the world.

There seems to be a qualification for being on the Front Bench at the moment. The hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) was stuck out on a mountain in Italy for 48 hours, and look where that has got him. I was an idiot myself when I was in my teens: I got stuck up above the snowline on a mountain overnight, with no equipment at all, wearing trainers. Unfortunately, that was before the days of mobile phones, and I just had to survive; I managed to climb down the following day. By the sounds of it, there is a link between risk taking and political careers, but I hope that both of us have learned our lessons; I look forward to further anecdotes from the Minister.

We need mountain rescue, and we know that demand is increasing. We have heard about the 26 teams in Scottish Mountain Rescue, which in 2025 had 1,270 call-outs and assisted more than 900 people. It is worth remembering that that took more than 39,000 hours of volunteer time. We heard from the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) about the many English mountain rescue teams—five, I think, in his constituency—and we heard from the right hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd (Liz Saville Roberts) about Welsh mountain rescue. Like her, I want to raise the profile of Llanberis Mountain Rescue Team. In my former career, I was the managing director of Go Ape, working in outdoor recreation—often out in the mountains—and the Llanberis team was responsible for training for the mountain leader qualifications. It is at the heart of this country’s very good training and outdoor education, and was responsible for responding to 10% of all call-outs last year. There is plenty to support and give plaudits for.

We have heard a number of arguments that more should be done regarding funding, and some of those arguments no doubt have merit, but we should be careful what we wish for with volunteer organisations. When I think, off the top of my head, about the most loved, must trusted and most supported organisations in our country, I think of the RNLI, the Air Ambulance Service, the hospice movement and mountain rescue. They have something important in common: they are not adjuncts of the state. They grow up from their local community, and they are therefore supported by, loved by and close to their community. It would be a terrible disservice to mountain rescue if, through some misplaced wish to support it, we brought it into the confines of the state.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

The hon. Gentleman makes an argument that I have heard before—that, to maintain certain rescue services, they must not be vulnerable to policy decisions making cuts to public services. There is a “but” though, as those services must have sufficient funding to survive. The RNLI is a very well loved and established charity, but it is much more difficult for some of the smaller charities. It is important that we move forward knowing that we need to maintain these services, even though we may have different funding models.

[Jerome Mayhew]

That is a reasonable point, but the key argument made by all hon. Members today is about the state getting in the way through regulatory oversight. That may be by mistake, as I think it probably is genuine oversight in this case—that is, the draft Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) (Amendment) Regulations 2026, which were debated in Committee on 15 April. Real concerns have been expressed by Members across the political divide about the potential impact of the draft regulations on mountain rescue.

Those concerns were articulated in Committee by my hon. Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson), who is medically qualified and was previously a medical member of mountain rescue. She set out concerns about the impact on mountain rescue, the application of treatment by volunteers and the requirement to be registered with the Care Quality Commission. The hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale estimated that it would cost each organisation between £10,000 and £20,000 for regulation. There will be a clear impact upon onsite healthcare on the mountainside, but also on sports events, fell running, mountain bike events—which I used to attend—and music festivals. We want high quality care, but as Members from across the political divide have argued, the regulations need to be proportionate. I hope that the Minister is about to announce that there will be an exemption for mountain rescue. We wait on her speech with bated breath.

That is just one example of regulatory burden; there are others. We should aim to have proportionate regulation. We should aim to reduce the regulatory burden in terms of bureaucracy while increasing the effectiveness of light-touch regulation to provide care and support when it is needed. The draft regulations appear to be the exact opposite, so I will be interested in the Minister’s response.

I have a final point, though it is really an observation. On the increased demand for mountain rescue, we have to ask, “Why?”. It may be in part because of changed attitudes to how we live our lives as a response to covid and the lockdown, and a reassessment of the rat race. People want to get out, experience adventure, get closer to the outdoors and to nature more generally. If so, without hesitation I applaud and encourage, as we all should, that increased demand and appetite for the outdoors.

There is an attitude on social media, however, where we seem to laud “extreme” activities, making very dangerous and difficult activities seem accessible and desirable to people like me when I was a teenager in my trainers. There is a concern that that attitude underplays the risk associated with those activities, when professional training is needed to build the layers of experience that make one capable of undertaking and surviving them. There is a balance to be struck between encouraging interest, involvement and engagement, and reinforcing the need for personal responsibility for one’s own safety—a responsibility that one addresses through training, experience and risk mitigation and management structures.

We are lucky to have mountain rescue. Finance will always be a challenge. I accept that improvements can be made, but I repeat my caution about the need to stay close to one’s community. At the very least, the Government should not make matters worse with heavy-handed or stupid regulation. We seem to have an example of that going through Parliament right now. The Government have the opportunity, through the Minister, to address the sector’s very real concerns, and I look forward to her comments.

Banking Hubs: Rural and Post-Industrial Communities

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Tuesday 24th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Lucy Rigby]

If the hon. Member would let me progress just a little further, I will cover the issues he refers to.

As I said, the strength of feeling expressed today, and more broadly in parliamentary interactions, shows just how important this issue is to Members, and to people right across the country, particularly in the types of communities that the hon. Member for Caerfyrddin represents. I recognise the particular concerns about rural and post-industrial areas, where longer travel distances, which were referred to, more limited transport and, in particular, uneven digital connectivity make the loss of a bank branch especially acute.

It is right to acknowledge that banking has changed very dramatically in recent years. Many customers have benefited from digital innovations that allow them to more easily manage their finances. For those who have benefited, those types of innovations have increased accessibility and convenience.

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

The Minister mentions the need to recognise innovations. At the same time, we have to recognise that organisations such as banks, and also the Post Office, are very much inclined to be self-interested. In my own constituency a year ago, we lost 21 out of 25 locations for vans. The Government surely need to intervene to make sure that remote and left-behind communities are not left even further behind because these large financial organisations are looking after their own interests.

[Lucy Rigby]

I was going through some of the changes in the landscape of banking, and will come to a slightly more negative aspect of that, if the right hon. Member will allow me to do so. I hope that will cover the substance of her question.

The most recent data from the Financial Conduct Authority shows that over nine in 10 adults banked online or used a mobile app in 2024. We also know, alongside the statistics on digital innovations that I just referred to, that around a quarter of adults carried out banking face-to-face in a branch over the same period. I put that alongside the statistics that the hon. Member for Caerfyrddin referred to about cash usage, which I will not repeat. I make no judgment about why I am a little old school on occasion with my attachment to cash, as she put it, but we know that many of those who still rely on in-person services are older customers and more vulnerable individuals. We also know that many businesses right across this country continue to depend on cash.

Road Safety

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Thursday 5th February 2026 Commons Chamber

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

I wish to open my contribution to the debate with a tribute to a young man from Pwllheli who was killed in a hideous two-car collision on the Porthmadog bypass just days before Christmas. While we await the inquest, I hope it is some comfort to his family that so many people in our home community want to see changes to the law as a memorial and mark of respect for the life of Mathew Hardy. He was 34 years old and the only child of Simon and Glenys. Mathew’s partner, Mari, is expecting a baby in three months’ time—too many lives shattered by irreplaceable loss. While many of us treat the right—the license—to drive a car with a familiarity verging on contempt, such tragedies remind us how dangerous vehicles can potentially be for all road users. Heaven knows, as Mathew’s father says, that people lose their gun licences, their guns and gun paraphernalia at any suggestion of police concern, but people keep their driving licences far, far too easily.

It is a sad fact that inexperienced young drivers remain disproportionately at risk of being killed or injured on the roads. We had the tragic case in my constituency of Harvey Owen who was a passenger in a car driven by a friend, along with two others, all of them teenagers, who lost their lives in 2023 when their car came off the A4085 near Llanfrothen and overturned in a ditch. Harvey’s mother Crystal—I am sure many Members will know her—is campaigning for graduated driving licences.

Northern Ireland has just committed to a full graduated driving licence system from October this year, which includes post-test restrictions that are designed to reduce exposure to high risk situations, such as carrying peer passengers. Evidence from other countries shows that graduated systems significantly reduce young driver casualties, and they save lives. Safer roads mean fewer accidents, and they also mean lower insurance premiums for young people, which is a message the Government should engage with. The Government should monitor Northern Ireland’s approach as a pilot for the rest of the UK.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

My colleague in the Scottish Government, Fiona Hyslop, Cabinet Secretary for Transport, has indicated a strong willingness to engage with the UK Government and other relevant bodies to trial things such as graduated licences and other road safety measures. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is something the UK Government could proactively engage with to make positive progress across the home nations?

[Liz Saville Roberts]

The hon. Gentleman makes a powerful suggestion. It is interesting that we are all talking along the same lines.

I welcome that the road safety strategy includes consultation on proposed changes to penalties for motoring offences. For families who have lost loved ones to repeat drink-drive and drug-drive offenders, it is incomprehensible why those drivers do not lose their licences at the point of providing a positive test. At the very least, that should happen automatically at a second or further offence. Such a policy would ensure that there was swift preventive action when there is clear evidence of risk.

My last example is that of Amanda Peak, who lives in Brithdir, near Dolgellau. She lost both her sons, Arron, aged 10, and Ben, aged eight, and her husband was badly injured. The driver who inflicted this on the family was drunk and driving at speed. Amanda begs the Government to bring down the alcohol limit and to address sentencing. When the drunken driver was sentenced, Amanda was told that this man would not even have been sentenced to imprisonment if he had killed only one child. Imagine that—it took two children to be killed for this man to be sentenced to imprisonment. I urge the Minister to meet lobbyists and to meet families as well, because this might well be a once-in-a-generation opportunity to make a change that will benefit very many people’s lives.

Office for Budget Responsibility Forecasts

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Monday 1st December 2025 Commons Chamber

[James Murray]

I emphasise to my hon. Friend and all Members of this House that the Chancellor and all of us in the Treasury value the independence of the OBR and the constructive relationship we have had with it over the past 16 months, in challenging times. Obviously, the matter that we are discussing today—the early publication of the report last Wednesday—is incredibly serious. The reason we as a Government are taking it so seriously is that we want to preserve the integrity and independence of the OBR in the future.

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

I am very interested to learn that the Chancellor is in Wales today. Amid all the message manipulation, she leaves the Minister to explain exactly why the continued freeze on income tax thresholds will hit Wales badly: an estimated five times more Welsh workers will be pulled into the basic rate compared with in the UK as a whole. I can only presume that the Treasury consulted the Labour Welsh Government. Will he release their response specifically in relation to confidence and a cost of living hit?

Financial Services Reform

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Wednesday 16th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Emma Reynolds]

I can reassure my hon. Friend that the concierge service will be working across the country. This is about ensuring that the UK has a single shop window for international firms looking to either set up or invest further in the UK. As we set out in the Leeds reforms, the benefits of that investment and of unleashing the potential of the financial services industry should be felt across the country, in the east midlands and beyond.

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

The grim truth is that people’s living standards in Wales have still not recovered from the 2008 crash, which resulted in a Labour Prime Minister bailing out the banks and the Tory austerity experiment, so why are the Government risking a repeat of the mistakes of the past when all the evidence shows—this is important—that growth will not trickle down from poorly regulated bankers?

[Emma Reynolds]

I gently say to the right hon. Member that we are not talking about going back to 2007—we have come a long way since then. Of course, after the crash, financial services regulations and a new system of financial services regulation in terms of the twin peaks of the FCA and the PRA—conduct and prudential—were introduced. We are not talking about going back to then. We are not bringing back 125% mortgages, as I have repeatedly said. We are simply saying that we need to reassess where we are and that the pendulum has swung too far the other way. We need to rebalance the system so that both consumers and firms can take informed risks to drive growth across the country. That will make people better off and give them the opportunity to secure better returns on their savings. I encourage her to look at the detail of this. We are looking to rebalance the system, not go back to where we were.

Government Performance against Fiscal Rules

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Monday 7th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

I might suggest to my hon. Friend that the public are grateful not to hear very much from the Conservative party after 14 years of failure, but if Conservatives Members wish to be competitive again, I would encourage them to set out what they might actually do with the country.

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

Plans to plunder disability benefits and the decision to hike national insurance contributions are examples of policies that disproportionately hit Welsh communities. Instead, we need fair policies, such as a wealth tax on assets over £10 million, an end to Government subsidies for oil and gas giants, and a clampdown on tax evasion. When will the Government’s fiscal rules enshrine fairness, where the ultra-wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share?

[Darren Jones]

The right hon. Lady seems to have missed the fact that this Government have changed the non-dom tax status, which had been used by some of the wealthiest people in our country for many years; we have introduced VAT on private schools; and it is now much more expensive to fly in a private jet than it was under the former Conservative Prime Minister. As a consequence of the decisions that the Chancellor took at the Budget last year, we have given the largest real-terms increase in spending to Wales since devolution began, and as a consequence of our reforms to the Bill that we will be discussing on Wednesday, we have increased the base rate of universal credit for the first time in many years.

Spending Review 2025

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Wednesday 11th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call Liz Saville Roberts.

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

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lefarydd. The announcement of just £44.5 million a year for the next 10 years for Welsh rail is Labour’s flimsy fig leaf of an excuse for the multibillion and multi-decade scandal that is HS2. The money announced today is only significant if it matches what Wales will continue to lose from all England-only rail projects, up to now and in the future. Can the Chancellor guarantee that from now on, Wales will receive the full £4 billion HS2 consequential funding, or will she admit that her announcement on Welsh rail funding is nothing but smoke and mirrors?

[Rachel Reeves]

I do not think £445 million is not real money. That money will be invested in the Burns review stations. In addition, we are putting in £118 million to make the coal tips safe. Maybe the right hon. Lady is not that concerned about that, but I know that plenty of Welsh Labour MPs are.

Speaker’s Statement

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Tuesday 13th May 2025 Commons Chamber

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

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Thank you for allowing this quite exceptional but fitting tribute, which I am sure will give some comfort to Sir Roy’s wife Dawn and his children, Hannah and Elliott. It was my privilege to work with Sir Roy during the first three and a half years of the coalition Government. Coalition government had never been done in this country in modern peacetime. The coalition required service to not one party but two in government, and for Sir Roy, it was a time of change and challenges, but they were all challenges that he took impeccably in his stride. There are many anecdotes that I could tell you, Mr Speaker, but unfortunately, too many of those who were involved are still alive, and there are limits to how far one can push parliamentary privilege.

The genius of Sir Roy Stone was that he never betrayed any personal political view. That was how he was able to serve Governments of all stripes. The dignity of Parliament and of the business of government really mattered to him. There was only one occasion when I saw Sir Roy’s mask slip. It was the early days of the coalition Government. The Liberal Democrat Whips Office was in the business of babysitting, and on this occasion it involved an actual baby; it was not the normal babysitting that the Whips Office is called on to do. Inevitably, as happens with babies, there was a need for a nappy to be changed. I took the baby—I think it was Jenny Willott’s son, Toby—into my office, and I had laid him on the sofa and was changing his nappy when Sir Roy Stone appeared in the doorway. One glimpse at his face told me that this scene realised his worst fears about having Liberal Democrats in government.

Sir Roy cared about both Government and Parliament, and being able to serve both requires very distinctive and particular talents. It was a privilege to work with him and to have the benefit of those talents. For those who mourn him, especially his family, the recognition of those talents should be an enduring comfort.

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

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I first knew Sir Roy Stone when I became leader of my group after the 2017 general election. He did, in fact, pass views on the Chief Whips of the time, but I think they are probably best kept to myself for now, because some of them are in the Chamber. He was immensely supportive, and as the leader of a very small group, I learned so much from him. It was the first time that the group had had meetings with the Chief Whip. I speak on behalf of a small party, and Sir Roy’s respect for Parliament, and for the presence of small parties in it, was evident. He felt that we had a role to play, and he enabled us to play that role very effectively.

My lasting memory of Sir Roy was from just after he left. A member of staff, Fflur Elin, could play the harp. Sir Roy found that out, and nothing would do but for Fflur to bring in said harp to play for him. It has been an honour to know him, and people’s recollections of him today tell me that he had immense influence on all of us here.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. On behalf of the Democratic Unionist party, I want to convey to the family of Sir Roy Stone our deepest condolences at this time of tragedy and grief. To serve under a number of Prime Ministers and Chief Whips is no easy task, but he was always fair and impartial. He contributed loyally and with great wisdom. I would not like to say anything against any of the Chief Whips in my party, but I have probably challenged them all, and to be perfectly honest, I probably still do. Sir Roy’s advice was much sought after and liberally given. He set a standard for others to follow, and to admire from a distance. It is always good to cite the Bible at these times; he has run the race, he has fought the good fight and there are many crowns laid up for him in heaven. Thank you, Sir Roy, and God bless all the family at this time.

Crown Estate Bill [Lords]

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Report stage
Monday 24th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Henry Tufnell]

The fishing industry has a great history in my constituency, and it is vital that the Crown Estate takes on board the issues in the fishing industry when it looks at leasing and consenting. I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention.

I am grateful also to the Minister for his assurances in Committee that the public framework document will give context to clause 3, on sustainable development. However, no text has yet been shared with this House, nor will any be shared until after the Bill receives Royal Assent. This reduces scrutiny and will encourage a retrospective review, rather than a proactive approach. Furthermore, relying on a public framework document reduces this House’s ability to ensure that the clause is properly enforced. What is the mechanism for enforcement in the event of non-compliance? What if the Crown Estate failed to report in good faith—what would the penalties be?

Off the back of Labour’s resounding victory last July, we know there is democratic consensus across the nation on our economic vision, which promotes energy security, regional economic growth and net zero, yet the Crown Estate appeared to be relying on the window dressing of ESG standards to obfuscate its desire to maximise its 12% of profits, at the expense of our nation.

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

The hon. Gentleman is making a powerful argument, and I share his concern for communities such as Milford Haven, in which renewable development will be critical in future. I am sure he will also agree that devolution of the Crown Estate would be a key way to make the best use of supply chains, and to ensure that money stays as local as possible, particularly in Wales.

[Henry Tufnell]

I thank the right hon. Lady for her intervention. I sometimes feel, though, that the ideas of her party are slightly for the birds. The idea of devolution—where is their plan? There is no plan. What are the practicalities?

--- Later in debate ---

[James Murray]

The matter that we are considering today, through the two new clauses that I have mentioned, is the proposal by Opposition parties for devolution to Wales. We are not analysing what may have happened in Scotland, historically; we are looking at the proposals put to us in those new clauses, which I am addressing.

To be clear, the cumulative impact of the changes that the hon. Member for Ynys Môn is suggesting in her new clause would likely be to significantly delay the pathway to net zero.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

The Minister said that the Bill would be beneficial to the people of Wales as it stands. Could he quantify that benefit, please?

[James Murray]

If the right hon. Member waits just a moment, I will come to some of the direct benefits for the people of Wales of retaining the Crown Estate in its current form.

It is important to emphasise that the Crown Estate’s marine investments are made on a portfolio-wide basis across England and Wales. Devolving to Wales would disrupt existing investments, as they would need to be restructured to accommodate a Welsh-specific entity. To devolve the Crown Estate at this time would risk jeopardising the pipeline of offshore wind development in the Celtic sea, which is planned for into the 2030s. The Crown Estate’s offshore wind leasing round 5 is spread across the English and Welsh administrative boundaries in the Celtic sea. It was launched in February last year and is expected to contribute 4.5 GW of total energy capacity—enough to power 4 million homes.

In addition to energy, the extensive jobs and supply chain requirements of round 5 will also likely deliver significant benefits for Wales and the wider United Kingdom. Lumen, an advisory firm to the Crown Estate, has estimated that manufacturing, transporting and assembling the wind farms could potentially create around 5,300 jobs and a £1.4 billion boost for the UK economy. Devolution would also delay UK-wide grid connectivity reform. The Crown Estate is using its data and expertise as manager of the seabed to feed into the National Energy System Operator’s new strategic spatial energy plan. On Wales, the Crown Estate is working in partnership with the energy system operator to ensure that its pipeline of Welsh projects—the biggest of which is the round 5 offshore wind opportunity in the Celtic sea—can benefit from this co-ordinated approach to grid connectivity up front.

[James Murray]

GB Energy is for the benefit of the whole of the UK. It is absolutely right to locate its headquarters in Aberdeen, given the strong connection between Aberdeen and use of the assets of the North sea to generate power for the entire United Kingdom. In fact, the hon. Gentleman’s example underlines my point, which is that when different parts of the United Kingdom work together, we can achieve more than we can separately. I thank him for endorsing my point.

It would not make commercial sense to introduce a new entity, with control of assets only within Wales, into a complex operating environment in which partnerships have already been formed. Furthermore, the Crown Estate’s assets and interests in Wales are fundamentally smaller than its assets in England, and would likely not be commercially viable if their costs were unsupported by the wider Crown Estate portfolio. The Crown Estate can take a longer-term approach to its investments and spread the cost of investments across its entire portfolio. A self-contained, single entity in Wales would not have the same ability; neither would it benefit from the expertise that the Crown Estate has developed over decades of delivering offshore wind at scale. A devolved entity would be starting from scratch.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

The Minister has just told the House that Wales is too small and poor to benefit from the devolution of the Crown Estate. That is an extraordinary argument, and I am sure that the Welsh Government will share my amazement. Has he discussed that with his partners in Welsh Labour?

[James Murray]

I think the right hon. Member has misunderstood the point I was making. If we were to have a devolved entity, it would be starting from scratch midway through a multimillion-pound commercial tendering process, just at a time when the Crown Estate is undertaking critical investment in the UK’s path towards net zero—something I am sure she is keen to support.

The commercial viability of all three 1.5 GW floating offshore wind project development areas in the Celtic sea, which straddle the English and Welsh administrative boundaries, benefited from the Crown Estate’s significant investment of time, expertise and capital, which enabled their entry into the market. UK floating offshore wind, an emerging offshore technology that the Crown Estate is supporting, would be particularly vulnerable to market disruption.

It is important to underline that income generated by the whole Crown Estate benefits the people of Wales. As I have noted, the Crown Estate pays its entire net profits into the UK Consolidated Fund each year. That means that much of the revenue already supports public services in Wales, either by supporting UK Government spending in reserved areas or through the funding provided under the Barnett formula and the Welsh Government’s block grant funding.

Oral Answers to Questions

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

The Government recognise that ports are an important route to growth, which is why the national wealth fund will deploy at least £5.8 billion into five priority manifesto sectors, including ports. I would be happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss that specific constituency issue in due course.

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

WealthTek was placed into administration by the Financial Conduct Authority after losing £80 million of its clients’ money. FCA-appointed administrators are now deducting fees from victims’ compensation. My constituents Dominic Knights and his wife have between them lost thousands of pounds. What is the Treasury doing to safeguard the £85,000 compensation limit?

[The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Tulip Siddiq)]

The FCA is held to account by the Government and Parliament, but Treasury Ministers cannot comment on individual cases, and the Treasury has no stake in the operational issues of the FCA. I am very happy to meet with the right hon. Lady and the FCA to discuss that matter, but let me be clear: the FCA is an independent regulator.