Commons Chamber

Tuesday 16th December 2025

(began 1 month, 2 weeks ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:34
11:34
11:35
None Portrait Oral questions: Justice
-

John Milne.
11:35
None Portrait Q1. What steps his Department is taking to ensure adequate provision of legal aid. (906926)
-

11:35
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
None Portrait Q2. What steps he is taking with the Secretary of State for the Home Department to deport foreign national offenders. (906927)
-

>> Steve Yemm. Question number two, please, Mr. Speaker. >> Yes.
11:38
11:38
11:39
11:39
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:40
11:41
None Portrait Q4. What steps his Department is taking to help protect victims of online misogyny through the criminal justice system. (906929)
-

Irene Campbell question four please, Mr. Speaker.
11:41
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:43
None Portrait Q5. Whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of the further use of mandatory mediation in civil law. (906930)
-

So Julian Smith.
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:46
None Portrait Q7. What steps he has taken to improve the security of prisons. (906932)
-

Under Rotherham. Question seven Mr. speaker, Mid Ulster.
11:46
11:47
11:47
11:48
None Portrait Q8. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of the proposed ending of jury trials for certain offences on the right to a fair trial. (906933)
-

Speaker, here.
11:48
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:54
11:55
11:55
11:56
11:57
11:57
None Portrait Q9. What steps his Department is taking to tackle the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation. (906934)
-

Sir John Whittingdale number nine, sir. Minister.
11:58
11:58
11:58
11:59
None Portrait Q10. What steps his Department is taking to provide adequate funding for victim support services. (906935)
-

Tim Roca number ten, Mr. Speaker.
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:01
None Portrait Q11. What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the implementation of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction in cases involving domestic abuse. (906936)
-

Lisa Smart.
12:01
12:01
12:02
12:02
None Portrait Q12. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of short placements in open prisons on the effectiveness of rehabilitation programmes. (906937)
-

Sir.
12:03
12:03
12:04
12:04
None Portrait Q13. What steps his Department is taking to improve safety in prisons. (906938)
-

Michelle Welsh.
12:05
12:05
12:06
12:06
12:07
12:07
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:09
12:09
None Portrait Q15. What steps he is taking to tackle backlogs in the courts. (906940)
-

>> What was good for the Minister might be good for Chorley as well. Abrahams. >> Question 15.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr. Speaker. Minister. With permission, Mr. Speaker, I
12:09
12:10
12:11
12:11
12:12
12:13
12:13
12:14
12:14
12:15
12:15
12:16
12:17
12:17
12:18
12:18
12:19
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:22
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:31
12:31
12:32
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:35
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:36
12:37
12:37
12:37
12:38
12:38
12:39
12:39
12:39
12:40
12:40
12:40
12:41
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
Minister. On the.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

May, the Diego Garcia Treaty was signed and laid before the House. As the Defence Secretary told this House on the day of signature, the House on the day of signature, the treaty secures the strategically important UK US military base on important UK US military base on the island of Diego Garcia. The Diego Garcia military base is essential to the security of the UK essential to the security of the UK and our key allies, and essential to keeping British people safe. Under the terms of the treaty, the UK will capitalise a £40 million trust fund for the benefit of Chagossians, which will be established by Mauritius on the 12th of December.

The Mauritian government approved introduction of primary legislation to establish the Trust Fund. The Mauritian Bill confirms the principle that the trust fund will be operated for Chagossians by Chagossians. Decisions on the use of funds will be taken by a trust Fund Management board. The board will comprise 12 members, seven of whom will be Chagossians, ensuring a majority representation. The chair of the trust Fund will be a Chagossian selected by the Chagossian members and following extensive representations and engagement by this government, the Mauritian Bill also now confirms that a UK based Chagossian representative will sit on the board alongside representatives living in Mauritius and the Seychelles.

The UK High Commissioner to Mauritius will also attend board meetings. We welcome these commitments by Mauritius, which will ensure the trust fund reflects the full spectrum of perspectives within the community. The treaty enables Mauritius to develop a program of resettlement on islands other than Diego Garcia. This agreement is the only viable path to resettlement on the archipelago. The UK government has been in talks with Mauritius to ensure that this programme is open to all Chagossians, irrespective of their country of residence, the Mauritian government confirmed on 12th December that eligibility to resettle will apply to Chagossians born on the archipelago before the 31st of December 1973, and children of parents, either of whom were born on the archipelago before that date.

As of April 2025, 94% of which were British nationality also had Mauritian citizenship. However, any UK based Chagossian who does not hold Mauritian citizenship and meets these criteria will be eligible for it and therefore able to participate in any future programme of resettlement. All Chagossians will remain eligible for British citizenship. Under the current citizenship pathway, Chagossians will be able to hold both British and Mauritian citizenship. Mauritius has also confirmed that civil status documents issued by the Government of Mauritius will continue to record the place of birth as the Chagos Archipelago for all those born there where for any reason this has not been the case, the Government of Mauritius will review and amend the documents as necessary.

This landmark agreement, Mr Speaker, secures the future of the strategically critical UK US military base. As the Defence Secretary told this House there was no alternative but to act. In so doing we have predicted Britain's at home and overseas.
12:45
Priti Patel Portrait Rt Hon Priti Patel MP (Witham, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for granting this urgent question. I think we've just heard from the Minister, basically, that the government's betrayal of the British Chagossian community continues. We've just had more details now on how bad this deal is for the Chagossian community. Labour's surrender of British sovereign territory means that now future decisions on access and resettlement to most of the archipelago, the ancestral home of Chagossians, are now left in the hands. Guess what of a foreign government? So can the Minister confirm if British Chagossians will need to become Mauritian citizens to have any hope of being entitled or eligible for future resettlement and resettlement program? That's a simple yes or no, because it sounds like it is an absolute yes.

This is a country that, until only weeks ago, had an offence on its statute books for. And I quote, Mr. Speaker, for misrepresenting the sovereignty of Mauritius and a country from which hundreds of Chagossians have fled to Britain in recent weeks. And by the way, Mr. Speaker, this is now adding to pressure on local authorities to house this community across the country. So does the Minister recognise the sheer madness of this plan? And, Mr. Speaker, the government has also confirmed that despite Britain giving Mauritius the government of Mauritius £40 million of British taxpayers money for the trust fund, Britain has no proper representation on its board and no control over how these funds are spent.

There will just be one UK based Chagossian representative on the board, chosen not by the British community, but guess what? By the Prime Minister of Mauritius. Can the Minister tell us if he thinks this is acceptable and did the government? I can't say the Minister specifically press for greater Chagossian and British representation on the board. And can he tell us exactly what UK delegations have been doing in Mauritius this year, who they've met and what has been discussed? And on the so-called contact group, why has the government refused to seek the views of the British Chagossian community in this surrender treaty, choosing instead, Mr.

Speaker, to outsource this vital function to a House of Lords select committee whose survey has been open to manipulation and interference from this for the Mauritian government. We've seen that online, so it's no wonder, Mr. Speaker, that the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has called the government out for its betrayal of the community. It's massively embarrassing, particularly when we've got a government of human rights lawyers. What is the minister's response to this UN committee? Will he suspend the ratification of this appalling treaty, which is what the UN calls for, and importantly, say sorry to hard pressed taxpayers in this country who are forking out £35 billion for this shameful atrocity, Minister.
12:47
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
Mr. speaker, in the spirit of Christmas, I will not respond to allegations of betrayal. I suspect that the benches opposite will will want to chunter throughout the discussion. Perhaps they might remind themselves who started these negotiations and on what basis they they no doubt will wish throughout this session to focus on transfer of sovereignty. Perhaps they might remind themselves what their negotiating position was in government. But let me turn, Mr. Speaker, to the questions that are asked.

I'm pleased to inform the House that we have met with the contact group, both on the second and the 8th of December. My ministerial colleague who leads on these issues, has been very keen to ensure that he hears from the full range of views from Chagossians in the UK. Now, I understand as I know the Minister, the colleagues opposite also know that there is a range of views amongst the Chagossian community. They do not speak with one voice. This government is trying to make sure that we listen to all of those views.

The shadow Foreign Secretary asks about the ratification of the treaty, as she knows it will be going for Third Reading in the House of Lords in the New Year. No doubt this will be discussed further then, as it was discussed in this House. This treaty will be scrutinised properly in the normal way, and all of these points will be surfaced. be surfaced.
12:49
12:50
Al Pinkerton Portrait Dr Al Pinkerton MP (Surrey Heath, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Minister. >> Mr. speaker, I thank my hon. Friend for his question and ensure Minister. >> Not Al Pinkerton Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Democrat spokesperson. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Liberal Democrats. Have been clear and clear from the start. Nothing should be happening to the Chagossian people without the full Democratic input of Chagossians themselves, who in the custom of other overseas territories citizens, we should recognise as a self-governing and self-determining people. Even if the UK has deprived Chagossians of access to their homeland for more than 50 years. Those principles, if they are to mean anything Mr Speaker to our overseas territories family must be both immutable and universal.

Now, in recognising that, I note that I'm now joined by the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which last week reported that the proposed agreement on the future of the Chagos Islands should not be ratified on the grounds that it risks perpetrating longstanding violations of the rights of Chagossian people. I am also concerned about the requirement made, I think, explicit in the Minister's statement yesterday that Chagossian people will only be able to partake in the resettlement programme if and only if they accept Mauritian citizenship, even in the circumstances where individuals and families have no historical connection, cultural or civic, to that state, so can the Minister therefore set out whether any negotiations have taken place that would have enabled Chagossians to exercise their right of return, without being required to ascribe or subscribe to Mauritian citizenship? Or are there any discussions of a Hong Kong style arrangement whereby permanent residency of freedom of movement may have been granted outside of citizenship? And finally, how does the Minister reconcile last week's UN report with his stated desire to conform with our international obligations?
12:51
12:52
12:53
12:53
12:53
12:54
12:54
12:55
12:55
12:55
12:56
12:56
12:57
12:57
12:58
12:58
12:58
12:59
12:59
13:00
None Portrait Urgent question: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, if she will make a statement on the United Kingdom’s new approach to Africa
-

>> Right. That completes the urgent question. We'll now move on to the next urgent question. Adam Jogee Bath Foreign Secretary. If she'll
13:00
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
make a statement on the government's new approach to Africa, Commissioner.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Commissioner. Mr. speaker, Africa matters to the United Kingdom and it matters to this government, our missions to this government, our missions and our plan for change. Africa has the greatest growth potential of any continent, providing expanding opportunities for UK businesses to kick start economic growth, strengthening the foundations of UK growth requires engagement with Africa to secure our borders and address the drivers of illegal migration. Africa is home to 30% of the world's mineral resources, including significant deposits, deposits of the growth minerals identified in the new UK Critical Minerals Strategy.

These are essential to securing our supply chains and enabling the UK's mission to become a clean energy superpower. However, we inherited an approach that reflected the past and not the opportunities of Africa's future. That's why we committed in our manifesto to deliver a new approach for mutual long term benefit. We were also clear that reframing our relationship was not something to cook up here in London, and then package as a shared approach. So we launched a five month listening exercise, hearing from governments and over 600 organisations, from civil society and diaspora communities, from businesses and universities about what they valued and wanted to see from Britain.

There was a clear common message African nations want respectful, long term partnerships that deliver real change for people's lives. Responding to the consultation, the UK's new approach provides a high level framing to guide the government's long term engagement with African partners, reaffirming the shift from paternalism to a partnership of respect and equality. It does so over seven areas of shared interest. First, we are moving from donor to investor. We will go further to unlock investment and trade, helping African and British businesses create quality jobs, economic opportunities and prosperity.

Second, we are working together on the challenges of illegal migration. championing African voices in global decision making, including in the global financial system. And finally, we're supporting innovation and cultural partnerships. This adds up to a new kind of partnership, one that works with African leadership, one that is inclusive and respectful and strong enough to work through difficulties and disagreements. Our high commissions and embassies will be at the forefront of embedding this approach in spirit and content, and we will take it forward into the UK's G20 presidency in 2027.

British Ministers will be out there on the continent championing these principles, strengthening coherence across our partnerships and backing diverse African voices to shape our work.
13:03
Adam Jogee Portrait Adam Jogee MP (Newcastle-under-Lyme, Labour)
-
-
Can I just gently say to Minister, this is a very important statement and absolutely what he statement and absolutely what he said is so important to the House. We don't need a mess. It will be easier if it was brought to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

house rather than hidden away in the library. I'm joking. Very much, Mr. Speaker, and I'm grateful to. You for.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You for. Granting this urgent question. And I declare an interest as chair of the all party Group on Foreign Relations and co-chair on the APPG Relations and co-chair on the APPG on the Commonwealth. The geopolitical challenges we face as a nation are acute and mounting, a nation are acute and mounting, and they have real impacts on people back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme and across our United Kingdom. For too long, our United Kingdom. For too long, our relationship with countries on the African continent has been viewed through the prism of colonial guilt.

It's harmed our ability to engage. It's seen relationships left to suffer, and it has let generations down. We must think about what we can do with nations on the African continent, not to them. The African continent is a big and diverse place and cannot be put in one basket. Each region will have different characteristics and our approach needs to reflect that with respect to understanding and action. The United Kingdom has been found seriously wanting in relation to its former colonies over the last 30 years under successive governments.

This must be a turning point based on respect, on friendship, on equality and our shared histories, bond systems and experiences. I'd like to ask the Minister the following. How will the approach protect the United Kingdom against the geopolitical threats we face from Russia, China and other hostile states and their corrosive impact on nations across the African continent? Many African nations are members of the Commonwealth, are hugely important post-war creation, but totally underutilised. So how will the approach ensure that the Commonwealth gets meaningful support and is properly fit for purpose? I am concerned that one word that wasn't mentioned in the statement was the word Commonwealth.

How much money will be put behind this new approach? What steps will be taken to ensure that new, meaningful trade deals are established between African nations and the United Kingdom? Because fair, balanced and decent trade has a hugely important role to play in this relationship and must be taken seriously, what will be expected of our heads of missions at high commissions and embassies across Africa to advance this approach? And what will our new approach mean for British engagement with the African Union? The bonds, Mr Speaker of history and people behind our United Kingdom and many independent nations on the African continent together? Common languages, common legal systems, common but difficult histories, and a common purpose.

This new approach has the potential to help grow our economy here at home, to neutralise the influence of hostile states, and to move forward together. And if it does that, it will have my full support.
13:06
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
Minister. the question and his dedication and diligence to these issues. I want to reassure him about the importance that this government places in the Commonwealth. It is a vital partnership both in Africa and across the world. It is the C in FCDO and it is very close to our minds and central to our strategy, both in relation to Africa and elsewhere. He asks important points about the role of Russia and China in Africa as he knows well, particularly China has been a long standing presence in many African countries, an important source of trade and finance.

But in my experience, African countries are not naive about Chinese motivations or the potential risks associated with elements of their offer. The Africa strategy that we have announced yesterday is in part a response to that desire from so many African countries for a longer, enduring and sustainable partnership with the UK, both to respond to the interests of others, whether it's China or Russia, but also to build on those historic ties to which he so eloquently referred. I want to pause briefly, Mr.

Speaker, to talk about Russia's role in Africa. They are exploiting conflicts, instability and natural resources right across Africa, in the Sahel, and indeed in North Africa. We are already supporting African partners through strategic security and defence relationships with countries such as Kenya, Nigeria and Ghana, coordinating closely with like minded states and international organisations. The role of Africa Corps in Africa is malign.
13:08
Priti Patel Portrait Rt Hon Priti Patel MP (Witham, Conservative)
-
-
Shadow Secretary of State Dame Priti Patel. for securing important UQ and if I may say to the Minister, I don't think it's acceptable, regurgitate the written ministerial statement from yesterday. There are some fundamental issues about what should be the government's strategy. First and foremost. Foremost, it was wrong to simply say that the approach that the government inherited was wrong. I should know that having recapitalised CDC and the fact that BII now have a huge amount of annual investment and reinvestment every single year on the economic development in Africa.

But fundamentally, whether it's from Gavi, the Global Fund or the Sustainable Development Goals, these are found in principles that are now being advanced across Africa. And the government really should do much more to stand up and defend them. But Mr. Speaker, with reference to the written ministerial statement yesterday, there was no reference to China Belt and Road debt traps or Russia's nefarious activities or the Wagner Group in Africa. And yet, before our eyes, we see the axis of authoritarian states pillaging African countries for its natural resources.

Where is the substance or a plan of action of influence to counter this growing influence of that axis? There is also scant regard for the government in the government's plan for the Commonwealth, as we've already heard, and its role in upholding democracy, capacity building and freedoms. Why is that the case? And is the government working with the new secretary general on her economic vision, which would clearly benefit the UK and Africa? We do not know how the government intends to support the African Union or rise to the challenges and the continent, and sadly, we're seeing so much conflict right now.

So can the Minister explain what is the UK going to do to leverage our expertise to conflict resolution, to good effort? And finally, on illegal migration? Mr. speaker, can I remind the Minister and the government, which intentionally tore up the engagement with a key Commonwealth partner called Rwanda, that was a country that sought to give leadership on illegal migration to stop young men from leaving the continent at great risk because they wanted to create an economic development partnership with the UK.

That surely speaks to some of the serious challenges that this government now needs to pick up and confront.
13:10
13:11
13:11
Al Pinkerton Portrait Dr Al Pinkerton MP (Surrey Heath, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Minister. >> My friend is a powerful advocate. I know that the Minister for Africa has been considering these issues, and I'll ensure that she gets a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and I'll ensure that she gets a meeting to discuss them further. Doctor Al Pinkerton, Liberal Democrat spokesperson. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government are absolutely right to government are absolutely right to say that the United Kingdom needs a new relationship with Africa, and many in this House hope that that partnership would be sustainable, strategic and built on mutual trust. Africa, after all, has one of the youngest populations in the world. It's got incredible economic potential. And yet this government is cutting aid to Africa by 12% this year alone, with further reductions likely in years to come.

Now, the Liberal Democrats criticised over the last decade the constant churn in government Ministers from the Conservative Party. And we are very disappointed that the Africa Minister has recently again been changed. And that has come as hard news in continental Africa, where the Minister was appreciated and the hard work that had been undertaken was bearing fruit. So warm words are not enough on the overall trajectory that we see from the UK as of arguably diminishing partnership and diminishing influence, cutting overseas development aid from 0.7 to 0.3%, for example, the lowest this country has ever seen.

And at a time when debt costs are rising in continental Africa, and it's important to invest in in the work of the FCDO because trade commissioners, for example, provide the in-country expertise that is needed to develop those new economic relations that the Minister talks about on migration, upstream investment in poverty reduction and conflict prevention is more important than ever, as is support for organisations like the British Council. So Africa is an essential strategic partner in an increasingly contested world.

So can I ask the Minister directly, how can the government seriously claim its strengthening partnerships and influencing and seeking to influence Africa while cutting aid and hollowing out the very tools that make engagement sustainable?
13:13
13:15
13:15
13:15
13:16
13:17
13:18
13:18
13:19
13:20
13:21
13:21
13:22
13:22
13:23
13:23
13:24
13:24
13:24
13:25
13:26
13:26
13:27
13:28
13:28
13:29
Steve Reed Portrait Rt Hon Steve Reed MP, The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Streatham and Croydon North, Labour )
-
-
Right? Well, let the front

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Right? Well, let the front benches change over. Statement

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Secretary of State Steve Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for granting the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

statement. Mr. speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

When we each enter this chamber, we carry on one shoulder the duty to represent our constituents and to represent our constituents and on the other, the responsibility to on the other, the responsibility to protect this democracy. The case of the former MEP, Nathan Gill, has revealed the threat our democracy faces today, and I know it has caused deep concern right across the House. On Friday, the 21st of November 2025, Mr. Gill was sentenced to ten and a half years in prison for accepting bribes linked to the Russian state and attempting to advance that state's twisted interests.

This is the longest sentence handed down to a politician in a case like this. In our nation's recent history. While we must commend the work of the police and the Crown Prosecution Service in successfully prosecuting this case, it is right that we now take a step back to look at how we can protect our democracy against such appalling crimes. And, Mr. Speaker, let me be clear about what this crime was. An elected politician took bribes to parrot the lies of a hostile state responsible for the death of Dawn Sturgess, a British citizen on British soil.

He took the side of those responsible for invading a sovereign European state, and he was prosecuted, while Putin's military targeted the civilian men, women and children of Ukraine. At the time, he sat as a member of the European Parliament, supposedly representing the British people, and went on to become a senior leader of a UK political party. Mr. speaker, we must learn the lessons so this can never happen again. Following discussions with ministerial colleagues, I have today ordered an independent review into foreign interference in UK politics.

This will be led by the former permanent secretary, Philip Rycroft, reporting both to me as Secretary of State responsible for elections and to the Minister of State for security, as the chair of the Defending Democracy Taskforce. The facts are clear a British politician took bribes to further the interests of the Russian regime, a regime which forcefully deported vulnerable Ukrainian children and killed a British citizen on British soil using a deadly nerve agent. This conduct is a stain on our democracy.

The independent review will work to remove that stain. The purpose of this review is to provide an in-depth assessment of the current financial rules and safeguards, and make recommendations. I will deposit a full copy of the Terms of Reference in the House of Commons Library. I have asked Philip Rycroft to report back by the end of March, when I will return to this House, to set out his findings and the government's response. It is right that the review is independent of government and independent of any political party.

It is also important, I make clear to the House that investigating crimes and examining broader allegations of wrongdoing remains the responsibility of the Electoral Commission and the police, not this review. Individual members should continue to refer to the current National Protective Security Authority guidance and speak to the parliamentary security authorities if they have any specific concerns. The findings of the independent review will build on both the government's election strategy and counter political interference and espionage action plan, and inform the Elections and Democracy Bill that we will bring forward next year.

We published our strategy for modern and secure elections earlier this year. This will close loopholes that should have been closed long before we entered office. It will strengthen existing rules on donations, which mean only legitimate donors can support legitimate campaigns. And it will clamp down on the free reign shell companies and unincorporated associations currently have to make donations without first undergoing proper checks. However, Mr. Speaker, in the time since that strategy was published, events have shown that we need to consider whether our firewall is enough.

The independent review will look at this, focusing in particular on the effectiveness of our broader political finance laws on current checks and balances within political regulation for identifying and mitigating foreign interference on safeguards against illicit funding streams, including cryptocurrencies, and on the rules governing the Constitution and regulation of parties and the Electoral Commission's enforcement power. It is right that the review looks at these critical issues in depth, and I stand ready to do whatever is necessary to protect British democracy from foreign and hostile interference.

Mr. speaker, I mentioned earlier the weight of responsibility we should each feel in this House those who seek to disrupt or attack the foundations of our democracy will never prevail. Britain will always be a democracy, because the people of this country will never have it any other way. And because the choices of the British people will always be the guiding star for our nation. I want to thank all hon. Members who have come to the chamber today. I am highlighting the threat of foreign interference because the first responsibility of His Majesty's Government is to keep our people safe, our ability to protect this nation and its values is always stronger when this Parliament presents a united front.

So I hope members right across the chamber will offer their support for the independent review. And, Mr. Speaker, I commend this statement to the House.
13:37
Paul Holmes Portrait Paul Holmes MP (Hamble Valley, Conservative)
-
-
Shadow Minister Paul Holmes. of State in advance for advance sight of his statement. And let me begin by saying that protecting the integrity of our democratic system from foreign interference is not a partisan issue. It goes to the heart of public trust in our elections. Interference in our elections from foreign actors is something that we must all be vigilant against. And I concur fully with what the Secretary of State has said about Nathan Gill, and join him in his sincere thanks to the CPS and the police.

Any crime such as this deserves full condemnation from all members of this House. Mr. speaker, the government announced its election strategy back in July, a strategy which affects all of us in this House. However, there was no consultation of political parties before the strategy was released. There has also been no formal consultation since it was announced. December marks the first time that the government has engaged with the parliamentary parties panel. We do, however, welcome the announced independent review led by Philip Rycroft, and wish him well in his work going forward.

Will the Minister commit to all parties being consulted on the new independent review during its work? And does the Minister accept the long standing convention that governments should not unilaterally impose changes to the law affecting political parties as parties without proper consultation and cross-party engagement on electoral resilience? Last week, the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission noted that the Commission was not consulted at all on the cancellation of the 2026 mayoral elections. So will he update us on whether council elections are going ahead or not, or will he cancel more at the last minute, and will he give electoral officials plenty of notice, whatever he chooses to do? Now, delving into the government's statement, the government has signalled its intention to introduce Know-your-customer style checks on political donations.

Yet political parties are not banks or the taxman. During the passage of the national Security bill, the last government committed to look at greater information sharing powers between relevant agencies and with political parties precisely to identify irregular sources. Does the Secretary of State agree that such information sharing would help political parties meet these new duties? I welcome the Secretary of State's announcement on cryptocurrencies, and the clarity that this will bring in scope of the independent review. The Secretary of State is absolutely right to mention Russia.

The last government legislated for a foreign influence registration scheme to stop covert foreign influence. Can the Minister explain why the government has repeatedly refused to extend this scheme to China? What reasons are there for leaving such a gap in our national security framework? And will China be included within the scope of the independent review? Unfortunately, this decision sits uneasily alongside the government ramming through the planning application for the Chinese embassy. How is this meant to convince members of this House that the government is taking foreign interference seriously from all malign powers across the globe? Mr.

Madam Deputy Speaker, there are clear loopholes that this government needs to address. Currently, there are loopholes created by the Scottish and Welsh governments that allow Chinese residents in Scotland and Wales to make donations to UK political parties and politicians. Can I ask what steps the government are taking to close these loopholes and ensure that safeguarding is consistent throughout the whole of the United Kingdom? Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, protecting our democracy requires transparent, cross-party discussion, centralised power that bends its knees to the Chinese does not have the United Kingdom's national interests as a priority.

The Secretary of State has an opportunity now to set the record straight and reassure the House of this government's commitment to take foreign interference from every malign influencer seriously. I do hope the concerns I have outlined are directly addressed here today.
13:40
Steve Reed Portrait Rt Hon Steve Reed MP, The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Streatham and Croydon North, Labour )
-
-
Well, first of all, can I warmly welcome his support for this review? I agree with him. This is way above party political politics. This matters to all of us. It's about the integrity and the safety of our democracy, and about making sure that the safeguards we have in place to protect those precious things are sufficiently sufficiently robust regarding the election strategy and the bill that will be brought forward in the new year, then we will, of course, be engaging with parties over aspects of that bill before it is brought forward to the House.

He asked about the elections that are scheduled to go ahead. They will be going ahead. He asks about cryptocurrency that will be in scope for the review, and I expect the independent reviewer to to take a view on that matter. It's been raised on all sides of the House previously, but I'm sure he and other members of his party will want to make their views clear to to the reviewer as he comes to his conclusions. Again, the the review is fully independent, but I would expect China to be fully in scope because of the questions that have been raised about the threats that China poses to national security, well documented.

And regarding the devolved administrations, we will be engaging with them over the applications of the findings of the independent review to to competencies that are within their scope relating to elections.
13:42
Florence Eshalomi Portrait Florence Eshalomi MP (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green, Labour )
-
-
Chair of the Select Committee, Florence Eshalomi. and I thank the Secretary of State for making his statement today. I think for far too often for members right across this House, sometimes we do take elections for granted. The fact that we can go to the ballot box and cast our votes in a free and fair election is something that we have to fight and we have to make sure we protect. So I do welcome the fact that we are looking into this investigation, particularly the angle of strengthening foreign donations.

It cannot be right that political parties can raise millions of pounds in cryptocurrency, and that will go unchecked in terms of looking at where the source of that funding. So I welcome that review into the illicit funding, making sure we can trace the source of that funding coming into our political donations. I also welcome that the appointment of Sir Philip of Philip Rycroft, and I hope to go through the terms of reference, which the Secretary of State outlined will be published later.

In terms of welcoming this announcement, it's important that we do look at the fact that democracy is under attack and we need to make sure that that accountability and independence stays in check. The strategy and policy statement introduced by the previous Conservative government was a step in the wrong direction, giving politicians undue influence over the Electoral Commission. Can I ask the Secretary of State if he will confirm that the strategy and policy statement will be abolished in the upcoming elections Bill? And if the independence of the Electoral commissions will be protected in future? Yes.
13:44
13:44
Zöe Franklin Portrait Zöe Franklin MP (Guildford, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Then Liberal Democrat >> Then Liberal Democrat spokesperson Zoe Franklin. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Firstly, I thank the.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the. Secretary of State for advance notice of the content of his statement. The Liberal Democrats welcome the statement and the decision to establish an independent review. This is a serious issue that clearly demands action and will be following the review very closely. Public trust in politics is at a dangerously low level. Polling consistently shows only 9 to 12% of the public trust politicians, and this is something that every member of this House should be seriously worried about.

Restoring trust must begin with integrity and transparency. People need confidence that the information shaping our political debate is accurate. Trust also relies on fairness. Every vote must count equally, and that requires a fair and credible electoral system. But finally, and most relevantly today, trust depends on transparency and political finance. Voters should know who funds our politics and trust that wealthy individuals, corporations or foreign interests cannot buy, influence or access. With that in mind, will the government accept that a small number of extremely wealthy individuals now will disproportionate influence over British politics? That includes overseas donors, which raises very serious questions around foreign interference.

And at recent Westminster Hall debate, members from across this House spoke out strongly on this matter. And finally, will the Secretary of State now commit to donation caps, something supported by voters across every major party? Thank you.
13:46
13:47
13:47
13:48
13:49
13:49
13:50
13:51
13:52
13:52
13:52
13:52
13:53
13:53
13:54
13:55
13:55
13:56
13:56
13:57
13:57
13:58
13:58
13:59
14:00
14:01
14:01
14:02
14:03
14:03
14:04
14:05
14:05
14:06
14:07
14:07
14:08
14:09
14:09
14:09
14:10
14:11
14:11
14:12
14:12
14:13
14:13
14:14
14:15
14:16
14:16
14:17
14:17
14:18
14:19
14:19
14:20
14:21
14:21
14:21
14:22
14:23
14:23
14:24
14:24
14:25
14:26
14:27
14:27
14:28
14:28
Matthew Pennycook Portrait Matthew Pennycook MP, Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Greenwich and Woolwich, Labour)
-
-
Thank you. planning system. As the House is fully aware, England remains in the grip of an acute and entrenched housing crisis. It is a crisis, first and foremost, that is blighting countless lives, not least those of the more than 170,000 homeless children living in temporary accommodation today. But it is also hampering economic growth and productivity by reducing labour mobility and undermining the capacity of our great towns and cities to realise their full economic potential. In grappling with this crisis, Madam Deputy Speaker, I can assure you that the government has never been under any illusions either about the monumental scale of the task before us or the challenges that must be overcome and the pitfalls avoided if we are to succeed.

But we remain absolutely determined to tackle it head on and make tangible progress toward a future in which all our people will have a decent, safe, secure, and affordable home in which to live. As you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, we've committed ourselves as a government unashamedly to an incredibly stretching housebuilding target of 1.5 million new homes in this Parliament in the face of a housing crisis of such severity. Anything less would have been a dereliction of duty. Progress towards that ambitious 1.5 million new homes target was always going to be slow in the early years of this parliament.

After all, the government inherited a housing market downturn, exacerbated by the conscious and deliberate decisions of Ministers in the previous Conservative government to make a series of anti supply changes to national planning policy, including the abolition of mandatory housing targets. And such is the protracted nature of the development cycle, that the corrosive impact of those changes is still in evidence today. But on taking office, this government acted quickly and boldly to put in place the foundations of a revamped planning system that will facilitate the delivery of high and sustainable rates of house building in the years ahead.

In December last year, we revised the National Planning Policy Framework, reversing the previous government's anti supply changes, implementing a new standard method aligned to our more ambitious national housing target, and releasing more land into the system through a modernised strategic approach to Green belt land. Designation and release. In March, we introduced our landmark Planning and Infrastructure Bill to further streamline and speed up the delivery of new homes and critical infrastructure, and I'm delighted that it will receive Royal assent before the House rises on Thursday.

Over recent months, we've carefully considered the extensive feedback we've received to a range of policy propositions, from a brownfield passport to reforming site size thresholds, and as a result, I am today setting out details of the next phase of this government's planning reforms. That next phase consists of action confronts. First and most significantly, we are today publishing a fuller and more definitive overhaul of the National Planning Policy framework for consultation. This wholly restructured framework maintains and builds on the initial revisions we made in December last year.

Includes a range of new measures to support key economic sectors and incorporates new clear and rules based national policies for both plan and decision making. As a result of the not insignificant risk and uncertainty that such an approach entailed, we took the decision not to proceed with statutory national development management policies at this stage. Instead, we've chosen to swiftly realise their benefits through agile national policy changes, while leaving open the possibility of a future transition to statutory nmps should it be required.

The new decision making policies in the framework published today are therefore designed to make development management more certain, consistent and streamlined to standardise policies that apply across the whole of England and to reduce duplication and avoid unjustified local deviation from national policy in local plans, as well as setting out national planning policy in a clearer and more comprehensive manner. We're proposing a number of substantive reforms to boost housing supply and unlock economic growth in the years ahead. They include the following.

A permanent presumption in favour of sustainable development. Building on the proposals outlined in our Brownfield Passport working paper to make development a suitable land in urban areas acceptable by default a default, yes, for suitable proposals for development land around rail stations within existing settlements and around well-connected stations outside settlements, including on green belt land, ensuring that sufficiently dense development comes forward around existing transport infrastructure. A targeted series of changes to drive urban and suburban densification, including through the redevelopment of corner and other low density plots, upward extensions, infill development and residential colleges, and action to secure a diverse mix of homes.

Stronger support for rural social and affordable housing. Setting clear expectations for accessible housing to meet the needs of older and disabled people, and providing more flexibility on the unit mix of housing for market sale, where local requirements for social and affordable homes have been met. In addition to these and other important policy changes on matters such as design, vision led transport and climate change mitigation and adaptation, the revised framework also delivers on various commitments made either at this Dispatch Box or in the other place.

As a result, it now includes a clear requirement to incorporate Swift bricks into new developments. The application of new national standards for sustainable drainage systems, explicit protection for our precious chalk streams, and as a result of my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East sustained advocacy on the matter. Recognition of the importance of providing new, improved, accessible and inclusive facilities for children's play. Taken together, Madam Deputy Speaker, these changes represent the most significant reform to national planning policy since the original Nppf was introduced more than a decade ago.

The proposed framework is the culmination of a sustained effort over the first 17 months of this Parliament to revamp our planning system so that it meets housing need in full and unleashes sustained economic growth. We look forward to receiving feedback through the consultation. Madam Deputy Speaker further revisions to the Nppf are not all that we're announcing today. The second main front on which we are acting is support for small and medium sized housebuilders. As a government, we are clear that ramping up housing delivery requires us to diversify the housebuilding market.

Integral to such diversification is not merely arresting, but reversing the decline of SM developers that has taken place over recent decades. Building on the steps we've already taken to better support SME housebuilders access Finance and Land, where today announcing a series of policy and regulatory easements to help them thrive and grow. In May, the government published a working paper seeking views on a new medium threshold for development for sites up to one hectare, with between 10 and 49 homes, noting that over 80% of such sites are developed by SM builders.

Having reflected on the useful feedback we've received, we've decided to go further. While the 10 to 49 unit threshold will apply, we propose to increase the size of sites covered by the new medium category to up to 2.5 hectares, thereby increasing the number of SME housebuilders being supported. To support development activity on this new category of site, we're proposing limiting information requirements to what is necessary and proportionate. We're also setting a clear expectation that local planning authorities allocate 10% of their housing requirement to sites between 1 and 2.5 hectares, in addition to the existing requirement to do so for sites under one hectare to better support different scales of development without compromising building and resident safety.

We're also using the consultation to ask the necessary technical questions to determine whether to exempt this new medium category of development from the building safety levy, and we're exploring further the potential benefits and drawbacks of enabling developers of medium sites to discharge social and affordable housing requirements through cash contributions in lieu of direct delivery. Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, having considered carefully the responses to the consultation undertaken by the Department for environment, Food and Rural Affairs earlier this year, I can confirm that the government will exempt smaller developments of up to 0.2 hectares from biodiversity net gain and introduce a suite of other simplified requirements to improve the implementation of BNG on small and medium sites that are not exempted.

DEFRA will also rapidly consult on an additional targeted exemption for brownfield residential development, testing the definition of land to which it should apply, and a range of site sizes up to 2.5 hectares. To conclude Madam Deputy Speaker, this government promised to get Britain building again to unleash economic growth and deliver on the promise of national renewal. While there is more that needs to be done to transform the failing housing system, we inherited the further changes to regulation and policy that we've announced today are integral to our plans to improve housing availability, affordability and quality in this Parliament.

They will not be without their critics, both in this House and in the country, but in the face of a housing crisis that has become a genuine emergency in many parts of England, we will act where previous governments have failed to ensure a decent, safe, secure and affordable home is the right of all working people rather than a privilege enjoyed only by some. I commend this statement to the House.
14:37
Gareth Bacon Portrait Gareth Bacon MP (Orpington, Conservative)
-
-
Shadow Minister Gareth Bacon. >> Thank you. >> Madam Deputy Speaker. I'd like to start by thanking the Minister for advance sight of his statement. for advance sight of his statement. This Labour government's last planning framework began pushing development onto rural areas, prioritising concreting over the greenbelt and green fields rather than focusing on supporting building in urban areas where we need to build most. And from what the Minister has just said, it sounds as though the government are going to double down on this with an all out assault on the greenbelt in London under their abysmal mayor for the last decade, Labour have conspicuously failed to build the right amount of housing, and now they are going to fail to build the right kind of housing in the right places in the rest of England, clearly preferring to target building in rural areas while not building in the cities and urban areas where demand is highest and much of the necessary infrastructure already exists at the current rate of house building under labour, which is at a dismal low, they will fail by some distance to make their 1.5 million homes.

Target House building is falling under labour, with additional dwellings delivered in 2425 falling by 12,810. If net additional dwellings continue at this rate, then Labour will not deliver their target by the end of this Parliament. But in seven years time, this Labour government's record on house building is dreadful. They delivered fewer homes in the first year in office than we delivered during a global pandemic. This is not a good sign for Labour's first year in office, and now this Labour government is intent on ignoring the voices of local people up and down the country, while imposing top down housing targets disproportionately in rural areas, while they tighten their grip with Whitehall imposed targets.

The reality is that Labour are prioritising building on rural areas while claiming that grey belt land. They are now returning to something the previous Labour government did, namely garden grabbing. The previous Conservative government removed the top down diktats which forced councils to demolish gardens. But the Minister has just promised, and I quote, the redevelopment of low density residential plots, introducing higher buildings at street corners and infill development within residential curtilage. It is clear that Labour have now have residential gardens in their sights, due to their failure to build homes on brownfield land.

Madam Deputy Speaker, they should be prioritising and incentivising brownfield first and making it easier to build on brownfield sites in cities and urban areas. But they are not. They are only paying lip service. If Labour. Labour really want homes to be built where they are needed, then they should think again about how their planning framework will actually deliver. Madam Deputy Speaker, there are many questions to ask about the government's approach, but time is short today, so I'll restrict myself to four.

The Minister states that there should be, and again I quote a default. Yes, for suitable proposals for development of land around railway stations within existing settlements and around well connected stations outside settlements, including on greenbelt. In this context, what is a well connected station? He proposes action to secure a diverse mix of homes, stronger support for rural, social and affordable housing. What form will this support take? What regulations will they relax or scrap to support housing delivery? What incentives will they offer to get brownfield development to actually happen? Finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, the views of local people are not a burden in assessing planning applications, but are amongst the most important factors putting local people and local concerns high up.

The agenda is a long established and democratic precedent that successive governments have followed. However, I fear for their voices under the current administration, as the current government have railroaded their Planning and Infrastructure bill through Parliament and are now following up with this statement. It is increasingly clear that the planning system, this government, doesn't just envisage and plan for, but is active in creating is a planning system where such local concerns are much harder to raise. His Majesty's Opposition do not believe that local people and local democracy should suffer for this.

The government are eroding trust in the planning system and widening the gulf between the government and local people. That is why we are clear that local voices must play a key part in any planning decisions, not just Whitehall's. We will continue to scrutinise this as the Labour government implements it, and we will hold them accountable as its impacts begin to negatively impact on local communities.
14:42
Matthew Pennycook Portrait Matthew Pennycook MP, Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Greenwich and Woolwich, Labour)
-
-
Minister. >> Minister. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank the Shadow Minister for his questions. I appreciate he hasn't had a huge amount of time to look over the announcement today, but I have to say he has completely misunderstood one of the primary thrusts of the changes we are making, which is to double down on a brownfield first approach. We're introducing through this draft framework a presumption in principle for development within urban areas. We want to make clear in principle what forms of development are acceptable in different locations for urban land.

As I said, building on our brownfield passports, this will mean in practice, development of suitable urban land will be acceptable by default. That is a doubling down of a brownfield first approach. He raised concerns about the greenbelt. As ever. Madam Deputy Speaker, this government is committed to protecting the greenbelt. It has served England's towns and cities well over many decades. But we did introduce, and I'm more than happy to have the debate with hon. Members opposite, a replacement for the haphazard approach to greenbelt release we saw under the last government a more strategic and modernised approach.

And all the draft framework does today is build on that approach in a specific form by allowing development to proceed in the greenbelt on well connected stations, well connected stations, it should be said, Madam Deputy Speaker, are precisely defined as the 60 highest travel to work areas based on GVA. But we are, as with all the policies in this draft framework, consulting on whether that is the right number, whether it should go higher or whether it should go lower. And there are appropriate densities in the framework that go for all stations across the country and higher densities for those specific well connected stations in those areas.

He asked me what we're doing on rural affordable housing. We do want to see greater support for social and affordable housing in rural areas. The new framework, if the gentleman, the hon. Gentleman will allow me, makes it easier for rural exception sites to come forward through clearer national policy makes it far easier for rural authorities to require affordable housing on smaller sites, including removing the need for legislative designation, and removes the first homes exemption sites as a standalone form to avoid driving up land prices and crowding out wider social and affordable tenures.

Can I finally finish, Madam Deputy, on housing supply? Generally, the shadow Minister critiques this government's record on housing supply. And it is true, it is true that net additional dwellings in 20 2425 stood at 208,600. But in attempting to castigate this government for that figure, I'm afraid the shadow Minister betrays his ignorance of the development process, because the fact is, the overwhelming majority of new homes completed in 20 2425 are the result of planning applications submitted in the last parliament. In rebuking those numbers, he is rebuking his own government's record, and he's right to do so.

And he's right to do so because the changes made under the previous government, as many hon. Members know, in abolition abolishing mandatory housing targets, have torpedoed housing supply in this country. We are turning things around, and this draft framework will help us to do just that.
14:45
Florence Eshalomi Portrait Florence Eshalomi MP (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green, Labour )
-
-
Chair of the Select Committee, Florence Eshalomi. Thank you, Madam Florence Eshalomi. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I welcome and I thank the Minister for his statement, and I commend the Minister for his work on bringing the planning system up to date. It can be quite a technical process and for the for the landmark Royal Assent for the Planning and Infrastructure Bill later this month, I welcome the fact that the Minister has been listening to many people from across the sector and making some of those changes, including the yes on default development around train stations, the national standards for drainage.

And we must remember for many children, access to a play space is something which they don't have. So seeing that include that is really, really vital. It's really easy for us to get caught up in the technical aspect of planning, but we have to remember those 170 children stuck in temporary accommodation this Christmas, and next year they will still be there if we don't get moving on this. This means building more homes, including social homes. I heard what the Minister said in terms of the Npms, and I'm hopeful that this will be kept under review so that we can look at planning decisions and speed up planning reforms.

I also wanted to ask the Minister, and this is an area I've raised with him in terms of accessible housing, and especially some of those that should be delivered, that the requirement of M42, m43 in terms of the building regulations. Can the Minister set out if there'll be a target on these new homes, and what discussions he's been having with advocacy groups and disability groups, and making sure those homes are fit and purposeful for everyone? Yes.
14:46
14:47
Gideon Amos Portrait Gideon Amos MP (Taunton and Wellington, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Liberal Democrat spokesperson Gideon Amos. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and while I am grateful to the Minister for advance sight of this statement, it, I fear, represents an unprecedented removal of powers from local people and local government that has given up a government that appears to have given up on sustainable development as a driving force behind decision making. Instead, this is a cost benefit statement which reads like it was written in the Treasury, which sees the benefits only of development and none of the costs to communities or to nature.

Sustainable development is no longer the pre-eminent principle in the new framework, a framework which means widespread development in the greenbelt, a presumption with so many holes in it that buildings put up for any purpose, including under permitted development, will now be the green light for development across the open countryside. Lorry parks in Greenfields Green lighted a framework that rewrites and overrides policies of local that local plans contain, calling into question for many authorities the value and purpose of all the expense that they go to in writing a local plan.

Can I ask the Secretary of State whether, given the one minute I have, is simply not enough to debate the most significant rolling back of planning controls for decades whether he will make government. Time for a debate on this framework in this House, so all members have the chance to debate it. A framework should have much more impact than the planning bill that's recently gone through Parliament. Will the government upgrade the wishy washy mention of chalk streams in this framework to recognise them fully as irreplaceable habitats? Will the Minister reverse the abolition of BNG for 0.2 hectare sites and go with the 0.1 hectare limit that environmental NGOs called for? And will the government increase its target for social and council rent homes from 18,000 per year to 150,000 per year that we Liberal Democrats wish to see, or at least the 90,000 per year that shelter wishes to see.

And will the government go further? Finally, to ensure that the 1.5 million permissions for homes that are not built are subject to real use it or lose it powers before new homes are created?
14:50
Matthew Pennycook Portrait Matthew Pennycook MP, Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Greenwich and Woolwich, Labour)
-
-
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. I've got a lot of his question. I've got a lot of time for him, but again, I think he misrepresents what is in this new framework in terms of local involvement, local engagement, and he seeks to give the impression that there are no safeguards on development in the new framework. That is not true. The new permanent presumption provides significant backing for development. Absolutely. We do want to introduce those clear rules based policies both for planning and decision making.

But development still has to comply with the wider policies in the NPF, and decisions on individual applications still have to be taken. He raised the point of local standards. Madam Deputy Speaker, our proposals support our overall aims to make policy. As I said, more rules based to streamline the content of development plans. The framework still allows some local standards where it makes sense to set them at a local level, such as on design, parking and open space. But where we have national standards in building regulations, including the forthcoming Future Homes and Building Standards, which raise our ambition in that area, we do think it doesn't make sense to allow duplication and variation across local areas.

Lastly, he mentioned chalk streams. Again, I want to push back. We've included explicit recognition of chalk streams as a feature of high environmental value. As I committed to doing the progress of the Planning Infrastructure bill, local plans, as a result, will have to identify and manage the impacts of development on these sensitive areas, for instance by creating buffer zones or green corridors. And we've set clear expectations for development proposals to assess and mitigate adverse impacts to water quality, including in relation to chalk streams.
14:51
14:52
14:53
14:53
14:54
14:55
14:56
14:57
14:57
14:58
Matthew Pennycook Portrait Matthew Pennycook MP, Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Greenwich and Woolwich, Labour)
-
-
I think my hon. Friend, for that >> I think my hon. Friend, for that question, he tempts me, I think, deliberately to comment on his local plan, which for reasons he local plan, which for reasons he will appreciate, I can't do on the general principles. I would say there are lots of factors that need to be considered when planning committees, officers or elected members are considering any particular application, but we do want to see greater weight given to applications on sites that are obviously allocated in the development plan.

It goes to the hon. Lady's question. We do want to see planned development. Local plans are the cornerstone of our planning system. That is why it's such a problem that we inherited a planning system where we only have less than a third of up to date local plan coverage, and we are determined to drive up coverage of local plans to drive plans to adoption as quickly as possible. When it comes to Greenbelt, through the changes we made last year, we set out a very clear sequential test for what local planning authorities need to do when they have exhausted brownfield development, densification Cross-boundary planning co-operation with local authorities.

When they do need to look to review Greenbelt, they should start with the poorer quality greenbelt. Greenbelt in the first instance, if that is required to meet their

**** Possible New Speaker ****

housing need. Oliver Dowden. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Within a.
15:00
15:00
15:01
15:02
15:03
15:03
15:04
15:04
15:05
15:06
15:07
15:07
15:08
15:08
15:09
15:09
15:10
15:11
15:12
15:12
15:13
15:13
15:14
15:14
15:14
15:15
15:15
15:16
15:17
15:17
15:18
15:18
15:19
15:19
15:20
15:20
15:21
15:21
15:22
15:23
15:23
15:24
15:24
15:25
15:26
15:26
15:27
15:27
15:28
15:29
15:29
15:30
15:30
15:30
15:31
15:32
15:33
15:33
15:33
15:34
15:35
15:36
15:36
15:36
15:37
15:38
15:38
15:39
15:39
15:40
15:40
15:41
None Portrait Ten Minute Rule Motion: Vacant Commercial Properties (Temporary Use)
-

>> Thank you. >> Madam Deputy Speaker. I beg. >> To move. >> That leave. >> Be given.
15:41
Luke Akehurst Portrait Luke Akehurst MP (North Durham, Labour)
-
-
>> Be given. >> To bring in a bill to enable local authorities to allocate for temporary use by charities, temporary use by charities, community organisations and small businesses any vacant commercial properties during the period of their vacancy to provide for certain obligations on landlords of commercial property in connection with such applications and for connected purposes. In the last general election, I kept my election literature very simple, with only three pledges. One of these was to improve the state of our local high streets, known as Front Streets in County Durham.

Everywhere I go in North Durham, this is a matter of great concern for residents. Both the two larger towns in the constituency, Stanley and Chester le Street, within living memory, had thriving, bustling front streets with a variety of independent traders selling food, clothing and other items, larger stores, a range of pubs, banks and entertainment venues such as cinemas. Sadly, this is no longer the case. Chester Street has got a fine selection of independent retailers and cafes like Cafe Nina's Computer Centre, Chester Geek, GW, Horner's Pub In the Closet, Carson's Cafe Bar and Refuse Community Cafe.

And in recent months we've seen excellent new additions to the Front Street, like Willow's Bakehouse and pretty Busy Blooms. But Chester le Street Front Street is blighted by vacant landmark sites, including the former Barclays, Santander, HSBC and Halifax banks, which will sadly be joined by Lloyds closing in January, and large empty landmark pubs like the Queen's Head and Red Lion in Stanley. The situation is far worse, with the former board school site having reached a stage where it has had to be demolished.

The literally burned out remnants of Bertie's bar and very few remaining active units amongst the vacant premises, creating a depressing air of dereliction which is a source of deep shame and disappointment to residents who take great pride in the history of their town. It is desperately unfair on the small number of businesses, like the lovely cafe, that are striving to keep the front Street alive, whilst in both cases there is need for improvement. The relative worst performance of Stanley has been explained to me by residents as largely down to the nature of some of the landlords in Chester le Street, the main landlord is local to the town, committed deeply to it and takes care to create his Front Street holdings by making generous arrangements to help new businesses to get started.

In Stanley, however, the tale is different. Many of the key landlords are absentees who bought their sites speculatively and have never even visited the town to see what they purchased. When approached by potential tenants, they make wholly unreasonable rent and other demands, as they would rather maintain a high notional value for their property in the hopes of a future sale, than accept a lower rent to get the premises occupied. There are a limited number of premises in Chester Street in similar circumstances to.

I know that the challenges facing our front streets in Chester Street and Stanley are the challenges faced by many high streets across the country. The universal nature of this issue, and its paramount importance to our constituents up and down the country, is demonstrated by the geographic spread of the members co-sponsoring this bill with me from Stoke and Stoke on Trent and Stafford to Sittingbourne and Sheppey, Truro and Falmouth and beyond. I am grateful to the hon. Members on my side of the House who are backing this bill to revitalise our high streets, and I know we are all proud to be part of a Labour government that is already delivering for small businesses across the UK.

Labour's plan for small businesses places the growth and productivity of smaller firms at its core, helping to make the UK the best place to start and grow a business. From creating a business growth service, helping local businesses to access the advice and support they need to. Pledging to end the scourge of late payments which drain £11 billion from our economy every year. This Labour government is standing up for our high streets. We are expanding start up loans, overhauling the business rate system so that 250,000 small businesses benefit from up to 40% off their rates and standing firmly behind the shops, cafes and entrepreneurs that keep our town centres alive.

This bill strives to add to the impressive record of our Labour government. This bill aims to give local authorities the power to step in and compel this kind of absentee landlord to make empty shop units available for temporary accommodation by charities, community groups and small businesses. The aim of this is to address the growing number of empty shops and commercial units, each of which represent the wasted potential of a space that could be serving customers, hiring local people and bringing footfall to the town centre.

This bill will also provide a lifeline to new enterprises, giving them the backing they may need to break through and become a staple of local communities. The local community. Whether it's a small business, employing our constituents or charity or community organisation providing vital services for the most vulnerable, these spaces can be so much more than an empty vacuum. This bill presents us with two visions of our town centres. The first is all too familiar to members. Across this house a ghost town of empty shops and lost potential, and an eerily quiet streets.

The second is a brighter alternative a thriving town centre where every unit provides value to our constituents. More people coming into town to do their shopping, treat themselves and spend time with loved ones. I know which of these two visions our constituents put us here to deliver in. This bill will help us get there. The state of the High Street is the clearest visible indicator of the state of the economy, and is of paramount importance to how the public see the communities we live in.

This bill fits in with the tangible steps the Labour Government is taking to restore pride in place in our communities, such as the aptly named Pride in Place scheme, which is injecting £20 million into some of the most deprived communities in the country, like Stanley South in my constituency, we should have zero tolerance of eyesore derelict buildings while premises sit empty. There are many organisations, charities, businesses and community groups that desperately need them. More people working in the high street brings natural footfall and visitors who will use other shops and cafes.

We know that the high street naturally faces problems due to increased internet shopping and out-of-town shopping centres, but we do not need to accept terminal decline. We need to re-imagine our high streets as community hubs that people will once again be proud to visit. My constituents and the constituents of other hon. Members deserve better. I commend this bill to the House here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the hon. Member have leave to bring in the Bill. As many as are of that Bill. As many as are of that opinion, say aye. of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

No, I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Who will prepare and bring in the bill? Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Dan Aldridge Danny Beales Allison Gardner Leigh Ingham Jayne Kirkham Amanda Martin Kevin McKenna. Mike Reader Alistair Strathern Lauren Sullivan Peter Swallow. And myself. Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes. Luke Akehurst.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yay!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yay! Typekit.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Very good.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Very good. Vacant commercial properties. Temporary use. Bill. Second Reading. What day?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The 16th of January, 2026.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The 16th of January, 2026. The 16th of January, 2026. The clerk will now proceed to read the clerk will now proceed to read the orders of the day. Finance number orders of the day. Finance number two, Bill Second Reading. Now the reasoned amendment in the name of the Leader of the Opposition has
15:50
15:50
Dan Tomlinson Portrait Dan Tomlinson MP, The Exchequer Secretary (Chipping Barnet, Labour)
-
-
Grateful to the Minister for giving way. He says no cut to capital budgets. But then he's talking, of course, only about the public sector. Has he seen the CBI economics research, which suggests there will be very severe capital Budget reductions in the private sector, the very sector which creates the wealth on which everything else depends? Yeah, yeah,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

yeah. I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. I'm sure he will have intervention. I'm sure he will have read the OBR's report. We did have a bit of extra time this year to read it than normal. And in that report, Madam Deputy Speaker, he will know that investment both overall whole economy investment and private sector investment has outpaced the forecast that the OBR outpaced the forecast that the OBR put out in March of this year, and I look forward to returning those points later in my opening remarks.

Madam Deputy Speaker, the Budget delivers choices that were fair and necessary, choices that deliver on the public's priorities. I always struggle with that word choices that bring about the change that this government promised. This government has chosen to cut the cost of living, delivering £150 off energy bills, freezing train fares and prescription charges. This government has chosen to cut NHS waiting lists, delivering 5.2 million more appointments and announcing in the Budget 250 new neighbourhood health centres. And this government has chosen to lift 550,000 children out of relative poverty in this Parliament by removing the two child limit and expanding free breakfast clubs and free school meal eligibility.

I will give way to the hon. Member.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The government has chosen to absolutely decimate family farms right across. The United Kingdom. right across. The United Kingdom. The Prime Minister was questioned yesterday by members of the Liaison Committee that farmers, and he was Committee that farmers, and he was told that farmers have said they may be better off dying before this may be better off dying before this tax change comes in. And I just feel we need to let the reality of that sink in. His response governments have to bring about sensible reform.

Sensible reform is not someone lying in an early grave to avoid the break up of their family farm. He also claimed that this policy is not targeted, merely a change to the tax regime. But when this finance bill decimates family farms, it certainly.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Ladies intervention was far too long. Dan Tomlinson.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

far too long. Dan Tomlinson. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I look forward to contributions from members on all sides of the from members on all sides of the House on the various measures that are in the finance Bill today, on are in the finance Bill today, on the point that the hon. Member raises this government, considered really carefully the reforms that really carefully the reforms that were announced at the Budget last year and has put forward changes to Agricultural Property Relief and business property relief that have and have an additional £1 million allowance, an allowance that was made transferable between spouses at this Budget and also has a 50% discount on the inheritance tax rate.

So 20% is paid above that higher allowance than 40%. Madam Deputy Speaker, as as well as changes to lift children out of poverty, this government has chosen to increase the National Living Wage from the 1st of April, 2026 by 4.1% to £12.71 an hour and to increase the national minimum wage Madam Deputy Speaker for 18 to 20 year olds to £10. I would happily

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way. I'm I'm I'm looking forward. I thank the Minister. For.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For. Giving way. He will know that for the vast majority of employees in Scotland, the increase in the in Scotland, the increase in the National Living Wage is redundant because it is less than the Scottish Living Wage in any event. But when he talks about the things But when he talks about the things that this government have increased by the Budget, was it their intention with their jobs tax to intention with their jobs tax to increase unemployment by 25%?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here I well, Madam Deputy Speaker, this Budget will lift thousands of children in Scotland thousands of children in Scotland out of poverty with the decisions that we have made. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, this government has Deputy Speaker, this government has made £10 billion of more spending available to the Scottish Government. And yet we can still see public services failing up and down Scotland, with the NHS not working as well as it should north of the border. I will happily thank of the border.

I will happily thank you, Madam Speaker. The Minister is making an. Excellent series of points and I commend him for the work. Could I commend him on behalf of 4000 vulnerable children in reading, for the fantastic support he's offering to them and their families? Much deserved and much appreciated by our community, and also to point out the significant benefits in terms of the cutting, the freezing of rail fares, other measures to continue bus fare subsidies, which an economic measures which will drive growth around this country.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hear, hear. I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention, the first from this side, and I look forward to many side, and I look forward to many more from friends on this side of the chamber to during my remarks, as well as members opposite. Madam as well as members opposite. Madam Deputy Speaker, this government has also chosen to cut government borrowing every year so that borrowing every year so that interest rates already cut five times since the election. Keep falling and I will give way to my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

falling and I will give way to my constituency neighbour. Er, well, I thank my neighbour for giving way, but just to press the point from the Member for Angus and Robert Glen, he didn't answer this point about the effect of the jobs tax on unemployment, because in my constituency I've met countless businesses that have laid off staff or have shifted staff to being self-employed. Does he accept, particularly given the unemployment figures today, that there is a direct link between the jobs tax

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and higher unemployment? Yes, Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes, Minister. Madam Deputy Speaker, the OBR were aware of the tax changes that were announced in the previous Budget when they made their Budget when they made their forecast just a few weeks ago, and they expect on that point that employment levels will rise in employment levels will rise in every year of this forecast and and that they will be higher in every year compared to March, reaching year compared to March, reaching over 35 million people in work by the end of the decade.

Madam Deputy Speaker, as I was saying, the government has chosen to make sure that borrowing falls in every year so that interest rates, which have already been cut five times since the election, keep falling, that borrowing this year will be at its lowest level in six years as a share of GDP, and the Chancellor made the decision to more than double our headroom against the fiscal rules in this Budget to provide continued economic stability. Madam Deputy Speaker, this finance bill, alongside other Budget decisions, delivers the choices to give people new opportunities and to renew our public services, helping lift thousands of children out of poverty, getting more people into work and maintaining the highest level of public sector investment in 40 years.

I was struck, Madam Deputy Speaker, by the response from the North East Chamber of Commerce, who welcomed the ending of the two child limit, saying the Chancellor is right to scrap the two child benefit cap. Our members have long argued that this is one of the most powerful levers available to tackle unacceptable rates of child poverty across our region, and to support more parents into sustained and into meaningful employment. It's statements like this that are further confirmation that lifting half a million children out of poverty isn't just the right thing to do to give our children the best start in life, but is an investment in the future and our economy and all of us will be better for it.

Madam Deputy Speaker, what this government has promised to deliver as our number one priority is economic growth. This government knows that the best

**** Possible New Speaker ****

way. I will I will give way to the hon. Member. I thank the Minister for giving way. I'm not quite sure if he believes what he's reading, because UK hospitality have already done the sums on the impact that this Budget is having on many of those Budget is having on many of those hard working hospitality businesses across Keighley and Ilkley. Indeed, calculating that over the next calculating that over the next three years the average of the hospitality businesses in my constituency will be having to pay constituency will be having to pay an additional £13,690 per annum.

What's that? What does the Minister say in terms of economic growth for those hard working hospitality businesses in my constituency as a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

result of this Budget, Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister. I on my on the hon. Member's point, first of all, he said that he's not sure whether I believe what I've written. I did write this myself, and I do very much believe it. On the point of business rates, I would say that the the business rates decisions will will have rates decisions will will have plenty of time to debate them in the relevant pieces of legislation and in committee. I'm sure they're not specifically in in the finance bill, but there were things I mentioned that aren't in the finance bill.

So of course, he's welcome to raise things that are in the Budget to. We discussed at length at Treasury questions last week with members on the front bench and others around the relief and the support that is in the system now to to help support businesses with the increases in the valuations that they've seen since the pandemic. There's over £4 billion of support over the next few years and 2 billion coming this year alone. But I thank him all the same for his intervention.

Let me try and make some progress. I thought, Madam Deputy Speaker, I might speak for 15 minutes, but we're 11 minutes and I'm only on page two. So let me do try and make some progress. We are, Madam Deputy Speaker, sticking to our commitments in the corporate tax roadmap, maintaining the headline rate of corporation tax, the lowest in the G7, while making reforms to capital allowances to support fiscal fiscal sustainability while retaining incentives to invest. And we're going further to support companies to scale up and attract investment and talent by significantly expanding the enterprise management incentives.

Company ability limits to maintain the world leading nature of this scheme, with doubling the maximum amount that a company can raise through EIS and VCT to make the schemes more generous and supportive. For entrepreneurs, helping to support more investment in companies and improve access to finance. For those who we want to see. Make the transition from start up to scale up and we're delivering a new service. Madam Deputy Speaker, to support major investment projects with advanced tax certainty as committed to in the corporate tax roadmap, we're also introducing a 40% first year allowance, allowing businesses to immediately write off a significant amount of their investment to reduce their corporation tax or income tax bill in the year that they make that investment.

Overall. Madam Deputy Speaker, these growth measures and many others which we are delivering across the government, will result in the doubling of limits for our enterprise tax incentives and will support many scale ups and businesses to attract capital as they grow. This finance bill builds on many other measures announced at the Budget and delivered over this Parliament. We are expanding and continuing the work of the National Wealth Fund. We've committed 14 billion for Sizewell C to help power more than 6 million homes.

We're making rapid progress in enabling the delivery of a third runway at Heathrow, and we've provided 120 billion in additional capital investment. Madam Deputy Speaker for roads, rail and energy, including 15.6 billion for a major

**** Possible New Speaker ****

city region. I will give way over this point. I thank the Minister for giving way on that point. I'm sure we'll way on that point. I'm sure we'll welcome the 50 or £60 million that we've provided for Lancashire County Council to provide good roads for my constituents, but on roads for my constituents, but on the point he makes about business investment separately, can I investment separately, can I welcome the three year holiday on the stamp duty new listings reserve, which I don't think we're talking about enough, but actually will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

about enough, but actually will be a huge benefit to newly listed companies in the UK and manages our competitiveness very well. Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I to very much welcome the change in the Budget and commend the work of my colleague, the the work of my colleague, the economic Secretary, for the work that she's been doing on that, and I'm sure we'll hear more about it. In her closing remarks at the end of this, this debate. Yes, I will give way to the hon. Member, and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way to the hon. Member, and then I will try and make some more progress so people can get in. I'm grateful to the Minister for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the Minister for giving way on this point of growth. He should be aware that since the Budget last year, 49% of farm businesses have paused or cancelled planned investment, 10% have already downsized operations and 21% intend to do so before next April. What is the government going to do to restore confidence in farming? To invest? Because without that there is no growth in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

rural community. Yeah. I thank the hon. Member for his points. We do want to see farming businesses in rural communities and businesses up and down the country, businesses up and down the country, investing and growing for the future, and on the changes to agricultural property and business agricultural property and business property relief that that the hon. Member mentions. It is worth noting, Member mentions. It is worth noting, of course, that the the statistics on the number of estates that will be affected suggest that it will be up to 375 estates a year.

A small proportion of the overall number of estates, and that number, Madam Deputy Speaker, has come down from 520, as was forecast at the previous Budget. Madam Deputy Speaker, if I may, I may just try and make some progress so that the hon. Members who are in the chamber to contribute are able to. Madam Deputy Speaker, this government is delivering growth and this government's focussed on driving investment in our economy. As I've just said, and as I mentioned to the hon.

Member earlier, we've seen that whole economy investment has risen by 4.2% in real terms since the start of the year, outperforming the OBR's March forecast for a decline of 0.1%. And of course, as the shadow Chancellor will know, Britain has outperformed its growth forecast this year, with growth in 2025 upgraded to 1.5% from 1% in March and beyond growth. Madam Deputy Speaker, this finance bill delivers a set of responsible choices, choices that safeguard our economy and prepare us for the future.

We've been clear that to achieve this, we have had to take the decision to ask everyone to contribute more at the end of the decade to protect our public services. After a freeze that was initiated by the previous government. This finance bill maintains income tax thresholds for employees and the self-employed at current levels. For a further three years, from April 2028 to April 2031. This is a fair choice in 2930 three quarters of the revenue from maintaining income tax and employee, self-employed and National Insurance contributions thresholds is expected to come from the top half of households.

This finance bill, Madam Deputy Speaker, also takes action to ensure that income from assets is taxed more fairly, raising 2.2 billion in 2930 by increasing taxes on property, dividend and savings interest income. The government is narrowing the gap between taxes paid on work and the taxes paid on income from assets at the moment, for example, a tenant will pay national insurance on their income and a landlord won't. But the extra toopy we will be closing the gap between the tax rates, for example, on landlords and on tenants.

In 2930, around two thirds of revenue from increases to a dividend. Property and savings interest tax rates is expected to come from the top 20% of this household of households. And importantly, Madam Deputy Speaker, there are choices. We have not taken, choices which previous governments have taken to borrow more in a fiscally irresponsible way, or to return to austerity, which would undermine our economy and our society. We've also chosen not to increase the rate of corporation tax, and we've stuck to our corporation tax roadmap.

Madam Deputy Speaker, it's important that those with the broadest shoulders contribute more to protect our vital public services. And this finance Bill delivers previously announced reforms to tax wealth fairly, including a revised tax regime for carried interest, which sits wholly within the income tax framework. To ensure that reward is taxed in line with its economic characteristics, removing the opportunity for individuals to use pensions as a vehicle for inheritance tax by bringing unspent pots into the scope of inheritance tax, and by reforming Agricultural Property Relief and business property relief, while ensuring any of the £1 million allowance for 100% rate which is unused will be transferred, which will be transferable between spouses and civil partners.

These decisions build on our action in the previous finance Bill, including abolishing the non-dom tax status, ending tax breaks for private school fees, raising the rates of capital gains tax, which currently raises £14 billion a year, with revenue expected to more than double to around 30 billion by 2030 2031. Fair choices also mean delivering justice for those affected by the infected blood scandal, and the government will extend the existing inheritance tax relief for infected blood compensation payments so that if an infected or affected person has already died when compensation is paid, inheritance tax will relief will instead apply on the death of the first living recipient of the compensation payment.

Madam Deputy Speaker, fair choices in the finance Bill also means tackling serious reforms which have been ducked for too long. That means reforming tax reliefs that, while intentioned, have exploded in costs in recent years. This government is reforming capital gains tax relief, which has allowed wealthy business owners to sell their shares without paying any capital gains tax. By reducing, we're reducing the relief available for business owners selling their businesses to employee ownership trusts from 100% to 50%, a relief that the previous government expected to cost less than 100 million a year in 20 1819.

But with published figures now showing that the cost of the capital gains tax relief reached 600,000,000 in 2021, and without any action, forecasts suggest it could rise to more than 20 times the original, costing to £2 billion the original, costing to £2 billion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

by 20 2829. I will give way to the round. The Minister for giving Way and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Minister for giving Way and on the subject of Business Property Relief. This impacts many family businesses across the country. What does the Minister say to Fiber-line in my constituency, who have already worked out that their BPR already worked out that their BPR liability is about £850,000, they employ 250 people in Keighley whose employ 250 people in Keighley whose jobs are potentially at risk as a result of this business not being able to mitigate an IHT liability

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that this government is imposing on it. Not to. Mention.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mention. Next. We have the proposals that we're putting forward on APR and we're putting forward on APR and BPR do do mean that those with business or agricultural assets will have both the the additional £1 will have both the the additional £1 million allowance, as well as a tax rate that's half the rate that others others pay within the system. others others pay within the system. And my understanding is that the system will be more generous than that which was in place before 1992 throughout the whole time, for example, that Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister.

We are reforming the Motability scheme, Madam Deputy Speaker, to to end the VAT relief on top up payments, which was which is a one off payment required to lease more expensive vehicles on the scheme. And and we're also ending the application of insurance premium tax on leases to ensure that the scheme delivers value for money for the taxpayer, while choosing to continue to support disabled people and reforms. And we're also introducing reforms to ensure private hire vehicle operators will no longer be able to illegitimately exploit an administrative scheme intended for tour operators to pay to pay a much lower rate of VAT than others, I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will give way. Persistence pays. Thank you. And the Minister is always both great, is always both always both great, is always both gracious and generous. But further to my hon. Friend's point about the to my hon. Friend's point about the impact of BPR. Imagine a company that's worth, say, 11 million. It that's worth, say, 11 million. It will have a 2 million BPR tax payment to make. That will be the payment to make. That will be the person who inherits those shares won't have the 2 million.

They will have to therefore extract that money from the business. Am I right in thinking that that is probably would require 3.3 million to be deducted, taken out of the company in order to pay that £2 million tax? Is that is that in the right order?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. I'm happy to discuss with him those numbers in more detail afterwards. I didn't quite follow all of the maths, but I'm follow all of the maths, but I'm very happy to come. Come in, come, come in on, come in and and discuss come in on, come in and and discuss those points with him. Thank you for the intervention from the floor for the intervention from the floor there. Increasing taxes on online gaming and betting is another change that we're making in the change that we're making in the Budget.

Madam Deputy Speaker, with the rate for remote gaming increasing from 21 to 40% from April in 2026, and the rate of remote betting increasing from 15 to 25% from April 2027. While choosing to protect in-person betting and horse racing, which plays such an important role in our sporting culture and in many local

**** Possible New Speaker ****

economies. Madam Deputy Speaker, I will give way on that point. I thank the hon. Gentleman for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. The. He will be aware, of course, that changes to those rates means there will be consequential impacts for jobs, particularly in places like Stoke on Trent, where thousands of people on Trent, where thousands of people are employed by gambling companies. The rights and wrongs of gambling aside, there will be an impact on jobs. Is that something he's jobs. Is that something he's willing to look at with the industry going forward, so we can mitigate the damage done to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sector and keep people in Stoke on Trent gainfully employed? I thank my hon. Friend for his

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention and he is a strong advocate for his constituents and for the businesses that are based in his part of the world. Businesses that do contribute significant revenue to the Exchequer and who this government is asking to contribute a bit more is asking to contribute a bit more in order for us to be able to continue to fund our public services in a sustainable way. And of course, I will continue to have conversations with him and others about the impacts of the changes that the government is announcing to this sector and others in this Budget and in this finance bill.

Madam Deputy Speaker, alongside these, the choices I've mentioned, we're also taking action on the loan charge review, which will include accepting all but one of the recommendations of the independent review and in some places, going further than the review suggested. We are creating a new settlement opportunity to support those with outstanding liabilities to resolve their affairs with HMRC. This marks the start of a final opportunity. Madam Deputy Speaker, to draw a line under this long running issue and I sincerely and dearly hope that for everyone involved that we will be able to now move forward and that this issue can start to be part of people's pasts rather than a seemingly never ending part of their future.

And in tandem, we're delivering a package of measures to close in on promoters of marketed tax avoidance, helping taxpayers steer clear of the schemes that they promote, such as a new prohibition on promoting avoidance arrangements that have no realistic prospect of success, and new promoter action notices to acquire businesses to stop providing goods or services to promoters of tax avoidance, where they are used in the promotion of avoidance. We'll give.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. The Minister is making an excellent point. Can I commend him for his work

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I commend him for his work on the loan charge and many, many IT consultants in my constituency and across Thames Valley are and across Thames Valley are grateful for the Treasury's looking into this matter. Many of them felt they were sold schemes which they they were sold schemes which they didn't always fully understand, and they are also grateful for the they are also grateful for the action to tackle inappropriate schemes being marketed at professional people. So I thank him

**** Possible New Speaker ****

again for his work on this matter. Yes. That is a very kind of my hon. Friend, and I know that he and Friend, and I know that he and others on all sides of the House have been making representations over many years on behalf of their over many years on behalf of their constituents who who have been affected by the loan charge. I've met with some of those affected. met with some of those affected. I've met with members of the APPG and I do, and I worked in the months that I was in this role, months that I was in this role, having only been appointed on the 1st of September, I have worked hard to make sure that we come forward with proposals that I do hope will help draw a line under this issue that those who have been affected can see are a reasonable and fair set of proposals that will help those who were subject to the loan charge to be able to come forward and to settle.

And I would really encourage those those individuals to come forward. Madam Deputy Speaker, alongside these changes, we are making steps to continue to close the tax gap by closing loopholes and removing barriers to ensure that people pay pay the tax that they owe, including raising, including raising an additional £2.4 billion in 2930 by introducing further reforms to pursue those who bend or break the rules to collect more unpaid taxes. And we're going to modernise the tax system to make it easier for taxpayers to get their tax right.

First time with the choices delivered in this finance bill. That will bring the total additional revenue raised by closing the tax gap in this Parliament to £10 billion by 20 2930 My right hon. Friend the Chancellor has spoken about this Budget being a package, not a pick and mix, and it is so important for our public finances and for our public services. This finance bill is choosing to deliver the long overdue reforms to update our tax system so it can work for a modern and dynamic and thriving economy and and funding vital policies such as the removal of the two child limit, which will lift half a million children out of poverty.

In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, this finance bill is about delivering on choices, choices to protect working people, choices to cut energy bills, to freeze train fares and prescription charges, choices to boost wages and reduce poverty, and choices to cut inflation to bring down mortgage costs. This finance bill delivers the government's commitment to this country to build a stronger and fairer economy, where living standards rise to see child poverty fall. To ensure that public services are improved up and down the country.

And with every measure in this finance bill being geared

**** Possible New Speaker ****

towards that goal, I commend this bill to the House. Well. The question is that the bill be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the bill be now read a second time and I call the shadow Chancellor Sir Mel Stride. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, in the middle of Leicester Square, in the heart of our great city, there is perhaps a there is a statue to perhaps one of the greatest Englishmen who ever lived, William Shakespeare. And his hand. There is a scroll, and on it hand. There is a scroll, and on it it reads in his own words there is no darkness but ignorance. This government has brought plenty of darkness to our country, indeed, during the run up to the Budget.

Madam Deputy Speaker, we had so many kites flown as to what taxes were going to be put up or not, but the sun was blotted out of the sky and a huge dark shadow was cast across consumers who stopped spending, and businesses who stop investing and employing people. And don't take my word for it, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Bank of England themselves say precisely that, that it damaged the economy. And indeed, we have seen this in the latest figures on growth, which the hon.

Gentleman, right hon. Gentleman was most eager to tell us about just earlier in his speech, the growth in the economy for the three months to the end of October. Madam Deputy Speaker was negative. It was -0.1% further evidence of the darkness that this government has cast upon the animal spirits in our economy. And as to Shakespeare's ignorance, Madam Deputy Speaker, he would be appalled were he here today at the ignorance that has been shown by this government on the basic rules of economics.

It is a basic fact, Madam Deputy Speaker, that if you focus on redistribution, as socialists always do, and there is always an argument, of course, for redistribution, but at the expense of getting the incentives right in the economy, you will damage growth. And at the very heart of this Budget, Madam Deputy Speaker, is exactly that. The key choice that has been taken is to increase taxes on hard working people, and to spend at least a substantial proportion of the money raised on increasing the benefits bill.

The second rule that this government seems to be incapable of grasping is that if you tax something, Madam Deputy Speaker, you get less of it.
16:20
Mel Stride Portrait Rt Hon Sir Mel Stride MP (Central Devon, Conservative)
-
-
That is a simple fact. And that brings me to work. We have seen in brings me to work. We have seen in this finance bill the freezing further of the income tax threshold. It means 800,000 people or thereabouts will be dragged into the basic rate of income tax, and the basic rate of income tax, and about a million or thereabouts will be dragged through fiscal drag into the higher rate of income tax. Indeed, by 2030. Madam Deputy Speaker, it is estimated that around 1 in 4 taxpayers will either be in the higher rate of income tax or indeed the additional rate of income tax, an £8 billion tax grab in the target year, rising to 12.7 billion in 2030.

Now that, on top of various other issues that are coming down the track, like the freezing of the threshold for repayments on student loans, effectively a stealth tax on younger people, the freeze in the employers national insurance threshold, which will raise around £1 billion by 2030, once again coming straight out of employers. A further instalment on the extra jobs tax. And all of this, Madam Deputy Speaker, will reduce the incentive to work. And we have seen this. One of my hon.

Friend's a moment ago, by way of an intervention, raised this very point in the context of hospitality, where we have seen 90,000 jobs being destroyed on this government's watch. And whose jobs are they? They are predominantly young people's jobs, because when you increase national insurance and when you reduce the threshold at which that tax kicks in, it disproportionately impacts those on lower incomes, which includes younger people. And of course, we have the Employment Rights Bill coming down the track as well, which will make employing people, particularly younger people, even more risky and expensive.

And we have seen, Madam Deputy Speaker, an outright attack in this finance bill on savers, those doing the right thing, putting money by for their retirement. And we have seen a 2% increase in taxes on savings income, which the OBR ironically suggests will actually lead to more people putting cash into ISAs. Quite the reverse of that which the Chancellor is attempting to achieve. And three quarters of the impact of that tax, according to the OBR, will be borne by working people by way of reduced pension contributions and lower wages.

Indeed, the Association of British Insurers says, and I quote, that this measure is, quote, a short sighted tax grab which will lower pension savings and undermine people's retirement security. And then it comes to inheritance tax to get back to our friend Shakespeare, when you shuffle off this mortal coil, there is a tax charge. If you have the temerity to have left something by way of a pension, a £1.5 billion tax grab by the Chancellor on those unused pensions, I will certainly give way to the hon.

Gentleman Shakespeare.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy. Speaker, I just wonder whether. The gravediggers. In hamlet might give us some clues as to what the last Conservative government did to the British economy.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I think the grave diggers, Madam Deputy Speaker, sadly, are still alive and well under this government. And we're seeing that government. And we're seeing that in the destruction of jobs, the destruction of business and the destruction of farms and the destruction of livelihoods right up and down this country. And I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

certainly allow my right hon. The Minister. Gave his estimate of the number of farms that would be affected, which I'm quite sure is an underestimate. But notwithstanding that, the chilling effect on that, the chilling effect on agricultural investment has been across the entire sector, as people across the entire sector, as people seek to avoid their farm reaching the threshold for the new tax.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the threshold for the new tax. Well, my right hon. Friend is absolutely right. What businesses, including farms, need in order for them to succeed is lower taxes and to not spend most of their time worrying about how they're going to cover the impact of future taxation, as opposed to planning for the future of their businesses and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

indeed, investing in them. Yes, I'll certainly give way. I thank the hon. Member for giving way, and he will be very giving way, and he will be very familiar with my constituency as he is my constituency neighbour, and I wonder if he would agree with me wonder if he would agree with me that the Minister might have got his figures wrong, because I surveyed all the farms in South Devon, of which there are nearly Devon, of which there are nearly 500 small farms, and of those who replied, 44% of the respondents replied, 44% of the respondents said that they would be.

They would be hit with an inheritance tax bill of over £300,000. When this comes in So would he agree with me that the government simply doesn't understand the value of a farm, particularly in a part of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

country like ours? Speaker I don't think I would naturally defer to the results of a Lib Dem survey over the work of Her Majesty's Treasury. However, I get the gist of what she said, and the gist of what she said, and perhaps perhaps a bar chart with a slightly dodgy scale would be would be a good way of putting putting be a good way of putting putting the point. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, what we don't know is that when the Chancellor says that for those who are in receipt solely of the state pension, should they be dragged slightly into taxation, that they needn't worry about that, because that will be dealt with? We don't know what that actually means.

We don't know what the plan is. We don't know what the cost is. And perhaps later on, the wind ups, the Minister will be able to tell us exactly what is envisaged for these very large number of pensioners under the arrangements in this Bill, who will be dragged into paying tax for the first time on their state pension. What a mess. Madam Deputy Speaker, working against the instincts of those who are doing the right thing to save for their future. And the same is the case.

Madam Deputy Speaker, in respect of investment, 2% increase in tax on dividends, a £1.2 billion tax grab. This will simply have the effect of disincentivising investments in equities. That will mean less capital going to invest in businesses. So of course, that we can drive up productivity. We know part of the story of low productivity in our country, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the fact that private investment has been too low for too long. This will way in the opposite direction.

And whilst the Minister, in his opening remarks, spoke about the importance of increasing investment in plant and machinery, the reality is that under the provisions within this finance bill, there is a cut to the writing down allowances, unless it's new plant and machinery, which will weigh against that very objective. This is an unfair bill. Madam Deputy Speaker and my right hon. Friend raised the issue of the farm tax and he is absolutely right. We have farms up and down this country who are now worried about the future farms, such as those in my constituency that have been in the family.

I will momentarily been in the family for sometimes decades, generations, in some cases even centuries, who are now having to stare down the barrel of a very uncertain future. And what an irony or what a tragedy it is that during the run up to the general election, the then shadow Secretary of State for DEFRA looked the president of the National Farmers Union in the eye, and said that when it came to inheritance tax, at least on that measure, farmers had nothing to fear from a future Labour government.

How wrong they were. And as Tom Bradshaw has said, this whole this whole tax increase is morally wrong and economically flawed. And he is right. I give way to the hon. Lady.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. He is also a near neighbour of mine in also a near neighbour of mine in Devon. So does he agree with me that the provision of APR feels like a double taxation burdening like a double taxation burdening farming families in their old age? One can reasonably only reach one conclusion. This government neither conclusion. This government neither understands nor values this country's farming communities. Talk about biting the hand that about biting the hand that literally feeds you.

It is for this move, amidst a host of other reasons, by my colleagues across these benches, that I will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

voting against this bill this evening. Well, can I welcome the hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, can I welcome the hon. Lady's intervention? And she is absolutely right on the matter of APR. But of course, it's not just

**** Possible New Speaker ****

APR. But of course, it's not just APR. Madam. Yes, I will give way to the hon. Lady. Yeah. I thank the right hon. Member

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the right hon. Member for giving way. And would he agree with me that actually, whenever we're in a world that's extremely uncertain, our farmers are part of uncertain, our farmers are part of our national security. If we are farming them to death, what are we to do in terms of sustainability

**** Possible New Speaker ****

businesses? Yeah. Yeah, ladies.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, ladies. Absolutely right. The value of farming goes well above and beyond simply successful businesses contributing to the economy in the traditional way. They also underpin

**** Possible New Speaker ****

traditional way. They also underpin our food security as a nation. But Friend. I'm grateful. Just finally on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful. Just finally on the family farm tracks, there are hundreds, if not thousands of farmers in Parliament Square this afternoon blasting their horns. I know the Shadow Chancellor himself and many other colleagues in this site have been out to meet them to understand what their concerns are, but has he heard, like I have the frustration they have with the government, the government's failure to listen and to understand the impact that this tactic, the family farm tax, is going to have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

on their viability. Well. My hon. Friend is absolutely.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend is absolutely. And I was out there speaking to farmers this morning, a group of farmers, actually up from Newbury, who taken the trouble to come up who taken the trouble to come up here and make exactly that case very powerfully to us on the day of this debate. How could I resist? My

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this debate. How could I resist? My right hon. And, gallant friend. Did you listen? But this attack on investment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

But this attack on investment extends well beyond agriculture and family farms. It is an attack on every family undertaking every family business in the land. It is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

bonkers. Yeah. Yes. Well, I know my right hon. Friend has been very restrained in his use of language. I think, given the severity of the matters that we are discussing. And he is are discussing. And he is absolutely right. Business Property Relief is being changed in broadly the same way that Agricultural Property Relief is being changed within this bill. And of course, that will have a devastating and similar consequence for family similar consequence for family businesses right up and down this country.

And I have been up and down the country, Madam Deputy Speaker, to me, with many of them and one of the foremost in campaigning, quite rightly, has been Steve Rugby of the Rugby Group, who is the head of the Family Business Association. And in his words, and he put it perfectly. He said business is now family. Businesses are spending too much time protecting their legacy and succession, not on promoting growth. And that is the whole point. If this government wants growth, it's going to have to do things that get businesses to think about growth and not to be having to worry about being broken up because of onerous tax tax measures.

And I certainly give way to the hon. Gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I wonder if my right hon. Friend worries like me that it may be the background, perhaps, of those on the front bench opposite. We have the I don't I don't want to disrespect either of the individuals there now because individuals there now because they're both fine people, but neither have ever, as far as I'm aware, been involved in running a aware, been involved in running a private business. They don't understand how private business works, and they equate the works, and they equate the inheritance of money from a father to a daughter, say, with a family business.

A family business needs to continue because of all the employment that arises from it. And equating the two and saying it's half the normal inheritance tax is to show a complete failure of understanding of the economy of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this country and the economy of a family business. A friend is absolutely right. It

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A friend is absolutely right. It shows a complete lack of understanding of business, and that reflects the lack of true business experience on the front page. I experience on the front page. I will come to the hon. Gentleman very shortly. The lack of business experience on the front bench, but experience on the front bench, but it also goes right to the core of the difference in principles and beliefs between the two parties. beliefs between the two parties. Principle parties in this chamber, we on this side believe that if you work hard and you save hard and you have something left at the end of your life because you love those that you wish to look after in your absence, you should be allowed to pass on that inheritance without the tax man taking a huge, disproportionate amount of that which you have accumulated.

All the party in all the party opposite believes it is mounding up ever more debt in a statist world in which that debt is to be passed on to future generations, to be paid back. We believe in supporting the little platoons, as Burke put it, the families that together form a mighty army. We believe that personal. We believe in personal responsibility. And for that to be rewarded, I will give way to the hon. Gentleman. Then I will come to the honourable.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Shadow Minister. Very kind. Does he bristle like I do? And my constituents and Angus and constituents and Angus and Perthshire Glens who are engaged in farm businesses and agribusiness more generally, when you when he more generally, when you when he hears Ministers on that side talk about the false because it is a false equivalence when they talk false equivalence when they talk about their generous rates of Agricultural Property Relief Agricultural Property Relief compared to the wider economy and how long they are going to get to pay it.

They are making a false equivalence between inheriting your mother's house after her death and pay, and transferring the family farm from one generation to the next. They are completely different propositions, are they not? Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Gentleman, as I have to say so often with many of the interventions that he makes in this House, is absolutely right. There House, is absolutely right. There is a huge difference between a dynamic, growing organism of a dynamic, growing organism of a company and the other situation that he described. And if you load up these taxes on the death of the principal owner or one of the significant owners of a business, then you load it up with then you load it up with uncertainty.

And quite conceivably, that business has to, as a consequence, be broken up. I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

take the the hon. Lady. I thank. The Shadow Chancellor.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For giving way. As someone that used to be part of a small family business in Glasgow, I just business in Glasgow, I just wondered if he agreed with me that stability around inflation, stability around inflation, corporation tax and reducing interest rates were equally important to a small family

**** Possible New Speaker ****

business. Well, it's interesting that the hon. Lady should raise the issue of inflation, because inflation is currently about twice the target of 2% and it was bang on target on the day of the general election at 2% because of the action that we, alongside the Bank of England took, the IMF is forecasting that inflation in our country will be the highest in the G7 this year and the highest in the G7 next year. And if you ask a question as to why that has happened, it is relatively simple.

If you put National Insurance on employers, they pass some of those additional costs on by way of higher prices. That is inflationary. If you borrow vast amounts of money, and despite what the Minister had to say earlier, spend vast amounts of money to about half £1 trillion more than was the case under the plans that the party opposite inherited. You also stake in stoke inflation. And whilst it may be that the the government frontbench will trumpet the fact that interest rates have come down five times, the reality is if they hadn't mismanaged the economy, they would have come down an awful lot faster.

Interest rates are higher and for longer because we have sticky inflation, which is due to the choices taken by this government. I give way to the hon. Gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My right hon. Friend makes a good case for conservative economics. Would he also agree with me that the also agree with me that the government has made some wrong footed changes to non-dom status in its two years in office so far, and its two years in office so far, and that he's going to damage investment and growth? And not only is that something that we don't want to see on these benches, but also their forecasts rely on £34 billion of revenue from these people.

So would he agree with me

**** Possible New Speaker ****

people. So would he agree with me that the government should think again about the wisdom of these changes? Where my hon. Friend is absolutely right is that we have become an economy that has closed the door on international investment. In fact, the door has been blown wide open by those fleeing to go to places like the UAE and Milan and other places around the world to escape the high tax jurisdiction that we have become. And it comes with great cost.

The 16,000 high net worth people that have fled under this government, you would probably need about a third to a half a million people on average earnings to cover the tax that just walked out the door. So my right hon. Friend. My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We will reverse the AB changes and the BPR changes if we form the next government. I will now make swift progress. Madam Deputy Speaker, just to say that the wrong choices have been taken. Tax should not be going up, spending shouldn't be going up this way.

And I don't even believe that the Chancellor's heart is in the benefit changes and the two child benefit cap changes that have occurred. If they were, why was the whip removed from several on the other side of this chamber? The reality is that the Prime Minister and the Chancellor are lashed to the same mast. This is all about their survival. They lost control of their own backbenchers. And to go back to Shakespeare and the Tempest, the storm has no respect for rank. So they pitch and roll solely at the command of those behind them.

Madam Deputy Speaker, as the great man wrote, all the world is a stage, and one man in his time plays many parts. But this Chancellor has played but one part, that of recklessness at heart. She has taxed that which is good. And in this bill she has incentivised

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that which is not. And by so doing all. Yeah, yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, yeah. The original question was that the bill be now read a second time since when amendments has been since when amendments has been proposed as on the Order Paper. The question is the amendment be made? And as it's the Second Reading of the finance bill, I cannot put a speaking limit. But I can suggest that colleagues keep their remarks to around six minutes and I call

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Callum Anderson. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm pleased to contribute to this debate, and I want to start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Exchequer Secretary, on bringing forward his first finance bill, and I hope it's the first of many. Given the time, the limited time that I have, I want to focus my
16:39
Callum Anderson Portrait Callum Anderson MP (Buckingham and Bletchley, Labour)
-
-
remarks on the government central mission, which is economic growth. And the government has rightly And the government has rightly placed investment and reform at the heart of its strategy, and removing the barriers to economic growth the barriers to economic growth that have held this country and the towns, villages and city that make up the Buckingham and Bletchley constituency back for too long, be it major planning reforms, cutting regulatory costs, investing in skills and apprenticeships and skills and apprenticeships and undertaking fundamental pensions reform to free up more risk capital.

And this investment and pro invest reform approach lays the foundation for our long term economic growth across the UK, but also our long term global competitiveness. Now this country is a great place to start a business, despite what members opposite have said. But scaling a business has been too difficult for too long, for too many entrepreneurs, and too many firms are acquired early by private capital, often capital from abroad, and therefore fail to scale globally. And there are a number of fantastic, innovative, high growth companies in the Buckingham and Bletchley constituency, be that Pulser and Physics or Carnot engines.

And I want all of them to realise their full potential in my constituency and not overseas. And I do believe that this finance bill goes some way in in enabling that. And it's not just not just those companies that believe that it will help. We've I've read many commendations from the start up coalition or the Scale Up Institute, who have backed many of the measures that I will cover in my remarks. Now, clauses 13 to 16 and clause 82 of this bill back.

The ambition encourages investment and rewards. Those that are wanting to take risks. The expanding the enterprise management incentive certainly raising the employment limits to 500. The gross assets to £120 million, and the holding period to 15 years ensures that more high growth, innovative companies can attract and retain the world class domestic and global talent that they need. Joining a fast growing company is, for many, a leap of faith, and when that risk pays off, the people who create the success should share in that reward too.

I also want to to welcome clauses 14 and 15, which accompanies the logic that I just set out forward with regards to the Enterprise Investment Scheme and venture capital trusts, and I particularly welcome the raising of the company investment limits and the lifetime caps, both of which ensure that more early stage companies can scale here in the UK and not overseas, and similarly, raising the respective gross assets limits before and after share deals sensibly reflects the modern growth realities.

I believe that these reforms will support the life sciences, the green technology, the advanced manufacturing companies, all in sectors identified by the government's industrial strategy, which it published earlier this year and enable earlier capital raising, faster and more efficient scaling, and make it far more likely that more of these companies will become national champions and companies of global consequence. Right anchored here in the UK, the final clause that I want to welcome in this bill is clause 82, which is the new UK listing relief, which removes the 0.5% stamp duty reserve tax on transfers for newly listed companies.

Now this is a this is a measure which for many, many across UK financial services but also across all a wide range of sectors which are in the industrial strategy for a significant period of time. And I believe that this clause will boost liquidity, incentivise more investors of all types, be the institutional or retail to buy British and entice more domestic companies to follow in the footsteps of Magnum of Shawbrook and the Beauty Tech Group in listing in London.

I'm pleased that this bill Madam Deputy Speaker strengthens the UK's ability to globally compete to support its entrepreneurs and to make sure that the UK is the best possible place to scale a company. I will just close my remarks now on what I hope will be perhaps placed for consideration in a future finance Bill in future parliamentary sessions that the government may wish to dedicate itself towards. And that is pro growth and pro enterprise tax reform. The previous government, and indeed many governments, have a number of different political orientations, have increased the number or have increased the length of the tax code itself, increase the number of cliff edges, complicated the tax base and frankly, fundamentally failed to close or to tackle various loopholes.

And as we rededicate ourselves to growth in this parliamentary session and in future parliamentary sessions, we do well to ensure that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

simplification and fairness are Gravesham. Again. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson Daisy Cooper.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. If this finance bill represents anything, finance bill represents anything, I'm sorry to say that it's this government knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing, and that is why we Liberal Democrats have tabled a reasoned amendment against this bill, setting out all of our reasons. Ultimately, this finance bill is a series of short term Treasury tax grabs with no care for the consequences and no vision for the future. People are crying out for change, the change that they were promised.

But the double whammy of stealth taxes on households and high streets make Labour look like nothing more than continuity
16:45
Daisy Cooper Portrait Daisy Cooper MP (St Albans, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
conservatives. Extending the unfair freeze on income tax thresholds again will drag millions of low again will drag millions of low paid workers into tax. The failure to reform the business rate system to reform the business rate system again looks like continuity conservatives. Madam Deputy Speaker, conservatives. Madam Deputy Speaker, in world, we need to boost our sovereign capabilities. Security is critical to that. And yet, despite all of the evidence, despite all of the campaigning, despite all of the honking horns of tractors on Whitehall, the government has failed to get it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

way. I thank the hon. Lady for giving way in 2023. The Prime Minister way in 2023. The Prime Minister told the National Farmers Union that losing a farm is not like losing any other business. If someone makes powerful representations, then my instinct is to consider what's being said. Getting it right is more important Getting it right is more important than ploughing on with a package which doesn't necessarily achieve the desired outcome. Isn't it time

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the desired outcome. Isn't it time the Prime Minister followed his instincts and abandoned the family farm tax? Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. I wholeheartedly agree that the Prime Minister should change direction. It's deeply disappointing that, having deeply disappointing that, having been grilled at the Liaison Committee yesterday, that he clearly has no intention of doing clearly has no intention of doing so. Madam Deputy Speaker, the changes to APR and BPR will punish family farmers who put food on our family farmers who put food on our tables and guarantee the food security of our nation, and it won't tackle the loophole by which private equity companies and celebrity farmers buy land to reduce their tax liability.

I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way. hon. Friend, for giving way. Much has been made by the other Much has been made by the other benches of the fact that inheriting the family farm tax will be repayable over ten years or payable over ten years, completely ignoring over ten years, completely ignoring the fact that 30% of family farms made no profit at all last year. made no profit at all last year. Invariably, in order to be able to pay the bill, they are going to have to sell land, which is just

**** Possible New Speaker ****

going to feed exactly the kind of for. Very grateful to my hon. Friend for making that point. This is going to have unintended consequences. We can see what those unintended, unintended consequences are going to be. We have spent a year warning the government that they can no longer say that they have not been warned. And I just hope so much that still at this late stage, that they do make some

**** Possible New Speaker ****

changes to the finance Bill. I'm grateful to her for giving way because I fear she might be a way because I fear she might be a little over generous in saying that there are unintended consequences here. If she looks at the provisions in the anti forestalling clause, which is intended to deny clause, which is intended to deny those over 65, or anyone dying now those over 65, or anyone dying now or dying within the seven year period to manage their tax affairs

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in a sensible way that puts a massive burden onto those over 75. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. I couldn't agree more. And the right hon. Gentleman for Orkney and Shetland, who has been chairing the Shetland, who has been chairing the DEFRA Select Committee, a Labour majority Select Committee, has navigated that issue so well over the last year, and I put all credit the last year, and I put all credit to him on the parliamentary record for his sterling efforts and drawing attention to that issue. Madam Deputy Speaker, if there had been any justification at all for these APR BPR changes, it would have been that the government was trying to crack down on these loopholes.

But as colleagues have said, that is not that has not happened with these changes. And the Prime Minister effectively admitted in front of the liaison Committee yesterday that the government wasn't even trying to do that. So we all know that these measures will cause damage. Farming communities know it. Liberal Democrats know it. Labour majority select committees know it. This is just another short term Treasury tax grab. Madam Deputy Speaker, family businesses are going to be hit to the very family businesses that support their employees through thick and thin.

The very employers who provide employment in every corner of the country, the very family businesses that help the economy bounce back strongly after a crisis, giving our economy resilience. Why would a government want to target our family businesses? I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and will she agree with me that this is not a tax on passive wealth? It is Punitively cynically targets productive enterprise. The government expects to raise roughly 1.4 billion from to raise roughly 1.4 billion from the inheritance tax changes. That analysis by Family Business UK suggests behavioural responses suggests behavioural responses could produce a new a net loss of 1.9 billion by the end of this 1.9 billion by the end of this decade.

Are these measures not anti-growth and directly at odds

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with the supposed messaging of this government? Thank you, Madam Speaker. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I wholeheartedly agree, and it's so frustrating that in last year's Budget and in this Budget, the government continues to say that it government continues to say that it is pro growth and that growth remains its number one mission. And yet, time and time again, we see measures that are anti-growth measures that are anti-growth throughout these, these two budgets. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have heard many of us have heard from family businesses in our constituencies and around the country.

Many of them have told us how they have sat around the family dinner table, and they've had deeply difficult, traumatic conversations, planning what to do with their business if they die in the wrong order. A phrase that for some family businesses used with me. And again, if they if they have to break up the business, they will probably end up selling it off to private equity companies too. These are the businesses that are household names and family favourites. This is again another short term Treasury tax grab with no care for the consequences.

Madam Deputy Speaker, on the income tax hike for dividend property and savings income, the Federation of Small Businesses sums it up. They say hikes to dividend tax mean the government continues to make investing in your own business one of the least tax friendly things that you can do with your money. At a time when we desperately need more business investment. This seems to be another short sighted Treasury tax grab. What we desperately need, Madam Deputy Speaker, is growth.

And we Liberal Democrats have repeatedly bang the drum for growth with Europe. Brexit, we know, has been a disaster. Many of the government's own Ministers admit it. Yet where is the strength of conviction to try and fix it? We now know that the previous government's failed Brexit deal cost the taxpayer around £90 billion a year in terms of lost tax revenue. Just think, just think what this government could deliver if it could start to fix that. Just imagine the change that the government could deliver in people's pockets, in their energy bills, in the money they have in their bank account at the end of the month, the change that the government could deliver for households and high streets, if the government could just start, just start to plug that gap of £90 billion a year in lost tax revenue.

And now, Madam Deputy Speaker, to our high streets, our high streets are critical to our sense of community up and down the land. Yet high street hospitality businesses are getting hit once again. Last year it was the jobs tax and this year it is the higher business rates bills. And that is why I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way. I thank. My honourable colleague. For giving way. Just yesterday I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For giving way. Just yesterday I was talking with a pub landlord who wants to expand his. His business has acquired a new building. He's has acquired a new building. He's found that even though the new building is derelict, his business building is derelict, his business rates on that have increased by 89%. He is eager to continue to have his He is eager to continue to have his pubs form the heart of the community, but he's finding it difficult to recruit workers since Brexit, when all of the casual workers went back to Europe.

Does my hon. Friend agree with me that these policies are profoundly undermining not just growth, but communities?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. I'm incredibly grateful to my hon. Friend for making that point because our pubs in particular, but because our pubs in particular, but hospitality more widely are at the heart of our community, and they provide so much more than just provide so much more than just somewhere to have a pint and a pie. They provide community social cohesion. They're the antidote to cohesion. They're the antidote to this pandemic and this epidemic of isolation. They have history and culture attached, and they're somewhere where we can go to argue well over a pint.

But yet our pubs and our hospitality businesses are really, really struggling. That is why, as a point of protest, we Liberal Democrats voted against the increase in alcohol duty in the Budget resolutions last week, and we remain opposed to them in the finance bill on business rates. I'm afraid to say, and I'm sorry to say, that the government is behaving as though they're somehow doing hospitality a favour. But I cannot tell you, Madam Deputy Speaker, how angry hospitality owners and leaders are furious, angry, betrayed, gaslit.

These are just some of the more polite words that I've heard them use. And the Labour manifesto was clear. It said the current business rates, the current business rates, system, disincentivizes investment. It creates uncertainty and places an undue burden on our high streets in England. Labour will replace the business rates system so we can raise the same revenue, but in a fairer way. This new system will level the playing field between the high street and online giants, better incentivise investment, tackle empty properties and support entrepreneurship.

But Madam Deputy Speaker, Labour has not replaced business rates and it has not levelled the playing field. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. To my hon. Friend for giving way. Does my hon. Friend agree that in places such as Stratford-on-Avon, places such as Stratford-on-Avon, this bill leaves pubs on the high streets and in villages facing bill streets and in villages facing bill increases many times higher than those faced by larger distribution warehouses linked to online retail, warehouses linked to online retail, raising serious questions about whether the tax system is really

**** Possible New Speaker ****

whether the tax system is really supporting communities and local economies. I'm grateful to my hon. Friend. She's absolutely spot on with that comment, because we've all seen the statistics and the percentage increases for officers for for warehouses have gone up marginally, but they've gone up massively for our pubs and hospitality businesses. And analysis, which I know has been shared with Ministers this morning, suggests, for example, that the bill for Harrods will actually fall by 1.1 million when it will be going up by tens of thousands.

For many of our small independent pubs, hotels and hospitality. The government cannot hide behind semantics. For a year they kept using the word lower and that is what businesses heard. Now the business rates bills have arrived and they can see that they are higher. The government gave themselves the powers to reduce the retail, hospitality and leisure multiplier not just by £0.05 but by £0.20. But now they are refusing to use those powers. The system of transitional relief that the government has put in place is simply an admission that the government has got this badly wrong.

There is a stark warning coming from the hospitality industry. They say that this looming increase that is going to come in 2029, this looming increase in business rates, is going to kill the pipeline of owners coming into the hospitality industry. And just as the government is about to publish its visitor economy strategy, there is so much incongruence. Madam Deputy Speaker. The government says it wants to do one thing and then does something else to undermine it. And the bottom line for this hospitality businesses, high street businesses have just two choices.

They can shut up shop, or they can put up prices. And there are a few things that speak to the economic health of the nation and the high street, more than the price of a pint. Madam Deputy Speaker, I issue the warning to the government. Now if they do not act, customers will see the £10 pint before the next general election on Labour's watch. So let me call on Ministers again to use the powers it gave itself to reduce the multiplier by the full £0.20 and adopt an emergency VAT tax cut to our hospitality businesses to boost growth, stimulate consumer confidence and help save our high streets.

Madam Deputy Speaker, for all these reasons, Liberal

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Democrats will be voting against the government's finance bill Markus Campbell-Savours. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. I struggle to be brief. So excuse me if I. Compensate with bluntness.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Compensate with bluntness. labour. Activist of 20. Years, former councillor and
16:58
Markus Campbell-Savours Portrait Markus Campbell-Savours MP (Penrith and Solway, Independent)
-
-
>> Years, former councillor and chief whip on a Labour group. And although I currently have the Labour whip suspended. People should be under no illusion where my loyalties lie. I knew before the election in July 24th that this government would not have an easy job. I believe there's too much to do, many broken services and not enough money to fix them. But I also know that the choice at the ballot box was between a party that subjected this country to politically motivated austerity, or a Labour government that would invest in the future.

I believe that still means tough decisions on spending and tax tough decisions. Our Treasury team have not ducked. I also don't find it credible that the last government failed to tackle backlogs in the NHS. NHS cut back on early intervention in family support, failed to fix the housing crisis and yet complain about the benefits bill. Like the things aren't all linked. Today I'll be supporting the finance bill to progress to the next stage. This government needs to set a Budget and there are many measures in the bill to benefit Cumbria.

But let me be clear. Whip or no whip, as the bill progresses, I will not be supporting the agricultural inheritance tax proposals. I want a full U-turn, a previously set out why I cannot and will not be moved to a position where I break my word to farmers in my community. But my advice to Ministers is take note of my more reasonable colleagues on the government benches. They've been increasingly vocal on this issue, and it doesn't look like they're going to stop soon.

Look at the anti foreclosure clause in this bill. Recognise the deep discomfort this is causing across rural Britain and change course. It really is not too late.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure to take part in the debate and to follow the hon. the debate and to follow the hon. Gentleman who's just spoken and who has is rare on the benches opposite has is rare on the benches opposite in feeling such commitment to maintaining and fulfilling the promises that he made, not least to promises that he made, not least to his farmers. And so, perhaps, Madam Deputy Speaker, I'll begin my remarks just focusing on the
17:00
Graham Stuart Portrait Rt Hon Graham Stuart MP (Beverley and Holderness, Conservative)
-
-
remarks just focusing on the farming issue, because I think too often we look at it in a sort of overall structural way and make comparisons with other types of inheritance, rather than looking at the specifics of the farming industry. And a third of of farmers don't make any profit at all. A great deal more of those who do make profit make very little. So although we don't have exact data, Madam Deputy Speaker, it would appear that well over half of farmers, well over half of farmers make a 1% return on capital employed, or less 1% or less.

And if you're a Treasury Minister, you would have thought you might not have any business experience. Sadly, that's they typically don't. On the Labour side, but they should at least practice numeracy. And if you're numerate, you can work out if you make just 1% return annually on the capital value of your business, how are you going to pay a 20% tax? It's 20 years of earnings. If you make 1% and a third don't make anything at all. And this isn't some freak thing that's just happened.

It's consistent. Now the government, to be fair to them on one sense, have have woken up. Madam Deputy Speaker, they said, oh, we must have a new initiative. I forget what it's called to increase the profitability of farmers. Well, yippity do. Well done for that. But shouldn't you increase the profitability of farmers before you impose a tax upon them, which mathematically, arithmetically, whatever other word you want to use, they cannot pay. That is the truth. They can't pay it. More than half of farmers literally don't have the profits to allow them to pay that tax.

And that sits at the heart of this. It's a simple truth. And these businesses are businesses who are prepared to do it because of their lifestyle, because of their personal commitment, because of their love of farming. They do it in order to put among the highest quality food in the world on our plates, at among the lowest costs in Europe. So from a public policy point of view, if you've got businesses that will do that who are prepared unlike any other business sector I can ever think of, I've ever experienced would certainly have ever entertained.

Big part of myself. Would take such low returns, work all the hours God gives, and bring brilliant food to the tables of people up and down this country at low cost. Why on earth, Minister? Why on earth would you want to go and drive those people out so that the very people you say you want to attack, namely the huge billionaires and vast trust based businesses, can gobble up the very farms which are currently run by decent people in our community who do all that good and ask very little in return.

I give way to the hon. Lady.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Member, for giving way, and is making an impassioned speech which certainly represents the which certainly represents the feeling of my farmers in my rural constituency of Chichester. Does he agree with me that the farmers agree that they are also up in arms, that these billionaire companies that these billionaire companies that are ripping up small farms out of the system and, and, and and building their empire, but the small family farms, anytime they do make profit, they reinvest it straight back into the farm so that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

they can farm the following year. Well, they they did, but we've

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, they they did, but we've seen and there's all the evidence. It's happening now, regardless of the argument from Ministers as to the argument from Ministers as to what percentage of farms are going to be affected, you can see it in all the stats it's available, particularly available. I would particularly available. I would have hoped to Treasury Ministers to find out what the real world impact is of this policy. And the real world impact is. We've seen a drop in investment in the farming industry, and that's a that's a disaster.

And it may be the hon. Gentleman who spoke before me is standing alone. But I think across the Labour benches, I mean, look at the enthusiasm for the Second Reading of this major finance bill that's supposed to be doing such good for the country. I mean, look at it. There's more than 400 of them. Madam Deputy Speaker and and they're not exactly here to cheer it on. And but but I think they are realising and I hope the Minister realises just how counterproductive this is.

But the one thought I would try and implant above all are those numbers. Those numbers mean it's absurd. It is absurd. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, imagine generally being a business owner today. Not necessarily just in farming. You climb up, you hike your way up the mountain to get to success. You wade through an eternal shower of tax rises, and you hack your way through a jungle of red tape. And then on your deathbed, you're met not first by the Grim Reaper, but by the Chancellor.

Armed with one final sting, a double tax bill for your children. And that is the reality facing family businesses. If this government cuts Business Property Relief next year, it leads to a double tax bill. And I ask the Minister who opened this to comment on that and how that double taxation works, he was unable. Off the top of his head, to respond to my specific numbers, which is entirely understandable, Madam Deputy Speaker, but armed and perhaps refreshed by the brilliant people in the box behind her, I hope the Minister, in her summing up, may be able to address the specifics of what is the tax reality for a business faced by this.

Because this this double tax bill is what thousands of sons and daughters will receive when their entrepreneurial mum or dad pass away from April, the 100% inheritance tax relief family businesses rely on will be capped at just £1 million. Anything above that will be taxed at 20%. So take a company, small company worth £11 million. Madam Deputy Speaker, the inheritance tax bill alone will be £2 million. But Madam Deputy Speaker as I'm as far as I'm aware, the sons and daughters of most entrepreneurs in Beverley and Holderness don't have £2 million tucked away down the back of the sofa to pay that bill.

They will be forced to extract that money from the business itself. I'm not sure that people have focussed on this enough. This isn't a tax on the business. This is a tax on the people who inherit the business and they are outside the business to pay that bill. As I say, they will be forced to extract that money from the business itself, usually in the form of dividends. And those dividends are taxed at rates approaching 40%. So £2 million inheritance tax bill becomes a £3.3 million hit on the business, £2 million to pay the Chancellor and another £1.3 million.

Oh yes, to pay the Chancellor simply because the money was invested in jobs, equipment or the business overall, rather than left idle. I give way to the hon. Gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Gentleman. Is he concerned, as I am, that this is a spreadsheet as I am, that this is a spreadsheet Budget that was concerned with very little more than what the number in the bottom right hand corner of the spreadsheet was. That's why everything is unravelling so catastrophically on on his BPR catastrophically on on his BPR point. Nothing against PLCs, but does he agree further with me that businesses that are owned by businesses that are owned by families rooted in communities spend their investments locally? They support local organisations and charities they employ locally and their profits go back in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

locally. So this is absolutely devastating jeopardy for those types of businesses. Well, the hon. Gentleman, as so

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, the hon. Gentleman, as so often is absolutely right. And again it's talked about hitting the fat cats, hitting the big fat cats, hitting the big businesses. They are the ones that will benefit. It's the huge corporates that will snap up the corporates that will snap up the farmland and they will snap up the small business. Because this isn't fair taxation. It's irrational double taxation. The consequences of this policy are real. And a report by the CBI shows that far from raising the 1.4 billion forecast by the Treasury, and if my hon.

Friend, if I may call him, that is right about them being obsessed about the bottom right hand corner. I hope if no other argument weighs with the Minister, this might they suggest that far from raising that welcome 1.4 billion, these changes are likely to reduce tax revenues from family owned businesses by 1.8 billion by 2030. Yet another example of this innumerate government having the exact opposite of the outcome that they wished. As investment falls, businesses restructure and growth is choked off.

Instead of supporting the government's claim to be pro-business and pro-worker, this change could cost more than 200,000 jobs, on top of the 200,000 jobs that the Chancellor has already cost this country. That's money sucked out of the economy and into Labour's bottomless black hole. And the impact will be felt directly in Beverley and Holderness, where it's expected to put 237 local jobs at risk, according to the CBI. These are apprentices, I bet I'd better not. These are apprentices not taken on, machinery, not upgraded, and businesses downsizing changes that will leave us all poorer.

So I ask the Minister and the Chancellor a simple and constructive question if she will not reverse these changes to business property relief, will she at least consider a targeted mechanism so that when these dividends are necessarily extracted solely to pay the inheritance tax bill, those dividends are not taxed?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Again. As I cannot set a time limit as colleagues to monitor their own timekeeping, and I suggest six

**** Possible New Speaker ****

timekeeping, and I suggest six minutes would be a good time. Alison Taylor. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's a pleasure to have the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. Members on both sides of the House have so eloquently set out their views on the provisions of this Budget. From my own experience of running a
17:10
Alison Taylor Portrait Alison Taylor MP (Paisley and Renfrewshire North, Labour)
-
-
my own experience of running a small business, I empathise with entrepreneurs working hard to build something, employ people, and being willing to take on the risk to build a business. In my constituency, as in many others, small business is an important part of the local community. Obviously they provide a source of local employment. They make our high streets into destinations. So many lend their expertise to local charitable and social organisations in the community, including local sports teams and to volunteer organisations.

Paisley and Renfrewshire North benefits from the generosity of local businesses in lending expertise, making donations or providing sponsorship. This Budget provides a sure foundation for the service, our services. Our entrepreneurs need to establish their business. We need a firm foundation of laws, police to enforce them and the courts to oversee the process. We need transport, infrastructure and public transport by which workers and customers get to work places or

**** Possible New Speaker ****

shops, and deliveries can be made. One of the concerns that many of us have in this chamber, indeed, probably we all have in this probably we all have in this chamber, including normal normality, is the issue of the squeeze of the middle classes, squeeze of the middle classes, squeeze of the working class, what many of my constituents have told me. And I wonder, does the hon. Lady's constituents told her as well, the constituents told her as well, the concerns that that squeeze is going to be felt even more.

And the only people who are really paying the most are the people, the working class, the middle class, those who can't afford it either.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I thank the hon. Gentleman for his point. I think, you know, we need a balance about fairness, and there's a lot of things in this Budget that will balance things out Budget that will balance things out in the round, including all the investment into infrastructure. And investment into infrastructure. And in Scotland, in my own constituency. That's really, really important to That's really, really important to drive economic growth. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, we need a workforce with the education to produce our goods or services and drive our business ecosystem forward.

This Budget sets a fair balance between the taxes and services, and a fair balance between benefits and responsibilities, and a fair balance between meeting immediate needs and investing in the future. I know that people are still suffering the hangover from the last government, and I hope that people start to really feel the benefits of recovery from this Budget. Madam Deputy Speaker, last week I was at the Paisley Christmas market. I expect it's quite like markets up and down the country, a mix of established local businesses and young and family entrepreneurs testing out a business idea, making Christmas gifts or treats for a little extra income in 2026.

Some of these stallholders will grow their businesses locally. Some will be taking steps in wider markets and new products. And my constituency of Paisley and Renfrewshire North is a suitable place to do that. Recently named as Scotland's Town of the year, Paisley has a supportive infrastructure for new and growing businesses, new net zero commercial property developments across my constituency are making it one of the most welcoming places in the country to locate or grow a business. This Budget gives them a found a firm foundation on which to build the Budget.

Demonstration of the government's commitment to fiscal responsibility is keeping borrowing costs down and bringing much needed stability to the economy. In education, we are focusing on skills and increasing the availability of apprenticeships. We are negotiating exciting trade deals across the world and attracting important new orders for ships to be built on the Clyde, and so much more. I am in no doubt there is still much more to be done. I look forward to what my hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and colleagues across

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Carmichael. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I remind the House of my entry in I remind the House of my entry in the Register of Members Interests. I want to start today with a I want to start today with a comment which some may see as controversial. Uncharacteristically controversial. Uncharacteristically so, I hope, but I want this government to succeed. I think it
17:15
Alistair Carmichael Portrait Rt Hon Alistair Carmichael MP (Orkney and Shetland, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
government to succeed. I think it is actually in the national interest that everyone should want our government to succeed, and I worry that continued economic stagnation now poses an increasing threat to social cohesion. And that is why I agree so strongly with their growth mission. That is why I think it is so important. I think, though, that if that growth is going to be meaningful, then it has to be a growth that is available and is felt and understood in every part of the United Kingdom.

So it shouldn't just be a growth in the cities and towns. It has to be growth that is felt and understood in rural communities, coastal communities, and of course, our island communities. And it is for that reason that I feel so strongly about the dangers of what the government is doing in relation to the removal of agricultural property relief. We have already seen the effect that the prospect of that has had on agricultural businesses and agricultural businesses, of course, underpins so much of what happens in rural communities.

49% of farm businesses have already paused or cancelled planned investment, 10% have downsized the scale of their operations and a further 21% intend to do so before next April. So the truth of the matter is that these changes to APR have absolutely killed the sense of growth in the rural community, and I welcome what the Minister said today about changes to the spousal transfer. I was inspired by the shadow Chancellor's references to Shakespeare. I offer my own from A.A.

Milne, maybe not quite so high falutin, but I. Madam Deputy Speaker, as you well know, I'm a bear of little brain, but I'm pretty sure that what we heard from the Dispatch Box today is more or less what they were telling us last year was going to be the case anyway. So if that is a concession, then it doesn't seem to be much of a concession to me, but it may have escaped the attention of the Treasury bench.

Not every farmer is married, and indeed a lot of farmers, like everybody else these days, get married and some of them get divorced. So is it really the message from the government to the farming community today that if you want to hold on to the farm for the next generation, then get on to Tinder now, because that's going to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

be your best chance of holding it on. The Right. hon. Member. Give way just in a second

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Give way just in a second because missing my punchline. You'd better understand that if you want better understand that if you want to develop your relationship in the back of a double cab pickup, then that's going to cost you as well.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that's going to cost you as well. I'll give way to the hon. Gentleman. I'm grateful. And I mean, while

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful. And I mean, while I suppose some in the farming community won't be taking up his dating tips, is he aware that 46% of farms are owned by single farmers? And that a single farmer with 200 acres of land would have to pay 136% of their yearly profit to cover this tax bill?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am indeed aware of the general point. The specific illustration is a new one on me, but I'm pretty sure, my hon. Friend, that it will be well funded because in fact, the be well funded because in fact, the reason why this is so dangerous is rooted in the exceptionally poor return on capital investment that you get from agriculture. I sat down with many farmers in my down with many farmers in my constituency. Your average family farm in Orkney will be something in the region of maybe 250 300 acres, running perhaps 100 suckler beef cattle and some sheep.

The value of that property will be something in the region of £3 million, including stock building, buildings and machinery, but it will return a net profit most years of something in the region of 25 to £30,000. So do the maths here. That is an inheritance tax liability of £400,000, which even over the ten years that's allowed, you are not simply going to be able to pay. So as a consequence, farms are going to be sold off in whole or in part, and they will not be bought for those who want to produce food.

And that is where the comes the really come to the nub of it. If, as the Prime Minister tells us, food security is national security, then what we see in the changes to APR is in fact, something that is going to diminish our ability to look after our own food needs. Now, the Minister from the despatch box said that this would only affect something. I did not pick up the exact figure. I think he said 320 something estates per year. Now, that figure may or may not be correct.

I have heard nobody outside Treasury who thinks that it is a credible figure, but it honestly misses the point. Whether it is one one estate or 1000 estates, an injustice as an injustice. And that is why I was so disappointed by the Minister's attitude today. Because consider who will be paying this tax. Who is estates will be affected. The Treasury's own figures tell us that 75% of those estates will come from those who are 75 or over, and that is why the anti forestalling clause in this bill is so pernicious and so obnoxious.

The effect of the anti forestalling clause is to trap, especially those who have farmed into their 70s, in their 80s, into the new rules, unless they die before next April. Now, I dislike the use of hyperbole, especially when we are talking about people and their lives. But honestly, the anti anti forestalling clause in this bill Madam Deputy Speaker is downright cruel for those who farmed into their 70s and 80s. They did it principally for two reasons. First of all, they were given good, sound, professional advice that this was the best way to hold on to the farm to hand it on.

And that was true until last October. But also, you have to understand, and this again, is rooted in the poor level of farm incomes. Many of them did it because they could not afford not to. I look at my own family example, and there are those in my family who continued to farm until the 80s, because if they didn't, they would be left simply on the state pension and nothing else. That is why this bill and these measures are wrong.

They are dangerous. They are a threat to our growth. They are a threat to our national security and our food security. And I, along with my colleagues this evening, will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

voting against them here. John Grady. Madam Deputy Speaker and I fully

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker and I fully support the Chancellor's decision to rebuild the hedgerow and to to rebuild the hedgerow and to tackle government borrowing and stick to her fiscal rules. It is consistent with labour values. There's nothing progressive about spending 10% of government spending
17:23
John Grady Portrait John Grady MP (Glasgow East, Labour)
-
-
spending 10% of government spending on interest. There's nothing progressive about leaving to future generations unsustainable debt. And I do worry, Madam Deputy Speaker, that there's a lot of criticism of the Chancellor's proposals, but very little by way of fully worked up alternative proposals. And tackling debt is very, very important because I will do in a minute, if I may, because the nature of government debt buyers is changing with the closure of defined benefit schemes and where we borrow money from in the future.

As the OBR have outlined in a report, is going to be much more different to what we face now. And further, there's rising government debt across very many governments in the Western world. So tackling this government debt in the longer term is very, very important. And the Chancellor is quite right to focus on our fiscal rules and facing to the tough decisions that need to be taken. And all of us must play our part in assisting with what is something that is incredibly important for our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

gentlemen. I thank the hon. Member for giving way, but this comes down to choices. The tax revenue that will be raised from the changes to APR be raised from the changes to APR and BPR is about 500 million. But then you have the government, on the other hand, saying we're going the other hand, saying we're going to spend 1.8 billion on rollout of mandatory digital ID, 47 billion on the Chagos deal. So this is about the Chagos deal. So this is about choices and how the government not only raises revenue but spends it.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. And I'm obliged, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is about choices. Choices to invest in the health service so that people can return to work and contribute to the economy. There's nothing more heartbreaking than being a constituency MP and listening to people who have been waiting over two years for a hip operation and two years for a hip operation and cannot work. Choices to invest in infrastructure. Choices to invest in new nuclear power stations. These are the choices that this These are the choices that this government are making and I am proud of them.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will we wait? I appreciate. The gentleman's. Giving way. He's right that this is about choices. Will he accept, though, choices. Will he accept, though, that one of the choices that the Chancellor has made is the idea that even though hospitality that even though hospitality employs less than 3% of people in the UK, sorry, even the hospitality employs just less than 7% of people in the UK. Since the Chancellor's come into office, the amount of jobs have been lost in hospitality is almost 100,050% of the total job is almost 100,050% of the total job losses.

So she has made a choice as Chancellor in this Budget. And that choice the Chancellor has made is to lose swathes of jobs throughout hospitality. Many are young people unemployable.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention and I worked in hospitality. I'm not sure I was particularly successful at it, but what I would say is there's a macro point here, an important point not to lose sight of. And that is from to lose sight of. And that is from the opposition benches. We hear objection after objection after objection to my friend the objection to my friend the Chancellor's decisions, but no credible alternatives. And facing the public finance situation we the public finance situation we face.

I'm going to make some progress, if I may. I'm afraid it is incumbent incumbent on the benches opposite to come up with some credible decisions. But of course we know what they're credible decisions are. They're the sort of credible decisions of a grave diggers Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng. Back to Shakespeare. Control of public finances is one part of the equation. The other way that we get out of this issue is through growth, and the government is promoting growth in the economy through things like the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which was shamelessly, shamefully delayed in the other place.

May I say, Madam Deputy Speaker, I suppose we should talk about reforms, proposals for growth, private sector investment. And like many on this side of the House, I have experience of this having worked in business. It's supported by contract law, the rule of law, confidence in the independence of the courts and reliability of the government. The European Convention of Human Rights also has an important part to play in this. In particular. Article one protocol one the right to enjoy your possessions peacefully.

So those who argue for the complete unilateral withdrawal from the Echr on the other side may wish to consider the catastrophic effect on the economy of such a step. Now, reform in the summer threatened investors with cancellation of contract for difference contracts, but chauffeur reform government would be happy to rip up contracts. It would be happy to shred Britain's reputation as a place of stability. I fail to see how that promotes economic growth. What it would do is higher bills for consumers make the country poorer.

I welcome the Chancellor's reforms to gambling taxes. There is a clear distinction between going to the bingo and gambling on the horses, and I will disclose. In the past, I have enjoyed quite a few trips to the horse races and online gambling and gaming. This causes very serious harm, as we heard at the Treasury Select Committee, and it is essential that we start to tackle this. And I realise this isn't a matter for the Treasury, but I do think the way in which online gambling and gaming is marketed needs review.

And I would encourage the Treasury to act robustly against any evasion and black market activity. Now, I've heard some mention of choices, this Budget and this finance bill puts in place two steps to remove the two child limit. And my constituency of Glasgow East has some of the highest levels of child poverty in the United Kingdom. This is a disgrace and it's a scar on our society. Child poverty blights, if I may make some progress, child, and I'm mindful of the speaker's time limit to child poverty blights lives of children in Glasgow East, and the levels of child poverty are a moral outrage.

Now, the conservative approaches do refer to my constituents being on Benefit Street. That reveals the contempt they have for my constituents and reform have been speaking of children in my seat with real racist malice. I say it's a privilege to be a member of Parliament for those children. I am proud that this finance Bill will help lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty. I am proud of our Labour government's actions on child poverty, and I fully support this bill, which raises the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

funds to reduce child poverty. I will give way. Yes. I'm grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I can only guess that reformer polling quite high in Glasgow East on child poverty, Glasgow East on child poverty, though his substantive point is he relieved that his constituents in Glasgow East are benefiting from the fact that under the SNP, the fact that under the SNP, Scotland is the only part of the United Kingdom where child poverty rates are falling.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hear, hear. Well, reform might be quite high in Perthshire as well. May I say, Madam Deputy Speaker? But leaving that to one side, let me tell you what my constituents aren't relieved about in Glasgow East record NHS waiting lists, an SNP government that blocks nuclear developments which could create hundreds of thousands of pounds a year for good employment, that could create excellent jobs, create growth in the economy, and SNP government that is anti-business and anti-growth, and has spent 18 years running Scotland into the ground.

That's what concerns my constituents and that is why next year, Anas Sarwar will be the next First Minister and create optimism

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for Scotland. I'm obliged. To. The way you tell. Ben Lake.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Ben Lake. Madam Speaker. And I'm very. Pleased to speak in this debate on the Finance Bill, I. I think on the Finance Bill, I. I think I've now spoken in most of the Finance Bill debates since I was Finance Bill debates since I was first elected to represent the people of Kennedy in 2017, and subsequently since last year. Now subsequently since last year. Now also the good people of Preseli North Pembrokeshire and an advance on our of all Finance Bill Madam Deputy Speaker.

I make the effort to have consulted widely with my communities, and in particular with the small businesses that form such an important part of the economy of my constituency. And in all the
17:31
Ben Lake Portrait Ben Lake MP (Ceredigion Preseli, Plaid Cymru)
-
-
years that I've served as a member of Parliament, never has the sense of fear, the lack of confidence, of fear, the lack of confidence, and the uncertainty being so palpable. When I've met with businesses in my constituency. And businesses in my constituency. And if I reflect very briefly on the structure of the economy, it's perhaps no surprise that they perhaps no surprise that they should be so worried about measures in this Budget. There are some 5500 in this Budget. There are some 5500 businesses registered in as of March of this year.

They may well be slightly lower by next March, but 81% of them are classified as small businesses with fewer than 50 employees. Now, that makes Kennedy Selby the small business capital of Wales. It also is a very rural constituency, a coastal constituency. And so the industries of agriculture and hospitality are very much key pillars of our economy. Indeed, 35% of all businesses are classified as being in the agricultural, forestry or fishing sector. And so much has been said already in this debate about the changes to Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief and the concerns that that this these changes have caused for small businesses and small family farms across the United Kingdom.

We've heard others mention very eloquently. I pay particular reference to the right hon. Member for Shetland and Orkney on this matter. He mentioned that already we have seen these proposals change the way in which our small businesses, and particularly farm businesses, operate. Some 55% of small businesses and 49% of farm businesses have already cancelled proposed investment projects. In anticipation of these changes, and the Family Business UK organisation estimate that in my constituency, these changes alone will lead to the loss of some 250 jobs and deliver a £13 million hit to my county's GVA.

There is a real danger with these changes that the government will deliver incredibly and long lasting harm to small businesses across the country and especially in rural areas. And it is particularly disappointing that the government has refused to to pause at least these changes so that they can properly understand the impact that they will have on rural areas. Because there are many figures and statistics that have been bandied about in the in the many debates that we've had for the past months about the real impact of these changes.

But the government itself has not undertaken the full impact assessment as follows. Most other policy decisions that the government takes. And as a member of the Welsh Affairs Select Committee, I was very pleased that we made that recommendation that they should at the very least,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

postpone these changes until they understand the impact of it, because unfortunately, Martin McCluskey. I'm intervening.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm intervening. On the honourable. Gentleman because we both represent rural constituencies here represent rural constituencies here in Wales and in Lincolnshire, and our constituencies are very different in their rural aspect, but both of us are affected equally but both of us are affected equally badly by this family farm tax. Now, many of my farms may be larger than his, but their income is still quite marginal. And I think what so many of us representing rural areas can't understand is why hasn't the government been prepared to compromise and listen to the NFU and, if necessary, take more resources from the bigger states but preserve our family farms?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm very grateful to the hon. Member for his intervention, and I Member for his intervention, and I very much agree with him that it is a point of real bemusement a point of real bemusement confusion, indeed, and for many of my constituents, the government has not looked to seek for compromise not looked to seek for compromise and to engage with the alternative proposals that have been presented by both the NFU and in Wales, also the Farmers Union of Wales, because the Farmers Union of Wales, because there is some consensus to be found there.

If only the government were to to budge and to be willing to compromise ever so slightly, so that they can achieve the objectives that they so eloquently point out. It is the intention or the objective of that policy without sacrificing hundreds, if not thousands, of family farms and businesses across rural Britain, and particularly in my constituency of Preseli, I, I suppose it probably underlines a growing sense that I've had Madam Deputy Speaker that although my constituency is only some 170 odd miles from Westminster and Whitehall, where many of these decisions are dreamt up and subsequently implemented upon us, we may as well be living on the moon, such as the disconnect between the policies that are sometimes made here and the impact they have on the ground, and the lack of effort to try and understand why so many businesses and people in my communities are so fearful for the impact that these proposals will have on their lives.

The one point I will add, just in closing, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that 15% of all jobs in my constituency are in hospitality. Now, it is a missed opportunity for the government in this Budget to look again at the VAT for hospitality. I think it would have done a world of good and given much needed confidence to an industry and a sector that is suffering dreadfully at the moment, with the cumulative impact of different cost price increases as well as as new

**** Possible New Speaker ****

taxes. So VAT cut on hospitality would have been very much welcome. And on that point. I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. hon. Member, for giving way. And on that point, not only the VAT but also the proposed hike in alcohol also the proposed hike in alcohol duty is yet another blow to pubs and breweries in my constituency of South Cambridgeshire, including the South Cambridgeshire, including the Three Hills in Bartlow, which is reeling from a business rate reeling from a business rate increase of 123% as a result of the business rate valuation changes. So does he agree with me that the Chancellor is really failing to protect our pubs and breweries with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

these measures? The hon. Member for her intervention, I very much agree with her and it comes very neatly with her and it comes very neatly on to my final point, Madam Speaker, in that the government has failed in its Budget to acknowledge the in its Budget to acknowledge the many increasing and cumulative pressures on hospitality and pub businesses. In particular, the hon. businesses. In particular, the hon. Member referred there to significant increases the value of a pub in her constituency. I also a pub in her constituency.

I also have been contacted in recent days by hospitality businesses, a pub that has just been informed of 131% increase to the rateable value now. They now will await to understand what exactly that means for their business rates bill. But the fear is very much well founded that they will find themselves having to pay a great deal more in the coming years. And they previously did. And that's on top of the higher employment costs that have been generated by this government's decisions on employers, National Insurance, and also all the other inflationary costs in terms of energy and goods.

The one thing I will end then, for, Madam Deputy Speaker, is that the Valuation Office Agency, if I understood this correctly, will come underneath the HMRC from next April. I very much hope that the government, HMRC will avail themselves of the opportunity to ensure greater consistency and clarity that I say transparency in the way that the VOA and these valuations are calculated. It is a very technical, complicated, murky way of addressing and calculating business rates and there is such a discrepancy in Wales that I must finish my remarks by bringing it to the House's attention.

The town council of Aberystwyth have done a lot of work in recent months of trying to find out why so many retail premises in the High Street have been vacated and are empty. Time after time, a business will say the business rates are just too high. So they then did some researching Madam Deputy Speaker and they found that for the zone A rates levied on retail properties in Aberystwyth town centre, on average, a business would expect to pay £525 per square metre. They then looked at other towns and cities in Wales and found that if you were a retail business on Saint Mary Street, Cardiff, you'd be paying £460 per square metre.

And if you were a premises on the Kingsway in Swansea, you'd be paying £180 per square metre for zone rates. Now it doesn't need you don't need to be an expert on Wales to understand that as wonderful as Aberystwyth is, it's not quite the same sort of hotspot as in Mary Street, Cardiff, or indeed Swansea for that matter. And so if the government and HMRC will be taking ownership and responsibility for the VOA from next April, I do very much hope that one of the first things they will do is look at some of these inconsistencies, because at the moment, as I say, some of these decisions are so disconnected from

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reality that we may as well be living on the moon. Alison Hume thank you, Madam

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Alison Hume thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As an eight year old girl sheltering in the little library at my primary school, I was library at my primary school, I was able to escape my bullies by using my imagination. Later, I harnessed my imagination. Later, I harnessed my love of reading to build a successful career as a screenwriter. successful career as a screenwriter. So I am absolutely delighted that the finance Bill includes an extension of the libraries for primary scheme to secondary schools.

The government has already committed £10 million to create libraries in the 1700 primaries across the country who do not have one, and now we are giving £1,400 to every secondary school to purchase
17:41
Alison Hume Portrait Alison Hume MP (Scarborough and Whitby, Labour)
-
-
new library books. This £5 million investment is targeted at getting more children reading for pleasure, and is part of the government's aim to make 2026 the National Year of Reading. Feeding a child's imagination is wonderful, but imagination is wonderful, but making sure they don't go hungry is essential. The Chancellor's choice to lift the two child benefit cap to lift the two child benefit cap will lift around 1850 children out of poverty in Scarborough and Whitby next year. Up to 4000 children will benefit from the expansion of free school meals in my constituency.

I visited some of my local primary schools with fully funded breakfast clubs and seen for myself how incredibly popular they are with both children and parents. All these measures are expected to lead to the largest reduction in child poverty over a parliament since comparable records began. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Chancellor's choices contained in this finance Bill and previously will endure for generations in my constituency of Scarborough and Whitby children will be helped to fulfil their potential. These are the barriers to opportunity we promise to break down in our manifesto.

These are the barriers this finance bill is breaking down, promise made, promise kept. Madam Deputy Speaker, one of the projects I loved at my primary school was called my Breakfast Table, where we looked at where the food and drink came from, tea from Sri Lanka, incredibly exotic, and bacon from a local pig farm, which was decidedly less exotic as the aromas from the pig farm often wafted as far as the school playground. Growing up surrounded by farms, I learnt to value their contribution not just in the food they produced, but in the difference they made to our community.

I was reminded of their practical, altruistic attitude this summer during the wildfire centred on Langdale Forest and Fylingdales Moor. At its terrifying height, covering an area ten miles square, ripping mercilessly through shallow deep peat forest, grassland and heather moor. The farming community reacted immediately, cutting firebreaks, back burning, bringing water in tankers and generally assisting the firefighters from North Yorkshire Fire and Rescue. The farming community didn't think about anything except putting the fires out. They were all heroes and we must value them.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I started my speech. I'll just make some progress. Thank you. I started my speech with children at the start of their lives, and I end it with people coming towards the end of their lives. I owe it to the farming families I represent to raise my concerns today about the anti forestalling clause contained within the finance Bill. The anti forestalling measure means that any elderly or terminally ill farmer who transfers their ownership of the farm to a descendant, but dies within seven years, will be liable to pay income e under the new system.

And if they don't live seven years after this gift, this could also trigger capital gains tax. If a farmer does not make a transfer but dies before April 2026, the agricultural estate will pass inheritance tax free. Madam Deputy Speaker, I've met with several families in Scarborough and Whitby who told me they are having heartbreaking conversations with their parents who talk about ending their own lives before April next year. I asked my I, I ask my hon. Friends in the Treasury, please can we look at removing the anti forestalling clause from the finance bill, or at very least introduce a transition to protect the most elderly and those with a terminal medical diagnosis? We have shown we can listen before and amend our policies.

Please can we listen again? In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is my hope that we can show the same compassion for our farmers in the winter of their

**** Possible New Speaker ****

lives as we have for our children in the spring of theirs. Here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here. Dave Doogan Deputy Speaker, the SNP will not be supporting a Second Reading. This bill derives from a Reading. This bill derives from a Budget that failed to deliver for Scotland and does nothing to remove. To move the dial on the household To move the dial on the household hammered by the cost of living crisis. Here, Scotland relied on a step change from this Labour step change from this Labour government, with investment in public services, investment in jobs and industry and real action on energy bills.

And none of that has come to pass. Instead, we have a dog's dinner Budget, resulting in
17:46
Dave Doogan Portrait Dave Doogan MP (Angus and Perthshire Glens, Scottish National Party)
-
-
an increase in funding for Scotland that doesn't even cover half of the exposure that the Scottish Government faces to the National Government faces to the National Insurance increase across the public sector. A resource block grant that has an average real grant that has an average real terms increase of only 0.5% per annum across the spending review annum across the spending review period on income tax. The clauses in this bill largely do not concern Scottish taxpayers, thankfully, who Scottish taxpayers, thankfully, who benefit from the SNP's judicious and progressive income tax rates in Scotland.

Those in Scotland earning less than around 30,300 are expected to pay slightly less income tax than they would elsewhere in the UK, with freezes to higher advanced and top rate thresholds estimated to affect only the highest 26% of earners. Someone earning over £35,000 in Scotland will pay just £0.90 more in income tax per week, compared to someone in the rest of the United Kingdom. While benefiting from Scotland's unique social contract where under the SNP we collectively fund prescription charges, bridge tolls, Scottish Child Payment, tuition fees under 22 bus travel, the baby Box Personal care, publicly owned railways and publicly owned Scottish Water, the best performing water company in the United Kingdom.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Not bad value for £0.90 a week. And on that I will give way. Thank you. I thank the hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving me speak. The Scottish public finances have been Scottish public finances have been aided by a record Budget settlement from the UK government. But yet from the UK government. But yet there's a £5 billion black hole in them. Might it possibly be the case that after 18 years of the SNP, that after 18 years of the SNP, there is some responsibility for his closer to home, perhaps in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Edinburgh, for such matters? Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, the hon. Gentleman for Glasgow East. the hon. Gentleman for Glasgow East. Obviously was not listening. The increase to the block grant is spread over the entire spending spread over the entire spending review period. So that's five years and it doesn't cover more than half of the cost that the Scottish Government will have to fund of the increase in employers, National insurance applied by the same Chancellor. I am glad I got the opportunity to say it twice.

Someone sorry. And with Bill set to rise on energy bills, they've gone up £340 under this government, despite the fact that they were supposed to fall by £300. That's what people voted for. That is the prospectus that Labour gave them, and they're not taking it seriously. They're coming back with £150 reduction to energy bills, which is coming out of general taxation. As sleight of hands go, it's not very slick. It's coming out of your standing charge and going directly onto your general taxation.

I won't dwell in the interest of time, Madam Deputy Speaker, on Agricultural Property Relief, I have said a fair bit on interventions, and I know the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East will contribute on that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Gentleman. Give way. I will give way. I am grateful to the.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Gentleman while he's on the subject of energy. Of course, what should have been in this finance bill was an end to the additional bill was an end to the additional tax levy, because there aren't sky high taxes anymore and there aren't excess taxes that need to be paid. excess taxes that need to be paid. And a thousand people a week a month, rather are losing their jobs in the oil and gas industry.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. The right hon. Gentleman anticipates my next paragraph, Madam Deputy Speaker, whereby the energy profits levy should be coming to an end, but has been extended by this Labour government out to 2030. That's what's caused the 100 job losses from Harbour Energy. It's what's caused causing 1000 job losses every month, according to UK. And the reason that we are in this situation is because the Prime Minister lacks the mettle to get rid of the current Secretary of State for Energy Security and net zero one job.

Getting protected in Whitehall costs a thousand jobs per month in Scotland. That's the Labour way and it always will be on electric vehicles. This somehow doesn't sound that much and it probably doesn't if you live in Chelsea or Kensington, but if you live in Angus and Perthshire Glens, Madam Deputy Speaker, it will cost you a sight of cost you an awful lot more than it will do. And I understand, you know, I get the politics of it. Of course, half of the entirety of the Labour membership live within central London or in Greater London rather, and the other half live in other English cities and in Glasgow and in Cardiff.

So they think it's probably a tremendous wheeze to make people in my constituency subsidise the tax on their memberships, electric vehicles. But people are smarter than that. People who live in the countryside can add up and they know that this government's attack on their electric vehicle taxes does not add up. They are being swindled by a way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am grateful his characterisation is slightly unfair to those 80 or 90 Labour MPs who to those 80 or 90 Labour MPs who represent rural areas, and I think it's worth paying tribute to the it's worth paying tribute to the speeches by the hon. Members for Scarborough and Whitby and Penrith and Solway who have spoken out and Solway who have spoken out against this mean, callous, Agricultural Property Relief measure, and they have done a brave

**** Possible New Speaker ****

thing by doing so. Wouldn't he agree? Yes. Absolutely would agree. I'm in full accord with their bravery on the APR. I am not sure how that links directly into a mile for electric vehicles, but the point is made and and I agree with it. And then that leaves the the preamble to the Budget, Madam Deputy Speaker, which was hugely challenging, had a direct consequence on the markets, caused people to freeze employment and investment in their businesses and cause pensioners to cash in their pensions.

And I am pleased that the SNP were the first to call on the FCA to investigate the Chancellor's behaviour in that regard, and I hope they change their position on that. But despite all of this, Scotland's economy remains one of the best performing parts of the United Kingdom since 2007. Under the SNP, per person growth has been 10.2% compared to 6.8 in the UK. We lead the whole of the UK, with the exception of London, for foreign direct investment, and a NatWest report recently confirmed that Scotland has one of the highest start up rates anywhere in the UK.

In the first two quarters of this year. Unemployment across the UK is 75%, but as I mentioned in my intervention with the Minister, unemployment in the UK has risen from 4.1% to 5.1% since this Labour government grasped power last year. Thankfully for the people of Scotland, unemployment is 25% lower in Scotland at 3.8%, a fact that I am sure will not be lost on the good people of Glasgow East. Next month, the Scottish Government will deliver their Budget and continue to build on our success.

Madam Deputy Speaker but the SNP will not be voting for a Second Reading of this bill. We will not be party to the injudicious and unjust damage which will be inflicted on businesses and on households by the grabbing hand of labour. In this bill, the people will have their verdict on this risible Chancellor and her bulging outflow of fiscal calamity in May 26th, specifically in Scotland and in Wales and in English councils. And I, for one,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

look forward to them getting their just desserts. Yeah. Adam Thompson. Thank you. Very.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Very. Much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was elected to this House to be a voice for working people, for the thousands of families in Erewash thousands of families in Erewash who in 2022 saw their mortgages skyrocket because the party opposite sent markets spiralling opposite sent markets spiralling with billions in unfunded tax cuts. Those people that I represent, they didn't vote for Liz Truss. Most of didn't vote for Liz Truss. Most of them didn't know who she was. But it was hard working families up and down the country and in Erewash that paid the price for her failures.

All the same, that should never happen again. What my right hon. Friend the Chancellor did last month in the Budget made actionable by this bill today, was to take the necessary decisions to ensure that there will never be another Liz Truss moment again. The provisions in this bill will deliver by the end of the decade, the fiscal headroom that we require to withstand shocks and help pay down
17:54
17:54
17:54
Adam Thompson Portrait Adam Thompson MP (Erewash, Labour)
-
-
wasted years under the previous government. Change is already underway. Madam Deputy Speaker, the economy is now forecast to grow faster this year than previously expected, as record investments and trade deals made and secured by this government pay off, and as reforms to stifling planning rules finally come through and deepen, it can grow further in the first year of this government. Madam Deputy Speaker, average wages grew more than they did in the entire lost decade of the 20 tens. And what happens when workers have more money? They don't sequester it to Dubai or the Cayman Islands.

They spend it on housing, on food, on our high streets, in the pub, on their children. The greatest investment of all rewarded properly for their labour. They fuel our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

economy and I will give way. Madam speaker. Giving way. I wonder when the people of this country will catch people of this country will catch up with the hon. Gentleman and start to express the appropriate gratitude for all that has been

**** Possible New Speaker ****

gratitude for all that has been bestowed on them by this government. I thank the hon. Gentleman for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his amusing intervention. I'm sure over time time will tell on those points. We must all contribute, points. We must all contribute, though, Madam Deputy Speaker, to Britain's renewal. And there are things that only government can do to secure that renewal. If we want to get the NHS back on its feet, fix our crumbling schools, cut waiting lists and truly invest in Britain's future, we must pay for it. We know that the alternatives proposed by the parties opposite lead only to calamity.

Liz Truss showed. That showed us that when you cut taxes for the wealthy, it's working people who ultimately end up paying. Nor should we want infinite borrowing. However, I don't want to spend a pound in every ten serving debt interest. It should go to our schools, our hospitals and our country. So yes, in the Budget and in the provisions made in this bill, the tax burden has increased. But it is those with the broadest shoulders who will bear the greatest weight, those with property to let, those with shares to sell, those paid not through wages but through dividends, those with such vast savings that they pay tax on the interest alone in the name of time.

I'm not going to give way again. These are some income streams that are overwhelmingly enjoyed by the highest earners. And it's by and large, though the already well-off, who will pay more under the provisions made in this bill. Those provisions include changes to National insurance relief on pension contributions through salary sacrifice schemes, again a mechanism primarily used by the highest earners. It includes reforming council tax so that a £10 million mansion tax in central London means that people who live in central London are not paying less council tax than terraced house owners in Ilkeston and Long Eaton.

It includes a new surcharge on homes worth more than £2 million, which will be paid for by fewer than 1% of homeowners. This Budget, Madam Deputy Speaker, was for working families, for the every man and every woman, for children and for young people. It was a Budget, not for millionaires, billionaires, slum landlords, investment bankers or the bosses of big corporations. As I said, in the name of time, no more interventions. Instead, we're taking action to cut the cost of living and strengthen our public services.

Services £150 off energy bills on average next year, rising to 300 for the poorest households. Again, money back in working people's pockets. As inflation continues to fall, it becomes easier for the Bank of England to cut interest rates, as it has repeatedly under this government. Prescription charges, train fares, bus fares all frozen. 5.2 million more appointments in our NHS with 250 new neighbourhood health centres cutting waiting lists and bringing back care closer to where people actually live. The parties opposite will decry these measures, exposing our fundamental differences.

Reform not here today, I note, would sell off our National Health Service to the highest bidder and force people to pay for the care that they need. Meanwhile, the Conservatives are calling for mass redundancies in the public sector enough to sack every police officer in the country twice over. They're against the minimum wage, they're against protections for workers. They have no plans for growth or renewal, just policies that would leave working families worse off while their donors get richer and richer. Madam Deputy Speaker, to renew Britain Britain costs money to restore confidence in the public finances.

Takes time to get the economy growing again is a serious challenge, but we are meeting it. The choice is between the measures in the Budget and this bill, or a return to austerity, and I know which side I am on. Madam Deputy Speaker, I will never apologise for standing up for working people and for saying that the highest earners should pay their fair share, nor should the Chancellor, nor should the government, and nor should the British people. Speaker.
17:59
Robbie Moore Portrait Robbie Moore MP (Keighley and Ilkley, Conservative)
-
-
And I'm not quite sure if the >> And I'm not quite sure if the hon. Member for Erewash has read the Budget, because he commented on those with the broadest shoulders those with the broadest shoulders must bear the pain. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, those on the basic rate of income tax will be paying rate of income tax will be paying an additional £220 a year in income tax as a result of this Budget. As I say, I'm not quite sure that those with the broadest shoulders would be those that are paying that level of tax growth down, inflation up, taxes up, unemployment up, borrowing up, interest debt up.

Madam Deputy Speaker, this Budget coupled with the last Budget is £66 billion of tax raising. Now, as we speak, Madam Deputy Speaker, there are farmers outside once again of this chamber. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I know that they are in the public gallery as well. Why? Because of the changes that this government continues to press ahead through the family farm tax and the family business tax. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Stuart Anderson. I thank my. hon. Friend. For giving way. Does he agree with me that farmers across south Shropshire have been devastated by the family farm tax? It's going to impact them far beyond what the impact them far beyond what the government are even considering, and this is an impact of national

**** Possible New Speaker ****

food security. Yeah. I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. And not only is this an Friend. And not only is this an impact on our farming community, but the wider agricultural supply chain and those many businesses that support our farming community. Why, Madam Deputy Speaker, because the changes of bringing in a threshold of £1 million will impact nearly every family farming business. And let's look at the figures. The average size of a farming business in England is about 200 acres.

And when you value that farmland, there may be a farmhouse, a cottage or two livestock, agricultural machinery, growing crops, crops in store. You are going to be well above that million pound threshold. Therefore exposing that farming business to an IHT liability kicking in at 20% of the value over and above that million pounds. Now the government will say, the government will say that we have allowed some allowances, but that does not take into account the value of those businesses.

And, Madam Deputy Speaker, this is not only going to have a hugely detrimental impact on those family businesses, but the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

wider agricultural supply chain, and I will. Give way. I thank the honourable. Member for giving way, and he is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Member for giving way, and he is passionate about this, and I commend him for the stand he's taken on. He is an expert on valuation, I know. Does he agree valuation, I know. Does he agree with me that Northern Ireland will be harder hit because of the land

**** Possible New Speaker ****

valuations and the price of land in Northern Ireland? And I do absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, because the value my hon. Friend, because the value of farmland in Northern Ireland is far, far greater than the average rate per acre in England or, dare I say, anywhere else in Great Britain. And that is why those Northern Ireland farmers are going to be absolutely decimated as a result of the changes that this Labour

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government are bringing in. I will give way. I'm grateful he's making an excellent speech. Is he aware of excellent speech. Is he aware of some research that the National Farmers Union of Scotland has done, which shows under the current inheritance tax rules, typical farmers in Scotland would pay £20,000 inheritance tax bill, whereas under the current proposals by the Labour government, that goes by the Labour government, that goes up to a staggering £775,000, which will kill off most farming businesses.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

businesses. And my hon. Friend is absolutely right. Indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker, I was in Dumfries and Galloway just last week speaking to farming businesses who are going to be impacted by the changes this Labour government is bringing in. And he hits on a very important point, Madam Deputy Speaker, because the NFU, the CLA, the Tenant Farmers Association, the Cav have all continuously over the last year tried to put forward progressive options for this government to listen to, to engage with, but they have not listened and that just shows the naivety associated by this government.

Indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker, on the Liaison Committee yesterday, the Prime Minister himself acknowledged that he was aware of farming individuals that have worked all their lives within the farming community that were considering taking their own lives, but despite that knowledge, wanted to crack on with this policy. Regardless. Callous, heartless and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

just shows what this government is about and. I will give way. I'm just. Reminded of Shakespeare again,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Reminded of Shakespeare again, who I believe said the abuse of greatness is when it disjoins remorse from power.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

remorse from power. Yeah, absolutely. And all I advocate, as I'm sure the right hon. Member. My right hon. Friend does is that this government simply engages and listens without simply engages and listens without our farming community. And it isn't just our farming community that is hit by these changes, it's the wider family business. I'll give way to my right hon. Friend and then to my.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank the hon. Member for giving way. I just wanted to point out one particular case of a North Cornwall farmer called Will Harris, who gave farmer called Will Harris, who gave up an engineering job of £60,000 a year to provide food security and year to provide food security and put food on food on our tables. His income is around 30,000 a year, but income is around 30,000 a year, but the tax that his children may have to pay would be 500,000 £50,000 a to pay would be 500,000 £50,000 a year, almost double the farm income.

And he's terrified he can hardly sleep at night thinking if

**** Possible New Speaker ****

something happens to him, what will happen to his teenage children and their farm? Madam Deputy Speaker, the hon. Member makes an excellent point Member makes an excellent point because it's not only Cornish farmers, it's those right across the country that are being impacted the country that are being impacted by this government's decisions, and that he makes an excellent point that many of our farming businesses are not only incredibly highly geared with the level of debt that is associated with their businesses, is associated with their businesses, but they are not returning a level of income to be able to even contribute.

Paying IHT liability at 20% over and above the million pound threshold, therefore being subjected to a death tax that they simply will not be able to pay. And I'll give way to my hon. Friend

**** Possible New Speaker ****

from Lincolnshire, Edward Leigh. My hon. Friend was brought up in my constituency and this is a notable local farming family and the reason why the house is the reason why the house is listening to my hon. Friend is he knows about farming. He's been bred into farming. Would he like to say, into farming. Would he like to say, with his own family's experience, what this means to farms in Lincolnshire? Because some people say, oh, Lincolnshire is full of large estates and all the rest of it.

No, it's full of working farms.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And he can speak with authority on this subject. Madam Deputy Speaker. The point

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker. The point to make quite clearly is that every single farming business, in one way or another, is now going to be or another, is now going to be impacted as a result of that million pound threshold kicking in. Why? Because whether you are an Why? Because whether you are an arable farm in Lincolnshire or Cambridgeshire or wherever you are, Cambridgeshire or wherever you are, and you're looking at the price All of those costs of inputs rising, and then not only being subjected to the challenges with cash flow.

As a result of this government removing the Delinked payments dramatically, dropping them to £600, or removing the SFI, or bringing in the fertiliser tax or the double cab pickup tax, you are now, as a business, going to be impacted by the changes to inheritance tax. So that impacts whether you're a hill farmer in Keighley and Ilkley or arable farmer in Lincolnshire, or dare I say, down in Cornwall or wherever you are even subject to high land values in Northern Ireland. This government must listen to our farming community right now.

Because I tell you, Madam Deputy Speaker, whether they come down today and make with their tractors, making their noises outside or come down tomorrow, I hope they continue coming to make sure that this government listens. And it's not just our farming community that are impacted by the changes. It's our family businesses, our hospitality businesses, our breweries, our manufacturing, our engineering businesses. And that's why I just simply cannot understand if you are a backbench Labour MP representing a urban constituency, maybe representing a manufacturing and engineering business, a hospitality business, a hotelier, why on earth have we not heard from those backbench Labour MPs who have family businesses in their constituency and have not been making the noise as loud and proud to the Chancellor about the negative impacts that these changes on IHT are going to be making to our many family businesses, and I will give way.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Member for giving way. I've recently joined the Public Accounts Committee, and I have come across in my short time on that committee, I've come across qualified accounts. I've come across local authorities not having audited accounts for many of them have audited accounts. I have watched the government wasting watched the government wasting money, almost endless amounts of money. And then I witness this madness of basically breaking the backbone of British farms, of British small businesses, of effectively ensuring that there will be no long term investment, which drives our economy.

So would the hon. Member agree with me that before we start breaking up this these enterprises, we should get the government's house in order, the States House in order, and we

**** Possible New Speaker ****

should cut state waste. Yeah. Madam Deputy Speaker, I do agree with the hon. Member in that the government must get its own house in order before implementing strategies on many of our hard working businesses that are impacting them and the changes to BPR, Madam Deputy Speaker, is detrimental. Why? Because I use the detrimental. Why? Because I use the example of a business in my constituency who have already worked out that their BPR liability is about £800,000.

The business is owned by a fourth generation in their late 80s. They have been told that they only way of paying a BPR liability should a death occur after April 26th, is to sell plant or machinery, or to sell shares in their business. Either way, losing control of their business or not being able to keep their business productive. That just demonstrates how uninformed this government is about the changes that they are going to be making. Madam Deputy Speaker, I think that I have made my point that the implications on IHT, the Minister sits at the despatch box laughing away.

But if the Minister had had the time to go outside and engage with our farming community, at least get around the table with those backbench Labour MPs, those on this side of the House that have been consistently raising this issue over the last year, then the Minister might not be sitting at the despatch box smiling away, but might have the ability to come to the despatch box in her winds up and give some sort of positive conclusion hope to those many businesses that are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

being impacted by this disastrous Labour government. Well. Serena Breckenridge. Can you, Madam Deputy Speaker,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for my constituents, the finance bill is more than just a legislative process. It's a legislative process. It's a statement of who we are as a country and what we believe our future to be. And I can say with confidence that this is a finance bill for places like Wolverhampton bill for places like Wolverhampton and Willenhall. I came into politics after years in the classroom. I know the harm that poverty does to our children. I have seen too many young people believe that a successful career is for someone else and not for them, and not addressing poverty ends up costing society far more in the long run.

We have inherited a country where we have a rise of food banks. More food banks than McDonald's, and there is no single silver bullet to end poverty. And some of these measures might not ever make headlines, but they show the different choices that a Labour government will make for our communities. So I support this
18:11
Sureena Brackenridge Portrait Sureena Brackenridge MP (Wolverhampton North East, Labour)
-
-
finance Bill to enable us to lift the two child benefit cap. the two child benefit cap. Independent analysis estimate it will lift around 450,000 children will lift around 450,000 children out of poverty by the end of this parliament. The inaccurate attacks by some quarters painting families by some quarters painting families in poverty with the broad brush are disappointing, but not surprising. In Wolverhampton North East, I inherited more than a third of children in poverty after housing costs higher than the UK average.

So lifting the two child cap will benefit more than 4200 children in Wolverhampton North East. Now that's the equivalent of 20 primary schools packed full of children. How could I not support this measure? And for those who are still clinging, clinging to lazy stereotypes, did you know that 60% of families in poverty are working families, and the rest may not be. The rest may be families that have lost a parent or a parent who has lost a job, fallen ill, or become disabled.

So this, along with the expansion of free breakfast clubs for all families and free school meals for children from families on Universal Credit, ensures that no child is too hungry to learn. Labour values and choices are clear when children need to come first. Yeah, I also welcome the Chancellor's response to calls from MPs like myself and others to reintroduce libraries in our secondary schools. An additional £5 million in funding, on top of the £10 million for primary schools.

I want all children to benefit from social mobility, boosting libraries and reducing inequalities that saw libraries removed disproportionately from poorer areas. So this is a finance bill that shows that our children matters. But this finance bill goes further. It strengthens the dignity of work. The National Living Wage will rise to 12.71 for per hour from April 2026, putting more money directly into people's pockets, and therefore this money is more likely to be spent in our local shops, on our precincts and our high streets.

Targeted cost of living measures continue to make a difference. Prescription charges frozen energy bills likely to fall by around £150. Train fares frozen for the first time in 30 years and continued support to ease everyday financial pressures. So, alongside no cuts in capital projects, sustained investment in public services, infrastructure and skills, this finance bill is set for stronger long term growth. Long term plan with undeniable benefits for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Wolverhampton and Willenhall and across the UK. Yeah. Can I perhaps encourage the remaining speakers to focus on the remaining speakers to focus on the fact that this is a finance bill and therefore about taxation

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and therefore about taxation measures, not spending? David Chadwick. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Wales is the poorest of our four nations, with the highest levels of nations, with the highest levels of unemployment and the lowest wages, and the family farm tax is yet another example of how this government is going to hurt the
18:15
David Chadwick Portrait David Chadwick MP (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Welsh economy. Will full knowledge of the consequences of doing so? This government has decided to hit This government has decided to hit the Welsh economy. Agriculture being one of the major sectors in the Welsh economy, and this government has decided to hit it hit Wales with an extra tax. That hit Wales with an extra tax. That is quite frankly, unacceptable and horrific way for this government to horrific way for this government to start off. Family farms are the backbone of our rural economy, the heart of our food system and central to the survival of many of our communities in Wales.

And people in Wales are shocked that this Labour government has decided to come from one of our major industries. People in Wales expect the Conservatives. We're accustomed to the Conservatives unpicking our major industries and taking them out, but they expect better from the Labour Party when family farms are being hit. The damage spreads far beyond the farm gate. It hurts vets, suppliers, hauliers, markets, local shops and rural high streets and that's why it was so deeply disappointing that 23 of Wales's 27 Labour MPs chose to vote this policy through, despite clear warnings from rural Wales and the scale of what is being put at risk is enormous.

Yes, of course, extremely grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way. His communities are not dissimilar to mine very rural, very mountainous and upland farming is critical to his communities as it is to mine. Does he think the Labour government have perhaps failed to understand that wealth is not concentrated in the hands of farmers in the way they think is the case? It is entirely possible to be an upland farmer in his patch or in mine, and to be earning the minimum wage, or indeed less.

The University of Cumbria shows that the average upland farmer earns less than the average than the minimum wage, and yet be in a position where, after inheritance tax is due, you might be paying £20,000 a year or more

**** Possible New Speaker ****

whilst you're earning only £16,000. That's not right, isn't it? I thank him for his intervention,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for his intervention, and he's quite right to point to the struggles of upland farmers who the struggles of upland farmers who deserve to earn a living from their work because they are working people too, but they're not being recognised for that. Agriculture recognised for that. Agriculture and the wider food and drink sector supports over 228,000 jobs in Wales, supports over 228,000 jobs in Wales, and generates more than £24 billion in turnover each year. This isn't a marginal industry, it's a pillar of the Welsh economy and industry bodies have warned that these tax changes will force family farms to sell land or assets, simply to meet higher liabilities, accelerating consolidation and driving our young people out of rural Wales.

That damages our food security, damages local supply chains, hollows out communities and undermines our tax base as well. And this isn't just an economic issue, it's also cultural. 43% of people working in agriculture in Wales speak Welsh, compared with 20% of the population overall. If you undermine family farming, that is to undermine the Welsh culture and the Welsh language in itself. And what makes this policy even harder to defend is the government's selective approach. Ministers have refused to act on supermarket profiteering, where Tesco alone have seen profits rise by over 100%.

And yet they're content to squeeze family farms that are already grappling with rising costs and post-Brexit uncertainty. The Welsh Affairs Select Committee, Madam Deputy Speaker, called for this policy to be put to be paused so that a Welsh Wales specific impact assessment could be carried out. And it's a grave mistake that that that that request has been ignored. And this is becoming a familiar pattern for those of us from Wales. There's rail underfunding, a refusal to devolve powers, including over taxation, and now a tax that threatens one of Wales's most important sectors.

Time and time again, Labour has advanced policies in this Parliament that have hit Wales hardest and waved them through. Regardless, the Welsh Liberal Democrats oppose this tax because they believe that family farms should form the spine of a prosperous rural economy. Rural Wales in in in fact, the rural economy across the whole of the UK deserves a plan for growth, not punishment driven by ideology, and the Welsh Government deserves a government that understands the value, the the strength and the work that our agricultural sector provides to rural Wales.

I'm thinking of the the tens of young farmers clubs in my constituency. These are run by incredible young people who form community groups and build confidence of the young people in their communities. As well as running their family businesses. And it's those young people that we need to stay in Wales, run their businesses well and create the jobs and employment that will enable rural Wales to prosper. But instead they're being told by this government, no, it's fine, we're going to hit you with an extra tax.

This this is something that's going to fall on the shoulders of Welsh young farmers. The the Welsh economy deserves a government that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

understands Wales. And that's not what we're getting so far. Yeah. Mr.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I want to begin by endorsing and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I want to begin by endorsing and agreeing with the widespread and very articulate and passionate. Contributions from right across this House that's encouraging that this House that's encouraging that there have been speeches on the Labour benches attacking the cruel death tax on family farms, because that is the only way to describe it. It is cruel. No matter what way you look at it. And the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland laid it out very clearly, as indeed he did yesterday in the Liaison committee when he put the Prime Minister on the spot.

And the Prime Minister had no answer. The Prime
18:21
Jim Allister Portrait Jim Allister KC MP (North Antrim, Traditional Unionist Voice)
-
-
Minister, with no answer, needs to change course. The government has change course. The government has lost the argument on this issue. It lost the argument on this issue. It is no answer to simply say we have the numbers to drive it through. This needs to be done on the basis This needs to be done on the basis of equity and what is right. And having lost that argument, so patently lost that argument, they need to face up to that. Just as the Prime Minister lost the argument yesterday in the Liaison Committee.

So this government on this issue needs to face up to that as well. I want then to make some comments about this finance bill particularly pertinent to Northern Ireland. In any fiscal landscape critical to being a part of the United Kingdom is a reasonable expectation that there will be the same fiscal ground rules across that United Kingdom, that if business is given advantage in one part, they will equally have that advantage in another.

And yet, when I come to this finance bill, particularly clauses 13, 14 and 15, I discovered to my dismay that businesses in Northern Ireland are not to have the same advantages when it comes to the capacity to scale up, such as provided for in clauses 13 to 15, with enterprise investment schemes, with venture capital projects, with enterprise management incentives. And that is because the hideous tentacles of the Windsor framework have reached right into this finance bill, and because of the Windsor Framework's imposition on Northern Ireland business of EU state rules, we find in clauses 13, 14 and 15 the exemption of Northern Ireland companies from the advantages to be given to others under those clauses.

In this Bill that removes the level playing field, the fiscal level playing field that should operate in any UK internal market that undermines the UK internal market, because companies in Great Britain can rightly, under these clauses, maximise state aid so that they can maximise their trading power. But alike company in Northern Ireland has the benefit that it can obtain from those scaling up opportunities capped by EU state aid rules, meaning they are not on a level playing field when it comes to competitiveness.

In respect of what this finance bill is capable of doing, and that causes me to challenge the declaration in respect of this bill that it has has no effect on GB Northern Ireland trade. It most patently has. If you have some companies in GB which can scale up with these enhanced benefits under investment and venture capital on unfettered by any state aid rule. But you have the same type of company in my constituency, fettered by the benefit they can draw because of the imposition of EU state aid rules.

That is neither fair nor right, and is but the latest manifestation of how the Windsor framework and our continuing subjection to foreign laws, not laws we make here. You state the rules are not set here. They're set in a foreign Parliament that no one in this United Kingdom elects by a combination with Ministers from 27 other countries who have no accountability to anyone in my constituency or in any constituency in this parliament. And yet that is something which is traducing and impeding business in Northern Ireland.

It's a good one.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Member for giving way, he is making a very passionate contribution and he's absolutely contribution and he's absolutely right. So in truth, clauses 13, 14 and 15 all increase support businesses for across the UK apart from one Northern Ireland is it? It is not that we have been overlooked, is not that we have been overlooked, but these clauses, these clauses expressly, explicitly and deliberately exclude us and this amounts to discrimination. It has to end.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And it has to end and it's discrimination at the behest of a foreign power. It's Brussels that's foreign power. It's Brussels that's saying you must impose state aid rules on Northern Ireland. rules on Northern Ireland. Therefore, the product of that in these clauses is a foreign parliament dictating to this Parliament what you can and cannot give to your own businesses in this give to your own businesses in this United Kingdom. That, Madam Deputy Speaker, is so fundamentally offensive to our constitutional integrity that goes to the very heart of what it means or what it should mean, what it should mean to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

be part of a United Kingdom. Seamus Logan. Thank you very much, Madam

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to briefly focus on a small number of issues in this bill and one associated in this bill and one associated with. I will explain, but I want to focus on how these will impact Scotland generally and my Scotland generally and my constituents particularly. And I note the Minister's comment is no longer in his place. That longer in his place. That persistence pays off. I think he made that point in reference to your intervention.

So I hope that the Minister is listening to me in relation to this. It's just over 100 days until April, when farmers across Scotland will face changes to agricultural property relief. Described by NFU Scotland as one of the most significant threats to Scottish family farms in a
18:28
Seamus Logan Portrait Seamus Logan MP (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, Scottish National Party)
-
-
generation. They did not know these changes were coming. No one did changes were coming. No one did because it wasn't in Labour's manifesto. What was in page 59 of manifesto. What was in page 59 of the manifesto was a pledge to, and I quote, recognise that food security is national security. That security is national security. That is why we will champion British farming whilst protecting the environment. The sudden application environment. The sudden application of the new rules and inheritance was deeply unfair.

No farmer expected this. Now in Scotland, 98% of total land area across the country is classified as rural, covering about 17% of the Scottish population. Land use. In my own constituency of Aberdeenshire North and East is classed as 76% agricultural, 18% forest or semi-natural and 3% built up areas. There are 51,200 farm holdings in Scotland, and I accept that not all of these will be impacted by this policy, but studies by experts such as the centre for the Analysis of Taxation have offered an alternative approach to the government, one which is less harsh and one which would generate similar levels of revenue, but which has been ignored by the government.

As I say, while not all farms will be impacted by the change to Apr itself, all farms could and maybe have been impacted by having to take new and costly legal advice in light of these unexpected changes. The special transfer allowance change is welcome, but its addition points to a recognition at the Treasury, a recognition that this is a shallow attempt to placate farmers in light of the ensuing backlash, and an admission that the 2024 Budget provisions were too harsh.

The anti forestalling clause mentioned by the Member for Orkney and Shetland, clause 62, in the Bill and the associated schedule 12, is deeply cynical as it penalises anyone who transfers the farm that dies within seven years, creating a potentially massive bill good for the Treasury, potentially disastrous for national food security. Now, is the Member for Scarborough and Whitby pointed out if no transfer is made and the farmer dies before April 2026, the estate tax free. But that's the problem with the anti forestalling clause.

Now, I appreciate Labour MPs are probably preoccupied with a different aspect of succession planning at the moment. But perhaps they could focus their minds on this issue. As has been said, Labour are paradoxically, paradoxically biting the hand that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

feeds them. But every family across these isles is feeling this. Would you give way? Oh, well, of course.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Oh, well, of course. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. He's making a powerful speech. Does he agree with me? And I think I'm right in saying the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnor, that agriculture in Wales and that agriculture in Wales and Scotland forms a very much larger part of our economies than it does of the English economy. So it's particularly objectionable that the government did not consult the devolved governments about this act. And does he further agree that farmers don't own wealth, they own value?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. Of course I agree completely. But look, I implore the completely. But look, I implore the Treasury to reconsider and hear the Member for Penrith and Solway. But if they do not, my party will bring if they do not, my party will bring forward a suitable amendment at Report stage. Labour MPs have talked a big talk about how much money is going to Scotland. I would like to ask them how much are they like to ask them how much are they taking away from Scotland, whether it's Apr, the energy profits levy, the excise duty on Scotch whisky or the National Insurance hike? It feels like once again, Scotland's wealth and success is being used against it by an uncaring Westminster government.

As usual, I want to turn to one other issue NHS drug costs. Not in the finance bill. But my point is it should have been in the finance bill. I appreciate that you're giving me a bit of leeway here, Madam Deputy Speaker. The new UK US trade deal in medicines begs huge questions about where the money is coming from to pay for these increases in drugs costs. If the additional costs come from within existing NHS budgets, i.e. efficiency savings, has the government read the University of York's impact assessment in terms of excess deaths and negative impacts on cancer patients? Gastroenterology and respiratory care in particular? If it's coming from the Treasury, where is it mentioned in the Budget or in this finance bill or in the accompanying Red book? It's certainly not in the bill, but it should have been.

But the OBR will be listening and watching and we'll get to this in due course. And what does all this mean for Scotland in terms of Barnett consequentials? Why has there been so little opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny on this smoke and mirrors deal? Transparency is needed on costs. The health secretary says 1 to 1.5 billion. The OBR says 3 billion. 6 billion suggested by other commentators. Which is it? The government hails this as a great deal for the UK. But the truth is, no matter where this money comes from, Treasury or existing NHS funds, patients ultimately pay the price for filling this form a black hole.

It all looks like the UK government are under a barrel on this. Drug companies threatening to pull out of investment in the UK. Bullying from an increasingly erratic White House and creeping privatisation of the NHS. The government need to provide some answers. I will in a moment. Government need to provide some answers and I simply say to all the members opposite who bragged this evening about what a wonderful bill this is and what a wonderful Budget this has been. Why are the polls showing this government the least

**** Possible New Speaker ****

popular in history? Give way. Thank you for giving way. Such

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you for giving way. Such an opportune point. But you know the you know, I respect the fact that the hon. Gentleman is here and that the hon. Gentleman is here and his political ambition is Scottish independence. Yes, I do respect that. But, you know, the government that. But, you know, the government did negotiate that trade deal with the United States, and it is the best deal, one of the best deals best deal, one of the best deals any country in the world has got.

But I do find myself wondering what kind of deal an independent Scottish Government, perhaps led by the gentleman next to him, or perhaps led by John Swinney. What kind of deal? They could negotiate with Donald Trump. Would it be a better deal or a worse deal?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Member for that intervention, and I'm very glad to hear that he respects our desire hear that he respects our desire for Scottish independence. And I simply say to him, when will this government respect the democratic government respect the democratic will of the Scottish people? I am coming to a close so I could go on. coming to a close so I could go on. Madam Deputy Speaker, on energy, on the Coastal Growth Fund, two measures which again, have hurt my constituents particularly.

But I'm going to pause there and leave it. And thank you very much.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We come to the final backbench contribution, Gideon Amos. And just to note that the front benches do

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to note that the front benches do Amos. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, so much about in contrast to this so much about in contrast to this Budget and the effects of it, so much about business in Taunton and Wellington is on the up at the Wellington is on the up at the moment, thanks to the enterprise community spirit and the business nous of people in Taunton and Wellington and Wellington. The new community hub, the King's Arms with a cafe etc. open the new year where I held my surgery last Friday was a huge success thanks to volunteers like Cliff and many others.

New units going up at West Park, new retail and food outlets are popping up all over the town. In Taunton, footfall has jumped 2.1%, four
18:36
Gideon Amos Portrait Gideon Amos MP (Taunton and Wellington, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
times the national average of 0.5%. Lots of independents like Dosha Wellness, the Little Cheese Shop have opened recently. We have great have opened recently. We have great pubs and restaurants too. Of course, just in the past few months we've seen the Winchester Open on Castle Green, tap one in the Independent Quarter, Chapel Tap in the town centre. And I thank all those centre. And I thank all those people and those business people who are committing to Taunton, Wellington and opening businesses Wellington and opening businesses in our area.

But I have to tell you about Deputy Speaker, these hospitality and drinks businesses are not sharing the joy in this Budget and this Christmas, and neither are our farmers. Lib Dems would not have levied the family farm tax. I voted against resolution 50 and instead of abolishing the penal anti forestalling clause, many that many call for the transfer by the government, the confirmation of the transfer by the government of the £1 million allowance between spouses and partners, though welcome, does not go anywhere near what was needed in terms of this measure.

Hospitality and drinks businesses are worried about increasing duty and increasing business rates. Cider is worth 150 million to the southwest economy, but cider makers are struggling. One in my constituency has pointed out that orchards take ten years to become mature, demanding contracts for 25 to 30 years. Cider plays a huge role in supporting our agriculture and maintaining the countryside, delivering a public good but representing only 6% of the sector means it's much more vulnerable to duty changes and price changes. What cider needed from this Budget was a 5% duty cut to to put back the differential with beer that was originally there, and hospitality believed their rates would go down.

They believed the famous permanently lower business rates promise, but they've actually gone up. Madam Deputy Speaker. The little Wine Shop, a fantastic brasserie in my constituency. Philip, the partner there, says, tells me this Budget means less hours for my staff, therefore less revenue for the Treasury when he as he is closing down one day per week, we will stop employing young people, he says. 16 years old. I have three members of staff leaving in mid-March. I will replace only one if I'm still open by then I am fuming.

What will the Minister say to Philip? In my constituency, we discovered that since the Budget, hospitality rateable values have increased, helping cancel out the multiplier. Another business, Mr. Miles keeping the lights on in Taunton High Street, though his valuation has actually gone down 10%. It's finding his business rate bill has gone up 12%. What does the Minister have to say to Mr. Miles tea rooms as they work to keep the lights on in the High street? As I as the other great Winchester pub in my constituency constituency has pointed out, pubs have to pay business rates according to increasing cash, increasing turnover.

What other business is subjected to the disincentive that when they increase business and increase turnover, their property rates increase? The answer is none. What Taunton and Wellington needed. In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, and what high streets needed from this Budget was a boost. And as a result of the quantitative easing, the big four banks are on call. I will give way. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Very grateful. Tim Brown. He, like. Me. Represents a constituency. In. The southwest where hospitality

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The southwest where hospitality businesses of all sorts are going to be very heavily hit by this Budget. They've seen rate increases. They've seen increases in their fuel, their alcohol duty, they've fuel, their alcohol duty, they've seen increases in the minimum wage. They've seen National Insurance increases. They are literally going to be taxed out of existence. Some of them this government says it supports small businesses. It couldn't be further from the truth.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Gentlemen, the small businesses are the backbone of the economy and the promise to reform business the promise to reform business rates, I believe made by the last government, needs to be delivered upon by this government. As I point upon by this government. As I point out, the big four banks alone will make £50 billion profit this year. The boost, therefore, that people The boost, therefore, that people and the high street need is both the cut to electricity bills and the 5% VAT cut, which the Lib Dems propose, funded by a windfall tax on those bank profits.

It's time the government backs small businesses like those in Taunton. Wellington, part of the biggest and most important sector of the British economy. After the chaos of the economy under the Conservatives, a boost to going out in the evening, a boost to our pubs and restaurants, a positive boost to the economy. That's the kind of Budget we need

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and that's the kind of Budget the Liberal Democrats would have delivered. To the. Front benches to wind up the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

shadow Minister, Gareth Davies. Speaker. It's a pleasure, as it always is,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's a pleasure, as it always is, to respond on behalf of His Majesty's Official Opposition, I'd like to thank members from across the House for their contributions the House for their contributions to today's debate, but in particular those from my side of particular those from my side of the House, in particular, my hon. Friend for Keighley, who has been a ferocious champion of farmers not just in Yorkshire but across the country. But he also spoke well about the family business tax and his business fibre line, which has been adversely impacted.

My right hon. Friend for Beverley and Holderness sought to give the Labour frontbench a maths lesson, although I'm afraid it is a little late for that and entirely futile. I enjoyed very much the speech by the right hon. Gentleman for Orkney and Shetland. I enjoyed his A.A. Milne quote almost as much as I enjoyed the unexpected references to Tinder. Of course, when it comes to Tinder, I would encourage everybody when it comes to politics to swipe right. Now, let me.

Also, I thought I'd give it a go. Let let me highlight just how prominent in this debate the family farm tax has been. And lastly, acknowledge the contributions the hon. Gentleman for Penrith and Solway and the hon.
18:42
Gareth Davies Portrait Gareth Davies MP (Grantham and Bourne, Conservative)
-
-
Lady for Scarborough and Witney, who spoke well, speaking out who spoke well, speaking out against their own party's policy. When it comes to farmers, it is not When it comes to farmers, it is not an easy thing to do, but it is the right thing to do and we appreciate it. For my part, I'm struck, I have to say, by a sense of déja vu, here we are again. Another year, another we are again. Another year, another finance bill that targets working people's pockets while failing on the government's number one mission of economic growth.

The finance bill is actually double the length of Labour's first finance bill, and I fear it will bring double the pain to the British public. Last year we had the now infamous Halloween Budget that scared the living daylights out of business. And this year we have the Nightmare Before Christmas Budget, which is essentially finishing off the rest of the country. This bill feels less like a carefully wrapped present, and more like something hastily stuffed into a stocking. Five minutes to midnight, with the receipt missing and the instructions written in a different language, we were promised a gift to working people, but what we have instead are higher burdens and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

higher and lower incentives. Of course. My hon. Friend is making a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend is making a fantastic speech and some very good colourful analogies there. But if I can also just be very prosaic, is can also just be very prosaic, is it not the case that the Office for Budget Responsibility has not scored a single impact of growth in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

scored a single impact of growth in the overall Budget? Yeah. Good point. As always. My hon. Friend points something

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend points something out that I think is important for the whole House to consider. And I'll come on to the broader assessment of the OBR later, which doesn't make for pleasant reading for the opposite. Members, look, tonight, Madam Deputy Speaker, members opposite must decide whether they're content to vote for a bill that makes their working constituents poorer, punishes family farmers and family businesses, and breaks promise after promise they made to secure their own seats.

And for all the bravado we may hear later from the Minister, there is now a growing gap between what Ministers are saying and what families and businesses are actually living. That gap has now become so visible that it's followed members opposite, out of the chamber and into the real world at this time of year. Madam Deputy Speaker, pubs should be putting up mistletoe. Instead, they're hanging signs saying no Labour MPs welcome. That's now a Christmas tradition that this government has invented all on its own.

When a government can't get a warm welcome or a pint in a local pub that's so badly needs the trade, it might be a good idea to reflect on why. Indeed, there is another growing gap between what Labour told the public before the election, what they repeated after it and what now sits in this finance bill. First, this bill is anti-working people only. Last year Ministers sat there, then stood up and promised the House that this government would not freeze income tax thresholds.

They could have stopped there, but they didn't. They went further. They said that to do so would amount to a tax rise on working people's payslips. Yet here we are today. This finance bill freezes income tax thresholds to 2030 2031. And the message to working families couldn't be clearer. If you get up early, go to work, do the right thing, provide for your family. Labour won't back you, they'll tax you less. And what will they do with all of this money that they're raising? They won't.

They won't pay down the national debt. Debt's going up. They won't employ more teachers. There are fewer of them now. And they won't employ more police officers either. We have few of those, too. In fact, they'll fail to deliver on almost everything they promised while in opposition. Instead they'll be. They'll turn hard working taxpayers money into handouts to appease their own left wing backbenchers. And secondly, this bill is anti aspirational and anti-business. If you decide to start your own business, or maybe you want to take over a business or a farm from your family.

What does this Labour government think of you? Well, as we've heard extensively today in this Budget, it takes further what they introduced at the last Budget. The family farm tax has spoken about by so many colleagues and a family business tax that will destroy aspiration and entrepreneurial ism. Time after time, the Chancellor has been warned of the impact of these changes on inheritance tax. She's repeatedly dodged questions in this House as she is this very moment. She has ignored concerns from the business community, and she has run scared of meeting the National Farmers Union.

That's not leadership. That's not owning your decisions. And finally, we were promised economic stability and management. And yet the OBR's own assessment of this bill tells a very different story. Growth will be slower over the forecast. Inflation will be higher. Debt will rise every single year of the forecast. Taxes will rise to the highest level on record. And just this morning we learned that unemployment continues to spiral to levels we have not seen in years. This was not a Budget for the wellbeing of the country.

It was a Budget to try to preserve the careers of the embattled Prime Minister and the embattled Chancellor. Madam Deputy Speaker, as we approach Christmas, it is traditional to reflect on who has been naughty and who has been nice. We are told that Father Christmas checks his list twice, but the British public need only glance once at this finance bill to know that they have been seriously let down. They know exactly which list the Chancellor belongs on. No matter if you work hard, no matter if you run a family business or a family farm, no matter if you save responsibly for your retirement, even in death, through the provisions of this bill, the taxman still comes a calling.

Under this finance bill, there is simply no way hard working British families do not end up poorer. Nobody voted for this, nobody voted for this. And we will certainly not be voting

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for it tonight either. Yeah. I call. The Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lucy Rigby. Madam Deputy Speaker. The Shadow Exchequer Secretary took the time to mention Father took the time to mention Father Christmas, and he took the time to mention Tinder. I thought he might also have taken a moment to welcome also have taken a moment to welcome the fourth major trade deal secured by this government, signed today with South Korea, which is set to with South Korea, which is set to boost our economy by £400 million. That was obviously too much to ask.

Madam Deputy Speaker, it's an honour to close this Second Reading debate on the finance Bill, and I thank my hon. Friend, the Exchequer Secretary, for opening the debate and to all hon. Members who have made their contributions today, and I look forward to hearing further contributions during the rest of the Bill's passage. Before I turn to the points made during today's debate, let me be clear about the purpose of this finance bill, and I'll frame it in the context of choices, because so many who have contributed to this debate today have done the same.

Put simply, Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill delivers on the fair, responsible and necessary choices required to strengthen our economy and to cut borrowing, to return our public services to health, to back British entrepreneurs, and to make people better off. That is what this bill does. And those are the choices that this government is making. And we have heard. Not yet. And we have heard absolutely nothing from the opposition. Madam Deputy Speaker, that acknowledges that they made the wrong choices. Indeed, what we've heard just now, what we heard from the shadow Chancellor just earlier, too, was a masterclass in selective amnesia.

You'd be forgiven for thinking that the shadow Treasury bench wasn't living in this country during their period of government, let alone running it. They've conveniently forgotten, Madam Deputy Speaker, that their choices gave us appallingly low productivity, threadbare public services, ballooning welfare spending and real wage stagnation. Those were their choices, and it's little wonder they don't want to remember them, let alone be judged by them. I'm going to make a bit of progress. Our choices are different choices. Our choices seek to rebuild and to repair our country and our economy, their choices to renew our public services and reform our welfare system.

Rebuilding our NHS, helping lift thousands, hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty, and investing in getting more people into work. Their choice is to strengthen our economy, maintaining the highest level of public investment for 40 years, backing British aspiration and importantly, cutting, borrowing and doubling the headroom against our fiscal rules.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will give way. Taking that personally. If you if you look at employment and you look at it over a time series, you can see employment was growing every single month until a certain every single month until a certain thing happened in July last year when Labour came to power. Madam Deputy Speaker, unemployment has Deputy Speaker, unemployment has gone up now officially, as of this morning, 5.1%. It is. It stands morning, 5.1%. It is. It stands today a 25% increase in the number of people who are not in employment.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

How can that possibly correspond with a mission for growth? I'm grateful to the hon. Member

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the hon. Member for his intervention, but I'm afraid to tell him that employment is rising in every single year of the forecast. Now, Madam Deputy the forecast. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, my hon. Friend, the Member for Glasgow East raised the importance of getting debt and importance of getting debt and getting borrowing down. I could not agree more. There is nothing progressive whatsoever about progressive whatsoever about spending over £100 billion a year on servicing our debt. That is more than five times our annual policing Budget.

It's money that could be spent on schools, on hospitals, and on the urgent public service renewal that this country so desperately needs. And it's exactly why this autumn Budget borrowing falls in every year of the forecast, and we are bringing the national debt under control. The Chancellor is putting in place the fastest rate of fiscal consolidation in the G7, and she's doubling the headroom to 21.7 billion. Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker, I'm grateful to the Minister. Will she concede that approximately three concede that approximately three quarters of the last three hours of debate on this bill has been devoted to the egregious family farm tax, including to noble and articulate contributions from articulate contributions from Labour backbenchers behind her, which took some bravery. Will she take that message back to the take that message back to the Chancellor and get her to finally scrap the family farm tax?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am grateful to the hon. Member for his intervention. It is not a concession on my part to acknowledge that that was the topic acknowledge that that was the topic of much debate during this debate. We are more than aware of the strength of feeling on inheritance tax and indeed the cost pressures that farmers are under, and I that farmers are under, and I appreciate. I appreciate the compassion with which hon. Members in this place have made their arguments on this point.

And I will remind hon. Members that that is why the government came forward with the changes that were announced at the Budget just a few weeks ago. And in those changes to both April and BPR, surviving spouses can now pass on double the tax free allowance, making the system more fair and simple for farmers. Madam Deputy Speaker, we know that a core part of strengthening our economy is about backing British businesses to reach their full potential, and that means backing British innovation and British aspiration.

It means giving entrepreneurs what they need to start up, scale up, list and grow here in the UK. And that's why this bill significantly expands the Enterprise Management Incentive Scheme limits to maintain the world leading nature of this relief,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

broadening access, broadening access I will, I will. I beg your pardon, Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg your pardon, Minister. Would the Minister agree. With me that it is due. To the careful management of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To the careful management of the public finances? But we have got record investment in defence and other areas of the Scottish economy,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

other areas of the Scottish economy, creating lots of well-paid jobs in Glasgow. Mr.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his intervention. The Scottish Government has been given a record settlement, an £820 million boost at this Budget, which takes the total additional funding for the Scottish Government from this Labour government to over £10 billion. Madam Deputy Speaker, I was talking about the entrepreneurship package within the Budget. So that's also why, as the hon. Member for Buckingham and Bletchley referred to, we're doubling the maximum amount that a company can raise through the generous enterprise investment and the venture capital trust schemes, making them more generous and helping to support more investment in companies making the transition from startup to scale up.

And we're not stopping there, Madam Deputy Speaker, because some of our most innovative, high growth companies, when they succeed bringing jobs and growth to our economy, we also want them to list here, too. And that's why this bill ensures that companies that list here in the UK will benefit from a stamp duty holiday on their shares for the first three years on the market, a point which was well made by my hon. Friend the Member for Burnley as well. We're backing British entrepreneurs, Madam Deputy Speaker, and we're making sure that the UK remains one of the most attractive places in the world to found.

Scale and list a business. I want to specifically address the point that the hon. Member for North Antrim referred to around the application of the measures. I've just been I've just spoken about to Northern Ireland, and I can assure him that Northern Irish companies will benefit from the expansion of the scheme and goods service companies, I should say, and goods and wholesale electricity companies in Northern Ireland will continue to benefit from the previous scheme

**** Possible New Speaker ****

limits. Madam. Oh, well. He is. It is in the point that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He is. It is in the point that the Minister made finally there under the previous schemes. But Northern Ireland is not to get the Northern Ireland is not to get the uplift. That's in clauses 13 to 15 for the rest of the United Kingdom. for the rest of the United Kingdom. Why? Because we are subject to EU state aid rules. We are being held state aid rules. We are being held back at the old rules, whereas everyone else in the United Kingdom gets the new uplift.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well. Madam, I can assure the hon. Member who makes a valid point that Member who makes a valid point that there are hardly any, any or very few, if any of these types of companies. So goods and wholesale companies, electricity, wholesale companies, electricity, wholesale electricity companies, sorry, I should say within Northern Ireland that come close to the existing that come close to the existing limits of the scheme, let alone those that are going to be extended. Madam Deputy Speaker, we're very Madam Deputy Speaker, we're very clear about the role of business and of economic growth in improving household incomes.

But we're also clear that after the opposition gave this country the worst parliament on record for living standards, far too many people are still struggling with the cost of living. This government is already making progress to tackle it. Wages have gone up more in the first year of this government than the entire first decade of the last real household disposable income was £800 higher in the first year of this Parliament than in the last year under the Tories. But we know that there is more to do, and it's because of the fair and the necessary choices in this bill that we're able to help ease the cost of living for millions of families across this country.

It's how we're cutting millions of households energy bills by an average of £150 per year, and extending the Warm Homes plan. It's how we're lifting the two child cap and with it lifting half a million children in this country out of poverty. It's how we're freezing prescription charges and freezing rail fares, and it's how we're increasing the national living wage whilst protecting the triple lock on pensions. Madam Deputy Speaker, this is a government that is committed to helping people with the cost of living to putting more money in people's pockets and the choices we're making in this bill.

Do just that. And, Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to turn to address the points raised by my hon. Friend, the Member for Scarborough and Whitby and the Member for Wolverhampton North East as well, because they're absolutely right that the choices this government is making in this finance bill will help to restore our public services. Those choices are why the Chancellor is able to put libraries in primary schools, as my hon. Friend referred to, and why she's able to protect NHS budgets as well.

They're why she's able to invest an extra £300 million in NHS technology to roll out 250 new neighbourhood health centres right across this country, and to continue to get waiting lists, which stood at a record high when this government came to power back under control. That means millions more people able to access the healthcare that they need free at the point of use. It means millions more people getting the operations that they need, the preventative care that they need, the scans that they need.

It's how we're able to repair our NHS and to ensure it continues to exist for the next generation and for many generations to come. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, this finance bill is about delivering on our commitments. It's about building a stronger economy where prosperity and living standards rise, where child poverty falls, where businesses succeed, and where public services are renewed. Every measure in this finance bill is geared towards that goal. We geared towards that goal. We promise change.

We promise fairness. We're delivering both. And for these reasons, I commend this bill these reasons, I commend this bill to the House.
19:02
19:02
19:15
19:17
19:28
John Slinger Portrait Points of Order John Slinger MP (Rugby, Labour)
-
-
Thank you madam. Thank you, >> Thank you madam. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, on a point of order, I'd be grateful if you could confirm whether any points of order confirm whether any points of order raised by members of this House since this parliamentary session since this parliamentary session began, have actually been deemed to be points of order. And whether if this is not the case, you could provide guidance to honourable and right hon. Members as to what does constitute a point of order, so that the time of members is not wasted in this House.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, it's not that one. I'm grateful to the hon. Member for Rugby for giving notice of his points of order on points of order, I can deem that his point of order was most definitely not a point of was most definitely not a point of order. A point of order for clarity, and for the hon. Member for Rugby should in principle draw the should in principle draw the chair's attention to a possible breach of the House's rules of order, which is points of order fell to do.

I would not like to speculate on how many points of order actually have served this purpose. I'm sure many now will. But the hon. Member raises an interesting question. Hansard can point out how many points of orders have been raised like his, which obviously his was not a point of order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Close, close. Now I come on to the motion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Now I come on to the motion number four on rehabilitation of offenders. Minister Tamworth. I beg to move. The question is, as on the Order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is, as on the Order Paper that opinion, say aye. I of the contrary, no the ayes have it. the contrary, no the ayes have it. The ayes have it I know. Come on to the presentation of public petitions. I'll give the frontbenchers a few moments to frontbenchers a few moments to shuffle over. Jeff Smith petition

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Tom Morrison. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I'd like to thank Steve Mansfield Action Group for bringing this much needed petition here today in Cheadle constituency. We are facing unrealistic and unsustainable developments that are already impinging on residents quality of life. The petitioners, therefore, life. The petitioners, therefore, request that the House of Commons urge the government to schedule a debate in the House on the protection of greenbelt and to protection of greenbelt and to resist destructive plans to sacrifice greenfields woodlands and wildlife habitats in favour of investing in sustainable housing solutions and protecting our natural environment for future generations.

Hey!

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition! Greenbelt protection.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition Tom Gordon. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Last week's peerage list shows the House of Lords still used to reward loyalty, connections and convenience, all to the tune of £370 a day to the taxpayer. I'm pleased a day to the taxpayer. I'm pleased to present this petition with the support of Lib Dem Councillor Graham Dickson. The petitioners, therefore, request that the House therefore, request that the House of Commons urge the government to bring forward proposals to abolish the House of Lords in its current form and replace it with a fully elected second chamber founded on clear democratic principles, accountability to the people it serves and equipped to scrutinise legislation with transparency and legitimacy.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition. House of Lords.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition. House of Lords. I beg to move that this House do now adjourn. The question is that this House

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this House do now adjourn. I call Liz Saville-Roberts on criminal justice system in Wales. Liz

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Saville-Roberts. Of people like to think that criminal justice happens to other criminal justice happens to other people, to other families, that anybody who finds themselves in the criminal justice system deserves what they get, that people get sent to prison to be punished. One of our jobs here is to remind ourselves, the legislators, that what we do has repercussions for real people, for their families. So I'd like to open this evening's adjournment debate on the criminal justice system in Wales, with an account of what happened to one family from Blaenau Ffestiniog to 22 year old Gweno Ephraim, to her mother, Karen Ephraim, to her half sister and brother, and to her extended family doctor Rob Jones and the Wales Governance Centre of Cardiff University allow us to understand the cracks in our criminal justice system in Wales.

Gwyneth story is what happens when real families fall between the gaps. Gwen's mother first contacted my office in January 2022, seeking support after her daughter had attempted to kill herself. Gwyneth was discharged from the local district hospital after two days in A&E. I'm told that the mental health team were not making home visits. This was to be fair during the Covid pandemic. A year later, Gwen pleaded guilty to six charges at Caernarfon Magistrates Court, which included assault of a health
19:33
Liz Saville Roberts Portrait Rt Hon Liz Saville Roberts MP (Dwyfor Meirionnydd, Plaid Cymru)
-
-
care worker at the Hergest Mental Health Unit in Ysbyty Gwynedd. She was sentenced to 44 weeks in prison. was sentenced to 44 weeks in prison. This was her first experience of the criminal justice system. The family, of course, readily acknowledged that her victims deserve justice, despite promises deserve justice, despite promises of a women's residential centre in Swansea since 2018, Wales has no Swansea since 2018, Wales has no prison or secure accommodation for women. Neither are there any approved premises for women.

Gwenno was sent just over 100 miles away to HMP style outside Manchester and held there for a period of three months. Three months was not long enough for her to be able to get a proper diagnosis for her mental illness, but it was long enough to turn her life into chaos. Despite being on suicide watch while in prison, Gwenno was released back into the community, where her refusal to engage was a sufficient reason for accommodation to be withdrawn.

She couldn't stay with her mother as her behaviour posed a threat to the younger children. This was the beginning of a vortex of bed and breakfast rooms, breaches of licence conditions, pointlessly short returns to HMP style hand washing over terms like capacity. When Gwyneth vulnerability was obvious and harrowing. Mental health episodes in train stations, hospitals and North Wales seaside towns. Now, while health and homelessness support through local authorities are devolved to Wales, criminal justice is not Welsh. Women's experience of the criminal justice system epitomises what doctor Rob Jones and Professor Richard Wyn Jones, conceptualised as the jagged edge of justice in Wales, despite not having a female prison, Wales has the third highest incarceration rate for women in Western Europe and, like Gwyneth, Welsh women are sent to prisons all across England, although predominantly to HMP style and HMP Eastwood Park and Gloucestershire.

78% of these women over three quarters were sentenced to 12 months or less last year, while nearly a quarter received a month or less. Such short sentences do nothing to rehabilitate female offenders, but they do plenty to derail lives. And with the 45% increase in the numbers recalled to custody for breach of licence in Wales in 2024, Gwynedd's revolving door experience is far from unique and it doesn't improve when we look at the wider picture either. Wales has had a higher in-country imprisonment rate than England since 2019, with 167 prisoners per 100,000 head of population in 2024.

This is the highest in Western Europe. In fact, one in every 648 people from Wales were in prison last year. Of course, it's not just people from Wales. 35% of all prisoners held in Wales last year were from England. 65% of them were held at HMP Berwyn and Wrexham. This is not sustainable. And so says the PCs union at Berwyn. Staff are worried that as prisoners are released early under new government plans, empty spaces will be filled by prisoners turned away from full prisons closer to home.

And it is not a one way street. Of course, around 30% of prisoners from Wales are being held across 109 prisons in England, away from families support networks, their culture sometimes their first language, as was exactly the case with Gwenno. And that last point is important, considering that a recent study by Rob Jones and Gregory Davies found that Welsh speaking prisoners have experienced, and I quote, widespread neglect of their needs and overt interference, interference interferences with their use of the Welsh language in prison.

Were prisons and Wales answerable to the Sun-Earth? More stringent Welsh language requirements would apply, and the language rights of Welsh speakers and prisons would very likely be more robust. As the UK government deals with the prison crisis that incentivises filling spaces wherever they become available, the differing needs in Wales are all the more important for us to stress here. I say this following the news of HMP Parkes approved expansion. Despite serious concerns over safety, access to drugs and the prison, recording the highest number of deaths for a single prison in 2024, the joint highest ever recorded in England and Wales.

Surely placing more people in a prison where the number of prisoner on prisoner assaults has risen by 15%, alongside a rise in self-harm and assaults on staff, is a recipe for disaster and accounting for women and category A prisoners who also can't be accommodated in the prison estate, is providing Wales with 700 more prison places, 700 more places than we presently have. Welsh prisoners really are sensible idea. This could see Wales's in-country imprisonment rate surpassed the average for the whole of Europe.

Of course, it is to be anticipated that prisoners are eventually released and in Wales, this is where the jagged edge is particularly clear. Where the wraparound services to help ex-offenders are, of course, devolved. Gwenno was released on occasion without a fixed address. Far from home. The number of people released into homelessness from Welsh prisons rose 34% in 20 2425, and we don't even know how many people Welsh prison, how many people, how many Welsh prisoners were released as part of the government's STS 40 between September 24th, 2024 and March 2025, and those into homelessness because the Moj did not provide that data when the Wales Governance Centre requested it.

There is a real constitutional question here on why data on the impact of UK level decisions that have a knock on effect on devolved services on the ground in Wales cannot be released. Communication and data tracking between relevant bodies is the bare minimum expectation. This, as it stands, is not effective governance of criminal justice in Wales. To turn now to probation. When Gwenno lost her train ticket home from HMP style, she missed her probation appointment back home in Wales and therefore she was in breach of her licences and she was sent straight back to prison.

Her experience again shows how the probation service has to operate in this jagged edge, where prisoners are at Gwyneth to prison, and not to take any risks when there are breaches in licence conditions. As the co-chair of the Justice Union's parliamentary group, I have heard directly from probation staff who warn that unless the service receives a significant funding, funding uplift and a marked change in both working conditions and culture, the UK government's government's sentencing Bill plans simply cannot succeed. A major overhaul is necessary, however, in response to an amendment by Lord Thomas of Cumbria than the other place calling for exactly the devolution of probation, as recommended by his own Commission's report.

Recommendation of the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future, Constitutional Future of Wales and the Commission on the UK's future by Gordon Brown. The Minister for prisons response was that the capacity for change in the probation service is pretty much maxed out. I am proud to say that that is not the view of the probation staff, of probation staff in Wales for Wales Probation Development Group. This juncture provides an opportunity for a 21st century probation service that is locally managed, commissioned and delivered with an emphasis on rehabilitation, desistance and the importance of relationships.

To make this a reality, we need devolution. If change has to happen anyway, why not undertake real, lasting change that puts in practice what is actually being asked for in Wales and what could make a real people difference to people like Gwenda? The future. Now, I understand that the UK government proposes a memorandum of understanding to allow some changes in Wales, but can the Minister, therefore, when she responds, tell me specifically what this would achieve in practice? Because I understand from the House of Commons library that a memorandum of understanding based on the Manchester model has no legal force.

In the case of the Manchester Agreement, either side would be free to withdraw from the MOU at any time, and that it is not possible to raise a formal dispute or take legal action if either side believes the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding have not been adhered to. So can she tell me how this will work for Wales? What could Welsh Government actually do, and what would be in place to ensure that the UK government keeps to its side of any deal? The reality is that this is a way for the UK government to essentially subcontract the meaningful, community based work, while refusing to give up the powers which set the agenda that works for no one.

If it did, why wasn't this the recommendation by multiple independent commissions? I would beg the Minister to answer that question, and that is actually particularly important, considering the way that the abolition of police and crime commissioners is being handled in Wales. The government says that Wales has a unique nature of devolved arrangements. But rather than addressing the fundamental incoherence of those arrangements and devolving criminal justice, the UK government is instead expecting the Welsh Government to help work things out.

In Wales, the delayed Policing White Paper is an opportunity for the UK government to undertake meaningful reform to improve Welsh policing and the criminal justice system in Wales. But to do that effectively, the government must engage, engage with the repeated recommendations of independent experts. So I come to my conclusion now, Madam Deputy Speaker, let us put ourselves in the position of Gwynedd's family. They have seen how offenders and ex-offenders in Wales and their families are failed by a result.

A resolute lack of joined up thinking. It is through the full devolution of the criminal justice system that we can start to fix structural problems and address systematic issues in Wales, which hinder both effective rehabilitation and the safety and welfare of victims, victims, survivors and their families. Now, this is not a political ask or a tick box on a constitutional wish list. It is a pragmatic solution with the needs of people, victims and offenders within their communities. At its heart, Gwenna Gwen I frame had been happy at school until the age of 16.

She found the move to college difficult. It was round about, of course, after this it was Covid and there was a traumatic event in the family. Her mental health made her vulnerable after offending the only place Gwyneth found the safety of routine was in prison, where she was in and out eight times between January and July this year. How could it be possible for a young woman to be released from suicide watch and prison to chaotic bed and breakfast accommodation over and over and over again? On the 7th of August, North Wales Police put out a missing person appeal for Gwenna.

It states that she was last seen in Bangor on Monday night, the 28th of July. I'm quoting from their statement. CCTV footage appears to show her walking alone between 10:20 p.m. and 11:10 p.m. by which time it is understood that she had reached the Menai Suspension Bridge. She has not been seen since the emergency services and the RNLI made searches in the days immediately afterwards, but they found nothing. An inquest has not been opened because Gwenna is not officially missing.

Gwenna is officially missing. That is her status. Because of this, Karen EFRA is refused access to her daughter's medical notes because she has not got her daughter's permission. This is all logical, officially, but it makes no sense to a grieving mother looking for answers. I would ask the Minister, please, would she be prepared to meet with Gwen's family with Karen Frame? Because I think it's better that the questions from her mother come from her, rather than from her member of Parliament.

Just to close, let us remember that Gwenna was in the care of the state, in prison, in hospital and on licence. We failed her.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call the Minister Alex Davies-Jones. Thank you, Madam.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Deputy Speaker. And can I thank the hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd for bringing this very important debate to the House this important debate to the House this evening. She will know that I am a proud Justice Minister, but I am also a very, very proud Welsh MP. And so everything she said this evening, I recognise myself as a evening, I recognise myself as a constituency MP and I all of my thoughts are with Gwen's family and I will happily meet with Karen to answer her questions directly and ensure that that meeting happens.

Because Gwen is a prime example of exactly why the criminal justice system is not working, and it is exactly why we set up the Women's Justice Board. It is exactly why we need to close the gaps to ensure that women like Gwen, or are given the support that they need, rather than necessarily a prison sentence. It is why we have taken recommendations forward on looking at short sentences which serve no one, apart from creating potentially better criminals rather than better citizens.

It's about why there needs to be better wraparound support, better support services available for women like Gwen and I will ensure that meeting happens. And it is a mission of this government and of the Justice Department to ensure that we do not fail women like Gwen going forward. I would also like to sincerely thank the hon. Member for her continuing engagement and interest in the justice system, not just in Wales, but generally. She has been a tireless advocate for this and I welcome all engagement with her.

It
19:49
Alex Davies-Jones Portrait Alex Davies-Jones MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Pontypridd, Labour)
-
-
is not the first debate she has had on the matter, and I am sure, Madam Deputy Speaker, it will not be her last. And she has also tabled amendments to the Sentencing Bill and sought to change the probation landscape in Wales, which she landscape in Wales, which she discussed as well. During that debate on the sentencing Bill, the hon. Member noted the impact that hon. Member noted the impact that that bill will have on probation in Wales. She mentioned it again this evening. The work of the Thomas Commission and the Brown Report on the devolution of powers to Wales is something that I have read closely.

The interface between that reserved and devolved services is something I know all too well. As an MP representing a devolved constituency, that jagged edge that she mentioned, and the importance of using data to inform services and practices. This debate this evening gives us further opportunity to explore those issues in detail and allows us to examine that justice policy and delivery landscape in Wales. And I welcome that wholeheartedly. First, I would like to deal with the issue of the commissions and reports that have considered justice devolution in Wales and that jagged edge that we sadly heard so much about this evening.

As the hon. Member noted, a number of commissions have looked into the devolution of powers to Wales, as well as, more specifically, the devolution of justice. The Thomas Commission recognised the complex landscape surrounding justice in Wales, examining that interface between reserved and devolved responsibilities and the delivery, as the hon. Lady mentioned, of many of the support services provided by devolved authorities to justice related issues. Yes, these interfaces exist, but it is not true necessarily that they cause problems in the delivery of justice in Wales.

The Ministry of Justice, His Majesty's Prison and Probation Service, His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service all work together with the devolved authorities on a day to day basis to ensure that delivery meets the distinct needs of Wales. The Ministry of Justice engages with the Welsh Government through several structured mechanisms aimed at co-ordinating justice delivery, including on a formal concord between the MoJ and Welsh Government, which establishes principles for cooperation. That Memorandum of Understanding on Offender Education. The Criminal Justice Board for Wales, which coordinates across criminal justice agencies and partners to oversee cross-cutting challenges in justice delivery for Wales.

The Justice in Wales Strategy Group, which acts as the senior strategic level interface on justice issues between the Ministry of Justice, Home Office and Welsh Government on key areas of policy and reform. And the Inter-Ministerial Group for justice, which is a cross-government forum enabling formal and regular engagement on justice issues amongst the UK, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland governments which addresses matters of shared interest. And my colleague, the Minister for sentencing, met with our devolved counterparts in recently in the past week and I have also recently met with my counterpart in Welsh Government to discuss cross-jurisdictional issues.

And we regularly meet and have collaborative conversations. That is in addition to that, daily level engagement on a range of issues. And as a result, I am pleased to inform the House that Justice delivery in Wales is performing well. Prisons are, believe it or not, performing well. Hmps in Wales have five public prisons Cardiff, Swansea, Prescoed in Berwyn and one

**** Possible New Speaker ****

private prison park, now HMP. I will. Robert on the matter, of course,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Robert on the matter, of course, and there has been much debate on the removal of jury trial in certain circumstances. But I am certain circumstances. But I am told that in Wales that we do not have these backlogs in courts and that actually this is a problem in that actually this is a problem in England that could be well imposed upon Wales and that there is a potential here of leaving the potential here of leaving the status quo as it is in Wales.

So we can actually see whether this works with a comparison in Wales between Wales and England. But I am told that the courts are not in the same position as regards backlogs in Wales at all.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I would like the information that the hon. Lady has, because the information I have had is that our court system in Wales is that our court system in Wales is in quite a severe backlog. Victims and survivors that I speak to in Wales on a daily basis have to in Wales on a daily basis have told me that they are still waiting years for their cases to get to trial. That backlog is very, very real. So if the hon. Lady has real.

So if the hon. Lady has information to the contrary, I would welcome that because, Madam Deputy Speaker, we we know the issue in our, in our courts is is quite severe at the moment. But going back to our prisons, HMP Usk scored the highest possible score across all four areas of assessment, despite a challenging time across the estates and across our prisons in Wales, this has identified strengths in leadership, governance along with collaborative working with the Welsh Government. It shows that it can be done when it's done well and all of our prisons have robust action plans in place to ensure continued improvement and ongoing development.

Now on the issue, the hon. Lady mentions our Welsh courts. They are performing well. The Crown Court performance in Wales is one of the best in the country. However, those backlogs still still exist. Welsh courts backlogs show concern also across magistrates courts in Wales, civil and family justice is performing well. Wales has seen successful initiatives such as the Pathfinder Pilot, which is transforming private family law proceedings in Wales, offering a less adversarial, early intervention focussed process, especially for domestic abuse cases.

And I have seen that first hand in Newport and in Cardiff. But we must do more to continue to improve this delivery. One of the specific recommendations of the Thomas Commission was that Justice Data should be Wales specific and more detailed, with disaggregated data reflecting distinct Welsh needs. Such data is crucial in the work delivery effectively in Wales. Now it is important to note that disaggregated Wales specific data is already collected and published. A comprehensive review of nearly 400 Welsh Government priority data requests found that 40% of the requested data has already been published, with clear signposting provided to aid navigation.

Now withstanding that, the government recognises the importance of specific data in policy development and operational delivery, and as such, last month Lord Thompson, the Minister and the Other place, wrote to the Welsh Government to set out areas where we will now collect additional disaggregated data for Wales and I will happily keep her updated on that. Over the past 18 months, the Ministry of Justice has worked collaboratively with the Welsh Government, with their official stakeholders, including Doctor Robert Jones of the Welsh Governance Centre, and we have made significant steps forwards in Welsh data collection and disaggregation.

We have focussed on improving transparency, accessibility and relevance. Relevance of Welsh specific justice data. We have developed and published a new Welsh specific data set, including the annual Management Information release on Welsh prisoner data, a bespoke Welsh reoffending data release for the Equalities and Social Justice Committee. Additional breakdowns such as custody type by institution and deaths under probation supervision in approved premises published in the October 2025 Offender Management Statistics quarterly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

release. We have also committed. Yes, I will happily give way. I do welcome the disaggregated data that has been. It has been data that has been. It has been quite a battle to get this, and it does indicate from the government that the new government that this is actually an area that they're is actually an area that they're interested in. If we now see tendencies across this data from year to year, with a complete data year to year, with a complete data set that shows that as the situation stands, justice is not serving Wales well.

I hope the government will consider the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government will consider the evidence before them. We will always be evidence led. The hon. Lady mentioned that this is not political. We will always be evidence led and look at what that data is telling us. And I will happily work with her and other colleagues on that as going forward. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have also committed to publishing further data on homelessness, for example, by institution and Welsh language, which is something that is of severe concern to me that Welsh prisoners are not being able to converse in their mother tongue and their first language.

And that is something that is very, very important that we need to address. And so we will publish that when it is available. That is anticipated at the end of 2026. But we are committed to doing that, and we are supporting the development of a publicly available Welsh Government dashboard as well. We have facilitated data sharing agreements, including for Welsh youth justice data, and in addition, substantial volumes of data are now accessible via the ONS secure Research Service and the Welsh Government funded data Bank, supporting evidence based policy development.

Officials will continue to enhance Welsh data provision where opportunities arise. We will promote awareness of existing data sets and maintain engagement with stakeholders to understand emerging priorities. I will now turn to the impact of criminal justice initiatives on devolved services, which I know is an area of interest to the hon. Lady. Now, in our manifesto, we committed to undertake a strategic review of probation, including devolution, and we are working constructively with the Welsh Government on this and I want to reassure her of that point.

That includes developing, as she mentioned, that memorandum of understanding on Co-commissioning and local working partnerships. Now that is still in development. And again, we'll happily bring her into that development to ensure that we get this right. And it is not just a replica of Manchester that we do this bespoke piece of work for Wales, and that it is Wales focussed and Wales specific. However, she will be aware that the criminal justice system is facing acute and significant pressures and we are taking action as a government to remedy that situation.

The sentencing Bill and upcoming legislation to implement the recommendations of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts are key components of that action, and we will need that time to bed in. It is important that we take time to get that right. Our priority is to ensure that the system is stabilised before we undertake any further review of the government's arrangements, but we will do so. We will continue to ensure that the impact of this work on devolved services is considered very carefully, and we will continue to work with the Welsh Government and devolved authorities to ensure that the system works effectively and sustainably.

In Wales, we have already had a number of discussions with the Welsh Government about this work and on the impact on devolved authorities, and my ministerial colleagues and I will continue to engage with Welsh Government Ministers on all justice issues to ensure that they can inform policy development and delivery, and reflect that distinct and specific needs of the people of Wales. Now to conclude, Madam Deputy Speaker, the justice system is as we are all sadly, we're facing unprecedented challenges, particularly in the criminal justice space.

The government inherited a prison system on the verge of collapse, which left the courts unable to send offenders to prison and the police unable to arrest dangerous criminals. But by working closely with our partners in Wales, we are delivering a system that is meeting the needs of Welsh users. The picture in Wales is positive, both in the criminal and in the civil and in the family space, and we are striving to ensure that these partnerships continue to improve justice delivery in Wales.

And again, I extend that hand to work with her and colleagues across the political divide to ensure that we get this right, because this isn't political, this is about serving the needs of the people of Wales. When we came into office, we mentioned the difference that a Labour government Woking at both ends of the M4 would have for Wales. This is that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

delivery in action. Diolch yn fawr the question is that this House do now adjourn. Is that this House do now adjourn. Is that opinion, say aye. I the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Order,
11:00
None Portrait Q1. What steps his Department is taking to ensure adequate provision of legal aid. (906926)
-

House House of House of Commons House of Commons - House of Commons - 1 House of Commons - 16 House of Commons - 16 December 2025.
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page