Banking Hubs: Rural and Post-Industrial Communities

Torcuil Crichton Excerpts

Tuesday 24th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Ann Davies]

Absolutely. Unfortunately, as of December last year, those post office vans no longer accept cheques. Some people of a certain generation still use cheques, but those cannot now be paid in by using a post office van, as we have in our village. Someone must physically go to a bank to pay in a cheque, which makes it very difficult for the elderly, especially given that in my area we do not have public transport either.

Removing local banking services risks deepening financial exclusion and placing additional strain on already vulnerable adults. Despite cash and in-person banking still being integral to many communities across the UK, they are becoming harder and harder to access. That is demonstrated by the number of bank closures across Wales. As the Welsh Affairs Committee has noted, the number of bank and building society branches fell from 695 in 2012 to 435 in 2022.

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

rose—

[Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)]

rose—

--- Later in debate ---

[Ann Davies]

Absolutely. The data is there for all.

The closures disproportionately impact less populated areas, as the distance to travel to bank branches is greater. For instance, data from 2008 to 2018 show that the greatest increases in travel distance to the nearest bank branch were in Montgomeryshire, Clwyd South, Arfon, Dwyfor Meirionnydd, and Brecon and Radnorshire. Those rural and less populated areas also tend to have older populations and less reliable internet, and experience the unique nature of rural poverty.

[Torcuil Crichton]

Will the hon. Lady give way?

[Ann Davies]

I am so sorry, but I am going to finish.

Restricting access to cash also affects many of those living in rural and post-industrial areas. As the Financial Conduct Authority has noted, digitally excluded older people, people in poor health, those with lower financial resilience and those with lower financial capability depend more on cash. We have seen that play out in my constituency, where we have recently experienced the closure of the last bank in the town of Ammanford—a Lloyds Bank on Quay Street. The closure will leave Ammanford—a town with an area population of 23,709—without a full-service bank branch. It will impact not only the town itself but the surrounding communities of Brynamman, Glanamman, Tycroes, Llandybie, Betws and the wider Amman valley.

The decision demonstrates a worrying lack of understanding of the needs of rural and post-industrial communities. For many, online banking is not an option. For example, broadband coverage in Carmarthen is significantly below national standards. Gigabit in Carmarthenshire is 41% compared with 78% in the UK. Superfast broadband is 85% compared with 96% in the UK. Those figures demonstrate that large parts of the county, including Ammanford and its surrounding villages, lack access to the high-speed internet that is required for secure and consistent digital banking. In practice, that means that online banking is unreliable or inaccessible for many households. Mobile banking apps do not function properly, especially in areas with poor signal and slow connections.

Digital alternatives cannot replace in-person services, especially for vulnerable groups such as older adults, those with disabilities and people managing complex financial needs. A significant proportion of residents are elderly, vulnerable or without access to transport, and the prospect of travelling long distances to the nearest branch is unrealistic and unjust.

I have had many constituents contact me to express their deep concern about the closure of the Lloyds branch. One constituent told me:

“We really desperately need this facility now. I don’t think any consideration has been given to the disabled, elderly, or even younger people who cannot travel to other towns. Although I understand the Post Office will absorb some customers, it does not provide all banking needs.”

He continued:

“I understand why the banks have to close some branches, but Lloyds’ support in the past has been invaluable to this area. With a brain-injured partner, it is nearly impossible to travel to Gorseinon. This would be a major trip causing unnecessary distress and anxiety for him; disabled parking in Gorseinon doesn’t meet his needs either.”

Cash has a social value, too. Another constituent said:

“I’m old school and still like to have cash—giving my grandchild pocket money, giving tips if I go out, taxis—the list could go on.”

It is clear that cash does not just facilitate economic exchange; it creates bonds and ties within communities, an aspect that is important to smaller and rural areas.

Where do we go from here? The Federation of Small Businesses Wales has said:

“While it is unrealistic to expect a return to high street banks on every street, it is important that new models are further developed—such as banking hubs—to ensure that these services are available locally.”

Banking hubs are a key alternative to communities that have lost access to bank and building society branches. They offer easy access to face-to-face cash and banking in the communities that have lost their bank branches.

I welcome that the Government have pledged to establish at least 350 banking hubs across the UK. In Wales, there are 12 shared banking hubs, with more in the process of being set up in Gorseinon and Caergybi—Holyhead. However, I note that none are in my constituency of Caerfyrddin—not one.

The Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 gave the Financial Conduct Authority responsibility for maintaining cash deposit and withdrawal access, although not wider banking services. The FCA’s rules came into force in September 2024. Those rules require banks not to close their services in communities until they have carried out an assessment showing that the closure would not impact withdrawal and deposit services in that area. Those assessments are conducted by Link.

While such a safeguard is welcome, the process itself seems to overlook rural and post-industrial areas. It does not allow for discretion to be applied to consider the needs of those communities. For instance, in the case of Ammanford, Link assessed that there was no need for additional services like a banking hub, given that Ammanford did not meet the population threshold of 10,000 people living near the high street. It said that Ammanford had 7,444 adults living nearby, which is still a significant number, but 23,709 people live in that surround. As we know, in post-industrial areas, the town merges into the villages—or the villages merge into the town.

Residents have made it clear that they are finding it incredibly challenging losing their only banking facility. A petition is being circulated in response to the decision, and it has already gathered hundreds of signatures—I urge all in the Chamber to share my online petition. I urge Link to engage with local stakeholders, including businesses, councillors and residents, to ensure that the assessment reflects actual community needs, including by establishing a banking hub in the town of Ammanford.

Can the Minister set out how the Government can accelerate the establishment of banking hubs in rural and post-industrial communities as part of their plans? What recent assessments have been made of the adequacy of the cash access review process to account for the unique needs of those communities? Banking hubs are a lifeline for communities that are already under strain. We need prudent policymaking in this area from the Government, so that constituents like mine are not overlooked for such important services. Diolch yn fawr, Cadeirydd.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con)]

rose—

[Torcuil Crichton]

rose—

[Lucy Rigby]

I will give way first to the right hon. Gentleman, and then to my hon. Friend.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Rigby]

As ever, the right hon. Gentleman gives me good advice and, as ever, I shall pay close attention to what he says. He rightly refers to different aspects of vulnerability and I will come on to some of those slightly later in my remarks. What is clear from the interventions that we have just had is, again, how passionately Members from right across the House feel about these issues, which is why the Government have been clear that it is critical that people have access to the services they need.

[Torcuil Crichton]

I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Caerfyrddin (Ann Davies) for securing this important debate. To echo the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for North West Leicestershire (Amanda Hack), I have come to Westminster Hall today following discussions with Lloyds Bank, which has decided to close the Benbecula branch of the Bank of Scotland in my constituency; there have now been two bank closures in my constituency in a few short years. That closure decision appears to be as irreversible as it is regrettable, but the danger now is that we will have no banking hub, because the banking population of Uist is too small to fit within the parameters of one. Will the Minister ensure that the banks, Link and associated authorities expand and adjust their parameters, so that sparsely populated areas and island populations continue to have access to banking services?

[Lucy Rigby]

I will come to—

Rural Fuel Duty Relief

Torcuil Crichton Excerpts

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss—apologies for not informing you of my intention to speak. I congratulate the hon. Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) on securing this important debate on an issue that affects lots of rural seats, including my own in Na h-Eileanan an Iar.

The 5p a litre discount—“Danny’s discount”, as we called it on its introduction in 2012 when he was Chief Secretary to the Treasury, shamelessly promoting his own constituency and other rural areas—was widely welcomed in the Scottish islands, and it has been adjudged a success, although forgotten by many. If I had been a Lib Dem, I would have taken out posters at every rural fuel station affected to tell people that they were getting 5p off every litre.

Since then, duty seems to have been mostly frozen in Budgets, which means that the rural fuel duty discount has been frozen as well. As the hon. Member for North Devon correctly pointed out, had it gone up by inflation the discount would have gone up as well. I had the Library do some research, and it estimated that in 2021 the scheme cost the Treasury only £5 million. Had it been increased by the consumer prices index, it would have gone up by 2p—£2 million—to 7p a litre. It was extended by the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition in 2015 and now affects 12 seats. The hon. Member estimates 11, but I estimate 12: four Labour, five Lib Dem, two SNP and one Conservative. The Conservative one is the seat of the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak).

There should be wide cross-party support for a review of the rural fuel duty discount, as my colleagues in Scotland have attested. I checked today, and the cheapest fuel I could get in Stornoway, the main town in my constituency, came in at £1.34 per litre. In Glasgow it is £1.28. Far from being a rural fuel discount, there seems to be an urban fuel discount in Scotland, and I am sure that is true of other parts of the UK. So I join colleagues from across the House in calling for a review of the scheme, and perhaps some gifts in forthcoming Budgets, or a signal from the Minister that such a review will be carried out.

Oral Answers to Questions

Torcuil Crichton Excerpts

Tuesday 9th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Rachel Reeves]

The Office for Budget Responsibility has produced an independent analysis and confirmed that it believes that 4% is the correct number, and the OBR continues to maintain that in its forecasts.

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

Has the Treasury made any assessment of the SNP’s plans to separate Scotland from its main market, the rest of the UK, which accounts for 60% of its trade? While I am at it, may I thank the Chancellor for the £820 million extra for the Scottish budget?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The good news for the Chancellor is that she has no responsibility for the SNP. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

Community Helipads: Rural Access

Torcuil Crichton Excerpts

Wednesday 15th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mr MacDonald]

The hon. Gentleman makes a very valid point. Safety is at the bottom of it all, but I will be talking about over-safety in one particular instance.

I am always pleased to recognise the dedication of the helicopter crews, but there is one specific case I want to talk about, in Portree on the Isle of Skye. The Portree and Braes Community Trust manage the helipad, not NHS Highland or anybody else. The helipad is a community venture; the trust raised the money and built it. It was set up 30 years ago and has been refurbished in conjunction with the coastguard, NHS Highland and other bodies, so it is very much an approved helipad. The ambulance can drive right up beside it; there are lights that can be turned on from the helicopter; it has windsocks; it is fenced off; it has special paint demarking the H—it has every facility one could want from a helipad.

Despite that, members of the community trust tell me that the helicopter is not allowed to land on that H. It has to land on the boggy, wet hillside beside it. It is not allowed to use that helipad. That sounds quite extraordinary; I am sure everybody here is wondering why, so let me inform them. The aviation regulations have been updated, meaning that the helipad is no longer functioning for search and rescue. It is being used by air ambulance and other helicopters, but not by the Bristow search and rescue helicopters. Understandably, that is causing a lot of confusion and irritation for mountain rescue, the community trust and the wider Portree community.

What is behind this? In March 2022, a lady attending an appointment at Derriford hospital in Devon was knocked over by a downwash from a helicopter and died tragically from a head injury shortly thereafter. Following that tragic incident, safety guidance was tightened—but in practice the new approach has gone too far, and has created a fear of litigation rather than a focus on safety.

In April 2024, the Civil Aviation Authority published the third edition of its guidelines, “CAP1264: Standards for helicopter landing areas at hospitals”, which some Members may have read. In August 2024, following the CAA’s publication, Bristow helicopters undertook a thorough review of all helicopter landing sites and helipads that may be used for hospital purposes, to assess their compliance. The review highlighted that the majority of those sites were not compliant with the new guidance, and so Bristow withdrew from operating on the non-compliant helipads. Out of fear of litigation after the Derriford tragedy, Bristow insists that it needs legal authority to operate from sites that are not CAP1264 compliant. The problem is not the quality of Portree helipad; it is the red tape around liability and the ownership of risk.

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Member for raising this issue. His situation is not unique; we have a similar one in the Western Isles, at the Stornoway hospital. The Scottish air ambulance helicopter is perfectly free to land at the hospital helipad, but the health board has had to set up an alternative site for the search and rescue helicopter, some distance from the hospital. It should not be beyond the wit of Government or legality to close that gap, by giving a derogation and some assurance to the search and rescue operators—currently Bristow—that they will be able to land at designated helipads for hospitals, not just in Portree and Stornoway, but across Scotland, where I understand that this problem affects some 23 sites. It would be good if the Minister could find a way of bringing two helipads into one space.

[Mr MacDonald]

The hon. Gentleman has hit the nail on the head, as usual. I have met all the interested parties, apart from the Health and Safety Executive, which we will come back to. The CAA has made it clear that the new guidance does not prevent Bristow helicopters from landing in Portree. Its guidance is non-mandatory. In any case, helicopter operators can land anywhere if they carry out what is known as a dynamic risk assessment, a real-time safety judgment that allows them to land wherever conditions permit and it is deemed necessary to do so.

One would think that clarification was a cover-all, but the Health and Safety Executive’s rules have led to an overly heavy-handed approach. It now treats every landing site as a shared workplace—those are the key words. It is piling on paperwork and bureaucracy. By contrast, a boggy hillside or the King George V play area in Portree are not shared workplaces, so Bristow can land at such sites. That is ridiculous; Bristow is not allowed to use a helipad, but it is allowed to land in a play area, which it does occasionally.

I ask the Minister to consider whether there is a problem of health and safety over-regulation. The coastguard, Bristow Helicopters, the CAA and the Department of Transport all have a responsibility to make sure that whatever actions they take in the name of health and safety do not hinder helipad sites. I know that the CAA does not wish for its guidance to close helipads; that is why it did not make its guidance mandatory. That was also the sentiment of the family of the Derriford victim, who agreed that they did not want the CAA’s guidance to negatively impact helicopters’ being able to land and pick up people.

I have a brief anecdote, which is true—a real incident in Portree recently. A woman was suffering from a suspected heart attack. An ambulance was called and took her to the bit of land adjacent to the helipad. The ambulance crew could not get a wheelchair or stretcher to take her to the helicopter. Instead, despite thinking that she was having a heart attack, she had to walk across the boggy ground to get to the helicopter. She could have taken the ambulance right to the helipad, but that was not available, so she had to walk across a very rough bit of ground—I have done that walk myself. One could not make it up.

Energy Profits Levy: North-east Scotland

Torcuil Crichton Excerpts

Tuesday 14th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Harriet Cross]

The Chancellor also extended the levy until March 2030. Just to ensure that the industry was hit from all angles, she abolished the investment allowance, removing the very mechanism that keeps companies investing.

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

I pay tribute to the hon. Lady for securing the debate. I share her passion for her constituents and their work in the North sea, because my constituents, over three generations, have done the same work, and I want to see people working in the North sea for another three generations. Does she accept that some 77,000 jobs in the North sea went on the watch of the last Government, and that the move from fossil fuels to renewables is inevitable and must be managed by things like passporting people into jobs?

We must be honest about the fact that offshore jobs are dangerous. I pay tribute to the people who have gone out there for the past 50 years to earn our energy security. The danger that they put themselves in is simply not the same in the renewables sector. Does she accept that we must balance the move from gas and oil in the North sea to renewables in the wild Atlantic, probably, with a managed transition that looks after our communities? However, that does not make it an either/or question of having either carbon from oil and gas in the North sea or onshore and offshore renewables. We can and will do both, and this Government should be committed to both for another 40 years.

[Harriet Cross]

I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman. At no point have I ever said that we should be persisting with oil and gas at the expense of renewables. We 100% need both, but both means both sides: we do not need to tax the oil and gas industry out of existence in the North sea in order to scale up renewables, because that will do the exact opposite, as he knows. I appreciate his point that jobs have been lost in the past—I know that because I live in the north-east of Scotland—but what happened to oil and gas prices during that time? Were they at a peak or in a trough? They were in a trough but they are now not, yet we are still seeing jobs cut and production decreasing faster than it needs to because of decisions made by this Government.