Royal Mail: Universal Service Obligation

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. I congratulate the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox) on securing this important debate on Royal Mail and the USO, an issue that matters deeply to households and to businesses across the country. Royal Mail is an iconic part of the UK’s infrastructure. The postie remains a familiar part of every city, town and village, providing a vital service to communities around the country. As other hon. Members have done, I pay tribute to the dedication of posties. I know, from spending time out on delivery with posties from the Barrhead sorting office in my constituency, the care that they have for their customers, and particularly their vulnerable customers. The USO underpins the network, guaranteeing that letters and parcels can be sent anywhere in the UK at a uniform price, six days a week. That principle ensures that businesses can reach customers nationwide and that families can stay connected.

[Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale) (Lab)]

I represent a partly rural constituency, Morecambe and Lunesdale, so my constituents rely on the universal service obligation. They also rely on regular mail deliveries for vital information such as hospital appointments. But my constituents, particularly in villages like Endmoor, are suffering with irregular and delayed deliveries. Does the Minister agree that my rural constituents deserve a good postal service, and that Royal Mail should focus on delivering one? What steps is the Minister taking to secure that service?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend makes an essential point about the importance of the postal service in rural areas. The hon. Member for Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire (Mr MacDonald) made that point as well. I know from my relatives in highland areas how essential that connection is. My hon. Friend raises the issue of NHS appointment letters—that point was also raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) and the hon. Member for Bridgwater. The trials of barcodes on those letters have been very successful, and I am happy to continue discussions with the Health Secretary to make sure that those barcodes are rolled out as widely as possible.

[Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) for raising the issue of the barcodes. Royal Mail representatives came before the Scottish Affairs Committee when we wanted to discuss with them the problem of deliveries in rural and highland areas. They were particularly proud to talk about the barcode idea, but seemed to be concerned that perhaps in Scotland there was not the same alacrity in adopting that sensible suggestion. Given the Minister’s knowledge of the geography of Scotland, which is at least as good as mine, is that a point he might want to take up with colleagues in the Scottish Government?

[Blair McDougall]

I certainly will. As I mentioned a moment ago, the more dispersed geography of Scotland means that the postal service is often even more of a lifeline in our part of the world. I will certainly follow up that point with Scottish Ministers, and with colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care. On the future of the universal postal service, I reassure the hon. Member for Bridgwater that we remain committed to a comprehensive USO that is financially sustainable and efficient, and that meets user needs within the open and competitive market. That is why the six-days-a-week, one-price-goes-anywhere universal service remains at the heart of the regulatory regime that is overseen by Ofcom, but of course the universal postal service faces challenges, as many Members have said.

[Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)]

It is also important to get letters into the postal service in the first place. In Bidwell West, which is in my constituency, residents face a 30-minute walk to the nearest post box. That is because Royal Mail refuses to put in new post boxes on unadopted roads, despite the fact that the developer is perfectly happy for there to be a new post box. Would the Minister consider raising that with Royal Mail?

[Blair McDougall]

I can certainly do that. Through Ofcom, Royal Mail has obligations in terms of the accessibility of post boxes, and I will raise my hon. Friend’s point with the chief executive of Royal Mail when I meet with him next week.

The challenges faced by Royal Mail are shared in most European countries, which are taking steps to reform their USOs. On 10 July, Ofcom announced reforms to put the USO on a more sustainable footing, and to push Royal Mail to improve reliability. However, changing those obligations alone will not be enough to guarantee a better service, so today, Ofcom has launched a call for input as part of its ongoing review of affordability, which will inform its consultation early next year. Reform of the USO is an ongoing process, which is being undertaken by Ofcom, the independent regulator, so I will not directly insert myself into that. However, I will certainly make sure that the voices of hon. Members are heard, widely and clearly.

Many Members raised issues relating to the quality of service. Experiencing delays is so frustrating, as many Members said. That is why, when EP took over Royal Mail, we secured the commitment through our golden share that before its new owners take value out of Royal Mail, quality of service must improve. Ofcom has powers to investigate and take enforcement action when failures in quality of service are identified, as it did recently when it fined Royal Mail £21 million for contravening its service conditions in 2024-25. Ofcom has told Royal Mail that it must urgently publish a credible plan that delivers significant and continuous improvement.

The changes to the USO that I referenced earlier include changes to Royal Mail’s quality of service targets, as the hon. Member for Bridgwater mentioned. They are intended to enable the business to more predictably deliver mail without delays, but I share his view that flexibility must ensure reliability, rather than lowering ambitions. Ofcom has committed to closely monitoring Royal Mail’s performance, and to ensuring that it meets the business regularly to have those conversations. It is evident from the contributions of hon. Members across the Chamber that Royal Mail’s quality of service has not been good enough. The Government have discussed that with the chief executive of Royal Mail, and I will do so again on behalf of the hon. Members who have raised issues today.

I will return briefly to the subject of the constituency of the hon. Member for Bridgwater. I know that there have been service issues because of resourcing difficulties in the Bridgwater, Burnham-on-Sea and Taunton delivery offices. I understand that Royal Mail is now actively recruiting staff to deal with that. Again, I will discuss that with the chief executive of Royal Mail next week. Royal Mail has publicly committed to delivering improvements to its quality of service, and is taking action to recruit additional frontline staff, improving delivery office efficiency and simplifying the network to make it more reliable and resilient. I am encouraged to see that Royal Mail is recruiting 20,000 temporary workers across the country to help deliver the Christmas items that we all expect during that peak period.

As I have set out, the Government remain committed to ensuring the provision of a financially sustainable and efficient universal postal service, one that is accessible and affordable for customers, and that works for workers and businesses. I fully recognise that delays in postal deliveries can have serious consequences for those, including small businesses, who rely on the post for important information. Now that Ofcom has made changes to the USO specification to ensure a modernised service, we need Royal Mail to work with its workforce and unions to deliver the service that we expect.

I hope that hon. Members will see Royal Mail’s service quality improve in the months and years ahead, but rest assured, I will continue to work with Royal Mail and Ofcom to make sure that that is the case. I emphasise that whatever criticisms we might have of Royal Mail, and whatever concerns we might have about the quality of service, we, across the House, are so grateful for the quality of service and the commitment of individual posties, who are an absolute lifeline to communities up and down the country.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Thursday 30th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

14. What recent progress he has made on implementing the industrial strategy.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

The whole of Government are focused on delivering the industrial strategy, and significant progress has already been made. This month, we published our new quarterly update, which reports on the key economic indicators for growth-driving sectors, delivery milestones and major investments. With over £250 billion of investment committed and over 45,000 jobs supported since July, we are delivering on that vision.

[Henry Tufnell]

Mid and South Pembrokeshire plays a vital role in the UK’s energy sector, supplying 20% of the UK’s energy. This Government have recognised that the future of Britain’s energy security depends on Pembrokeshire, identifying us as a key growth region and investing in our workforce with an £800,000 skills pilot. Will the Minister set out how the industrial strategy will help empower communities from Pembroke Dock to Milford Haven to continue to lead the way in our energy security and help generate local economic growth?

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend has been a constant advocate for the energy potential of Pembrokeshire. That is why the industrial strategy supported south-west Wales’s clean energy potential through targeted investment in infrastructure and workforce development. The strategy will build on that using the potential of the port of Milford Haven, floating offshore wind in the Celtic sea and carbon capture technologies. The £800,000 skills pilot that he refers to underpins that clean energy industries sector plan. The National Wealth Fund will also benefit Wales, as it will invest in the sectors he mentions that are prevalent in that area.

[Noah Law]

Cornwall has a huge role to play in making Britain a clean energy superpower. As Ministers will be aware, much thought has already gone into the making of an industrial strategy for Cornwall. The crucial piece now is to unlock the funding needed for industrial and economic development, particularly in the wake of the shared prosperity fund coming to an end. What discussions has the Minister had with colleagues in the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government about the prospect of a set of investment measures to replace shared prosperity funding and ensure the realisation of Cornwall’s unique industrial potential?

[Blair McDougall]

I know from holidaying in my hon. Friend’s constituency that it is a place of incredible beauty, but I know from his constant advocacy that it is also a place of huge industrial potential. Cornwall will benefit from access to the £200 million investment fund, which provides debt and equity finance of up to £5 million for businesses in the south-west. That has already delivered £51.8 million of direct investment, leveraging an additional £48.1 million. I know he has big plans for industry in Cornwall, and we will work with him, especially on access to finance, to ensure that we can unlock that potential. We will of course work with our colleagues in MHCLG.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

I declare an interest as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for British buses. Our bus manufacturing industry supports thousands of jobs across the country, but faces an existential challenge from China. Market share has increased rapidly, and the Scottish National party’s disastrous ScotZEB 2 scheme sent less than 20% of orders to Scotland’s sole manufacturer, which directly jeopardised 400 jobs earlier this year. What urgent interventions are Ministers considering to contend with the rise in Chinese market share? Has the Minister discussed this issue with colleagues in the Department for Transport prior to the publication of the 10-year bus pipeline next month? Record bus funding should not be a shopping list for China.

[Blair McDougall]

I share my hon. Friend’s frustration at the lack of an industrial strategy from the SNP Government in Edinburgh. It has meant that workers at Alexander Dennis in his constituency are on furlough rather than doing what they do best: making world-class buses for public transport. For our part, we are supporting combined mayoral authorities to co-ordinate the procurement of buses through a Crown Commercial Service commercial agreement, and we are publishing a 10-year pipeline of future bus orders to provide the much-needed certainty that the sector requires. That includes providing advice on using social value criteria that suppliers such as Alexander Dennis are well placed to meet when procuring new buses, such as creating and retaining jobs in a way that respects our legal obligations. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for keeping this issue on the agenda.

[Mr Speaker]

It is no use the Secretary State looking at me with a grin as though I am out of order. We are still only on the second question and I have to get some other Members in—that is all I am bothered about. It will get worse shortly—I have got Jim to come! I call Robin Swann.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

I will not take the dig about being short personally, Mr Speaker.

The industrial strategy and the strategic defence review both offer great opportunities to the entire United Kingdom. Can I seek reassurances from the Minister that he will work with the Northern Ireland Executive to ensure that Northern Ireland and Northern Ireland businesses get benefit out of both?

[Blair McDougall]

I can absolutely give the hon. Member that reassurance. I have already met with my opposite number in the Northern Ireland Executive. The hon. Member mentions defence industries in particular, and it feels like every single month there is a significant defence order as part of the industrial strategy. It shows that these are not just words on paper, but that we are delivering within the real economy.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I welcome the Minister and, indeed, the whole Front-Bench team to their places—well done!

On the industrial strategy, what steps have been taken to fund high-quality workforce apprenticeships in sectors such as technology, manufacturing and hospitality, to provide young people with opportunities for employment and lives in those industries? Will the Minister undertake to discuss these matters with the relevant Minister at the Northern Ireland Assembly?

[Blair McDougall]

As I said to the hon. Member for South Antrim (Robin Swann) a moment ago, we have already met with the Northern Ireland Executive on these issues. Skills are an essential part of the industrial strategy because we see, again and again, industries around the country that are desperate to grow, and have the orders, but are unable to create the high-paying jobs that we need. That is an absolute priority for us as we implement the industrial strategy.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Gareth Davies (Grantham and Bourne) (Con)]

Labour’s industrial strategy recognises that housing and infrastructure are vital to driving regional investment. But as I hope the Minister will know, across the road, the Treasury has been quietly consulting on changes to the landfill tax, ending the decades-long exemption for quarries. That change would add millions of pounds on to infra- structure projects and increase tax costs for construction businesses across the country. How would such a move help grow our economy and build the homes and infra- structure that we need?

[Blair McDougall]

We are fast approaching the time of year when I have to tell my children that they will have to wait until Christmas to find out what their presents are. The hon. Gentleman knows that he has to wait until the Budget to find out what is in the Budget. He mentioned planning. We have made huge changes to planning rules, which have resulted in a saving of about £272 million in red-tape costs for business, so we are ensuring that that sector, in particular, has the environment it needs to contribute to growth.

[Gareth Davies]

I am afraid that is not good enough. The industry is facing deep uncertainty around the kite flying going on across the road at the Treasury. I realise that he is not responsible for that, but he needs a better answer for the construction industry. The Construction Products Association has just cut its growth forecast for the sector to barely 1% next year, warning that the uncertainty over new taxes is choking investment. I will ask the Minister again: how on earth will adding £28,000 to the cost of a new home, or 25% to road construction costs, through a new builders tax do anything other than cement the slowdown that Labour is overseeing in our economy?

[Blair McDougall]

To stand up and raise uncertainty, and then complain about it, is quite something. The shadow Minister said that we are slowing growth; we were the fastest-growing economy in the G7 in the first half of 2025. We are now the fourth-largest exporter in the world, and we have had five interest-rate cuts in a row—

[Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)]

Do you even know what the question was?

[Hon. Members]

More!

[Blair McDougall]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am glad that those on the Opposition Benches recognise excellence when they see it.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)]

I also welcome the ministerial Front Benchers to their new roles. The Liberal Democrats have long championed an industrial strategy. In government, we created the Green Investment Bank, the British Business Bank and the regional growth fund, and we opposed the Conservative Government’s damaging decision to scrap the industrial plan. We welcome the industrial strategy’s return, especially its focus on investing in skills.

However, businesses know that the apprenticeship levy does not work: funding is hard to access and millions go unspent. We welcomed the pledge in June to replace it with a more flexible growth and skills levy, but firms and young people are still awaiting details. Will the Minister provide details of what training this will fund, so that businesses and young people can plan ahead with certainty?

[Blair McDougall]

I thank the hon. Lady for her kind words on my new appointment. I will not get ahead of announcements on that, but given the importance of skills to the industrial strategy, we are not waiting for those announcements. We have had TechFirst, a £187 million investment in secondary school pupils, undergraduates, PhD students, entrepreneurs and businesses, to help them get ahead on that. We have the engineering package of over £100 million, and the defence package of £182 million. We are making those investments now to ensure that the pipeline is there for those industries, which are the priority within the industrial strategy.

[Sally Jameson (Doncaster Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

6. What steps he is taking to help support business growth through his Department’s plan for small and medium-sized businesses.

[Jo Platt (Leigh and Atherton) (Lab/Co-op)]

11. What steps he is taking to help support business growth through his Department’s plan for small and medium-sized businesses.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

The Government have launched our small business plan, which my predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow West (Gareth Thomas), did so much great work on. “Backing your Business” outlines how we will make thriving small and medium-sized businesses a reality across the UK. We are unlocking billions of pounds in finance to support businesses, including through the most significant reforms to tackle late payments in 25 years. We will support businesses further by revitalising high streets and delivering growth-boosting support for digital adoption through a new online business growth service.

[Sally Jameson]

For British Beauty Week last week, I visited the award-winning Doncaster salon Beauty Lounge in Armthorpe. The British beauty industry is a massive success story for business. What will the Minister do in his new role to support the industry and salons across the country?

[Blair McDougall]

As ever, my hon. Friend is a great advocate for all things Doncaster. The beauty sector is a vital driver of innovation, sustainability and wellbeing across the economy, but also locally, through businesses like the Beauty Lounge. That is why we are backing small businesses through the small business plan, as I just set out, but we are also reforming business rates and have increased the employment allowance, enabling employers to hire up to four full-time workers without paying national insurance contributions. I am always told on social media that I am in need of a glow-up—perhaps the next time I am in Doncaster, the Beauty Lounge can help me out.

[Jo Platt]

Leigh and Atherton has many exceptional SMEs that are driving local growth, particularly in manufacturing, engineering and construction. What steps is the Minister taking to make sure that SMEs in areas like mine receive targeted support as part of efforts to address regional imbalance and reduce reliance on our major metropolitan centres?

[Blair McDougall]

I know my hon. Friend is a great believer in Leigh and Atherton’s untapped potential, and so are we. We have launched the small business strategy, with action on late payments, action to unlock access to finance, and better, simpler support through the business growth hub. In addition to that, Leigh will receive £20 million through the pride in place programme. I know my hon. Friend fought hard for that on her community’s behalf.

[Peter Fortune (Bromley and Biggin Hill) (Con)]

My constituency has nearly 5,000 SMEs, all of which are facing increasing business rates and taxes, threatening jobs and growth. Will the Minister signal his support for SMEs by following the Conservative party’s lead and completely abolishing business rates for pubs and restaurants on the high street?

[Blair McDougall]

I gently say to the hon. Member that he did not do that in 14 years in government. Indeed, the Conservatives were set to remove the reliefs on small businesses. Rather than repeating the mistakes of the Liz Truss Budget with unfunded tax commitments, we are giving real support to businesses now, including by increasing the employment allowance so that more and more of the small businesses that he describes do not pay national insurance contributions at all.

[John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)]

I recently met with Discover Adventure, a small business in Coombe Bissett which is genuinely struggling to engage with Government over the recent package travel regulations. It sits ambiguously between DBT, the Department for Transport and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport; indeed, a question was thrown back today, having been tabled in the Table Office. May I sincerely ask the Minister to help me locate the correct Minister to deal with the Association of Independent Tour Operators? This is a vital small business sector in this country, and it needs someone to engage with in Government over these regulations.

[Blair McDougall]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his constructive question; I am very happy to pursue that within Government. The wider point is that both the small business strategy and the industrial strategy are important because they are cross-Government strategies, as lots of sectors and individual businesses are facing challenges that are not just the responsibility of one Minister. I will certainly follow up on that.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)]

I associate myself with the remarks about British Beauty Week. In addition to beauty businesses, one of the key ingredients for growth on our high streets is having a post office in the mix. As Post Office Minister, he has inherited a network of 11,500 post offices across the country and a consultation on the size of that network. Can he echo what his predecessor said at the Dispatch Box, and commit to supporting our high streets by maintaining the scale of the post office network throughout this Parliament?

[Blair McDougall]

I thank the shadow Minister for her welcome. She is absolutely right about the anchoring effect of post offices on high streets all over the country. We know not just that, as we mentioned in the Green Paper, if people go to their post office they are likely to spend money in local shops, but that post offices are essential—as I found out during a visit to one the day before yesterday—in giving small businesses somewhere to take their takings. The Green Paper set out the options for maintenance of the post office network, and it is certainly our intention to maintain it.

[Alex Sobel (Leeds Central and Headingley) (Lab/Co-op)]

8. Whether he has had recent discussions with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on increasing the use of British-built cars by Motability Operations.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

My hon. Friend is a dynamic advocate for a dynamic part of the country in the Thames valley. The industrial strategy and its sector plans highlight the strengths in his area, especially in tech and life sciences. Alongside the national package to grow the sector, specific interventions in the south-east include an AI growth zone in Culham, support for the Solent freeport, expanding the British Business Bank’s nations and regions investment fund and major projects backing the Oxford to Cambridge growth corridor. We will keep working with my hon. Friend to unlock the potential across the south-east.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr Stuart, please—we do not read out the phone directory, and trying to do so in a topical does not work for you or me.

[Blair McDougall]

As I said to the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin), we are committed to ensuring not just that we work to maintain the post office network, but that we deal with some of those long-standing issues about the viability of the business going forward—issues that the Conservatives had 14 years to fix and did not.

[Dame Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab)]

Workers at Tata’s Trostre site in my constituency have been hard hit by the five-week annual stoppage, leaving them short of money over Christmas. Despite reassurances from Tata, the Minister will understand that they are worried that this is a sign of worse to come. What is he doing to bring down energy prices, negotiate preferential treatment for our products to access the EU, and ensure that we strengthen our protections against cheap imports—all vital to the future of our steel industry?

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

T5. Small and medium-sized businesses in my constituency have told me about the impact that Trump’s trade war is having on their ability to export to the United States. What is the Secretary of State doing to support these vital job creators and ensure that British goods can continue to be sold worldwide?

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Member raises an important point, particularly for small businesses, which rely on those schemes. I pay tribute to the Royal Mail for the speed at which it reacted to those de minimis changes to ensure that businesses were able to continue. We keep working with Royal Mail as well to ensure that that is possible.

[Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)]

In rural constituencies like South Norfolk, I can think of no better place for employment than our pubs. From the Wheel of Fortune in Alpington to the Angel Inn in Loddon, these pubs are not just vital hubs of our communities but drivers of economic growth. In fact, Mr Speaker, you are more than welcome to join my Christmas pub team on 13 December. What support are the Government putting in place to help those businesses provide decent employment?

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)]

As of tomorrow, the Lending Standards Board will be no more, because its funders—the banks—have pulled out. Will Minister meet me urgently to take forward the good work that the board was doing, particularly on the ethnicity code? That work exposed the fact that only 19% of minority businesses achieve loans, whereas 58% of standard applications do.

[Blair McDougall]

Businesses led by entrepreneurs from ethnic minority backgrounds make a huge contribution to all our constituencies. Indeed, I met two such remarkable business people in Acton a couple of days ago. My hon. Friend is right to mention that finance is a barrier for under-represented groups, including ethnic minorities. Dealing with that is a key part of the small business strategy, and it is why we have put billions more into the British Business Bank. She has led on these issues, and I am of course happy to meet her to discuss the future of the programme that she mentions.

[James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

To show his deregulatory zeal, the Business Secretary just boasted about scrapping the British Hallmarking Council, which has one part-time employee. Given that every £1 of regulatory costs has the same impact on investment as £1 taken in tax, why are the Government proceeding with their unemployment Bill and proposing a £5 billion a year tax on British businesses?

--- Later in debate ---

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

Many small businesses rely on Facebook advertising to reach customers, but too many find that if they get hacked, it takes too long for Meta to let them back into their account. That has been the case for Andy Campbell, who runs ATR Carpet Cleaning. Will the Minister advise on how we can get the likes of Meta to reconnect these people with their accounts, because Meta is not doing that for us?

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. One of my constituents is in a similar case, and it is devastating. For a large business, fraud and economic crime is an inconvenience; for a small business, it can be existential. That is one of the reasons why, this week, we are communicating with small businesses to ensure that they up their cyber-security. I am happy to meet the hon. Gentleman on this issue.

[Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)]

What steps is the Department taking to improve access to finance for UK start-ups seeking to scale up, given that only 1% of UK start-ups raise equity of more than £100 million? By comparison, in the US, 6% of start-ups do so. Furthermore, how can we ensure that women get a fair share of access to finance?

Post Office Capture Redress Scheme

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Wednesday 29th October 2025 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

Today I have launched the Capture redress scheme, which is now open for applications.

This represents a significant milestone in our commitment to provide redress for postmasters who suffered financial shortfalls due to the Capture software.

Following the independent investigation on Capture, the Government announced that we would be providing redress for affected postmasters. In June we set out our approach to redress, and I am pleased that today we are delivering on that commitment.

The experiences shared by affected postmasters have been invaluable in shaping the scheme that we launch today.

Who is eligible?

Postmasters who used the Capture software in their branch between 1992 and 2000 and suffered a financial shortfall as a result of the Capture software can apply. Applications are also open to those with legal authority to act on behalf of deceased postmasters or those who lack capacity to apply themselves.

This scheme is specifically for those without a criminal conviction related to Capture. If any convictions related to Capture are identified as unsafe and overturned by the courts, we remain committed to ensuring that appropriate redress is given.

Payments

As a demonstration of our commitment to swift action and to provide immediate support before the cases are assessed by an independent panel, eligible claimants will receive a preliminary payment of £10,000 upon confirmation of eligibility.

Once eligibility is confirmed, an independent panel will assess all the evidence provided, taking a holistic view, and decide upon an appropriate award. The award will be based on a banding model ranging from £10,000 to £300,000, reflecting both financial and personal impacts. The preliminary payment will reflect the lowest band and where, following assessment, a postmaster has been awarded a higher band, this amount will be topped up.

In exceptional cases, where circumstances are particularly severe and supported by detailed evidence, the panel may consider an award exceeding the £300,000 upper band limit.

All awards will be exempt from income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax. They will also be exempt from national insurance contributions and, where applicable, corporation tax, and will be disregarded for the purposes of means-tested benefits, including universal credit and housing benefit.

How to apply

As previously set out, we are launching the scheme starting with a phased roll-out for an initial group of 150 claimants. This approach will allow us to test and refine the process. Applications for phase 1 can be made via an online form. Full guidance and application details are published on gov.uk.

Any lessons from the first phase will inform any refinements needed ahead of wider roll-out in phase 2, which will launch swiftly after completion of phase 1. Ipsos, an independent research agency, will be delivering an evaluation to inform this. Should we enhance any payment aspects of the scheme following phase 1, these improvements will be applied retrospectively to early participants.

Appeals and legal support

Claimants who, following assessment of their applications, are found ineligible can request an independent review of this decision.

Additionally, claimants have the right to appeal the award offered in certain circumstances where there is new evidence, procedural error or material error. If appeal grounds are met, the award may be amended following a review by the scheme’s independent panel chair.

We encourage all claimants to seek legal representation. The Government have published a legal cost framework that law firms can sign up to. The framework will ensure that postmasters can seek legal representation from the firms listed in the framework without having to pay legal fees. The Government will pay these legal fees directly as part of the scheme.

We strongly advise that postmasters check that a legal representative is content to operate within the terms of the cost framework to avoid being charged.

Today we deliver on our commitment to provide redress for those negatively affected by the Capture software.

[HCWS1000]

Regulation Action Plan: Corporate Reporting

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Tuesday 21st October 2025 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

The Chancellor today set out the progress that has been made to deliver on the Government’s vision for ensuring regulators and regulation support growth. The Government have published “Regulation Action Plan—Progress Update and Next Steps”, setting out how the Government are going further to realise the vision we set out in the action plan in March 2025.

This progress update was accompanied by a package of specific reforms, in which the Government commit to reducing the annual administrative burden of regulation on businesses by £5.6 billion by the end of this Parliament. It also outlines the actions already taken to meet this target, including that six months after we announced our action plan, we have already identified and announced £1.5 billion in gross savings, which will contribute to the target to reduce the regulatory administration burden by 25% by the end of this Parliament.

Department for Business and Trade commitments

My Department has undertaken critical work to reduce the regulatory burden on business. We have already:

increased the monetary size thresholds for micro, small, medium and large-sized companies by approximately 50%, enabling up to 132,000 companies to benefit from lighter-touch requirements; and we are eliminating duplicative or redundant reporting requirements from the director report and director remuneration report and policy, delivering £185 million in administrative savings for businesses every year.

launched a call for evidence on improving the UK’s licensing regime for the hospitality sector, following the recommendations of my Department’s licensing taskforce.

issued a strategic steer to the Competition and Markets Authority setting out how Government expect the CMA to support economic growth across all aspects of its activity. In parallel, to support growth, investment and business confidence, the CMA is embedding the four principles of pace, predictability, proportionality and process across all its work.

These actions are based on direct feedback from businesses about how certain regulations act as barriers to their success. This feedback is captured in the 2024 business perceptions survey, which I have published today. As part of the actions set out by the Chancellor in our progress update on the regulation action plan, my Department will:

run a series of policy sprints across specific sectors to identify regulatory barriers which affect companies with innovative business models and high potential scale-ups. We will also deliver a range of regulatory deep dives, looking across each sector of the economy and delivering strategic reforms that best support business.

consult in the coming weeks on proposals to provide greater certainty for businesses on whether transactions will be subject to merger control, proposals to ensure remedies are regularly reviewed, and changes to how the CMA makes decisions in mergers and markets investigations.

work with the CMA as it launches two business surveys during this financial year, aimed at gathering valuable insights and further strengthening its engagement with the business community.

bring forward a consultation on specific reform proposals to the opt-out class action regime to strengthen predictability and cost-effectiveness, and ensure effective consumer protection.

deliver in partnership with the Financial Reporting Council to clarify the UK corporate governance code guidance, making it clear that the payment of non-executive directors in shares is appropriate, enhancing the ability of UK listed companies to attract the highest calibre of talent from across the global stage.

commission the Investment Association to discontinue its public register, which tracks shareholder dissent, thereby removing duplication with UK corporate governance code requirements.

Modernisation of corporate reporting

We are committed to going further and improving the regulatory landscape for businesses. A key part of the package is my Department’s plans to modernise and simplify the UK’s corporate reporting framework. This includes legislative changes and an ambitious and holistic consultation planned for next year. Together, these measures could save UK businesses around £230 million per year in reporting costs.

The legislative changes, which we aim to bring forward as quickly as possible, will implement two significant exemptions, to lift up to 51,000 thousand companies from unnecessary reporting obligations, as well as removing the requirement to produce a director’s report for all companies required to produce one. The changes we intend to make are:

first, the Government will aim to exempt most medium-sized private companies from the need to produce a strategic report as part of their annual report and accounts. This means that medium-sized businesses that can benefit from existing exemptions will no longer need to prepare narrative reporting, so they can focus on running their business, rather than producing information that is disproportionate to their scale and ownership model.

secondly, the Government will aim to exempt wholly owned subsidiaries from the need to produce a strategic report where their disclosure is included in the annual report of a UK parent. This will eliminate duplicative reporting within corporate groups.

thirdly, the Government will aim to remove the requirement for any company to produce a director’s report as part of their annual report and accounts. This report is often seen as a cluttered, compliance-driven document that has accumulated numerous disclosures over time, which offers little useful insight for investors. Through the removal of the director’s report, we will remove redundant and duplicative reporting, building on the changes that came into force earlier this year https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2024/1303/contents/made However, some useful reporting requirements, including reporting on energy and emissions, will be retained and moved elsewhere in the annual report.

Impact of changes

These reforms are anticipated to benefit up to 44,000 medium-sized private companies, and around 7,000 subsidiary companies, who will no longer be required to produce strategic reports. Approximately 440,000 companies will no longer need to compile a director’s report.

In October 2024, the previous Secretary of State for Business and Trade announced plans to consult in 2025 on measures to simplify and modernise the UK’s non-financial reporting framework. Stakeholder engagement over the summer indicated that only reviewing non-financial reporting would fall short of what is needed. Businesses, investors and professional bodies have urged the Government to adopt a holistic approach in order to consider the annual report and accounts in their entirety.

The Government have listened and expanded the scope of their reforms, now framed as the Modernisation of Corporate Reporting programme. A broad consultation will be delivered in 2026. To meet what industry has asked for, we will co-design reforms covering remuneration reporting, corporate governance reporting, and the financial reporting framework, as well as improving regulatory alignment across reporting frameworks, and we will consider how corporate reporting should function in a digital age.

This broader initiative reflects a commitment to far-reaching reform, aiming to restore company reporting to its original purpose, and providing concise, decision-relevant information for investors and creditors, while removing unnecessary burdens on business.

Next steps

The Government will continue to improve regulation in the UK, ensuring that it enables growth and does not unduly hold back investment.

To drive progress, I have also published “Unlocking Business: Reform Driven by You”, a business questionnaire, to gather direct insight from firms on where regulation is creating unnecessary burdens. This is a chance for businesses, investors, representative organisations and charities to tell us which regulations, forms, compliance processes and regulators are imposing the undue or unnecessary burdens, so we can deliver a pro-business programme of regulatory reforms.

The Government will continue to put industry at the heart of this programme, working with regulators and Parliament to ensure that the regulatory system protects consumers and supports competition, but also encourages new investment, innovation and growth.

The full regulation action plan progress update and business questionnaire are available on gov.uk.

[HCWS973]

Draft Companies (Directors' Report) (Payment Reporting) Regulations 2025

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Tuesday 21st October 2025 General Committees

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

I beg to move,

That the Committee has considered the draft Companies (Directors’ Report) (Payment Reporting) Regulations 2025.

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Vaz. It is also a pleasure, as the new Minister for small business, that this is the first statutory instrument that I am speaking on, as someone who ran a small business and suffered from late payments at times.

Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, employing millions of people and enriching our lives, yet we know that the scourge of late payments has been holding them back. Late payments are estimated to cost the economy almost £11 billion per year and to lead to 14,000 businesses closures annually. That is an average of 38 businesses every single day. This cannot go on.

That is why this Government has already taken action to improve payment practices. In December 2024 we launched a new Fair Payment Code and introduced secondary legislation requiring construction businesses to publish reports on their retention payment practices. In July we launched a public consultation considering additional legislative measures to hold businesses to account on payment performance.

The consultation considers measures that go even further than today’s statutory instrument, and will be the most significant legislation to tackle late payments in over 25 years. It will give the UK the strongest legal framework on late payments in the G7. These measures will include removing flexibility around maximum payment times, which disproportionately impact small businesses, and introducing mandatory interest on late business- to-business payments. Our consultation closes on 23 October—Thursday this week—and we intend to take forward primary legislation as soon as parliamentary time allows.

Today we are making a down payment on those wider legislative reforms. We are going to build upon the existing payment transparency regulations for large companies by introducing payment data headlines into directors’ reports. Large companies are already under a duty to report biannually on their payment practices and performance. These draft regulations will require large companies to disclose payment reporting data within directors’ reports required under the Companies Act 2006, further increasing the transparency of payment performance to their boards, stakeholders and auditors.

Businesses that are already adhering to current payment regulations will not be significantly affected, as it is data large firms are already required to collect and publish through Gov.uk. The Government want to shift the focus from small businesses wasting hours of their time chasing late payments, and instead put the onus on the boards and stakeholders of large businesses to ensure they are paying their suppliers fairly.

I will now outline the key elements of this statutory instrument. These regulations amend schedule 7 to the Large and Medium-sized Companies and Groups (Accounts and Reports) Regulations 2008 and introduce the requirement for large businesses to report information about their payment practices within their directors’ reports. The payment data headlines will include statements on payment practices, average time to pay, and the percentage and sum of payments made before 30 days, between 31 and 60 days, and after 60 days. They will also include the sum and proportion of payments that were not paid within the agreed payment period.

This data will publicly illustrate a company’s approach to payment. It is only a small ask for large businesses, but will help with continuous improvement of payment times. The Government are committed to ensuring that this legislation continues to work and this instrument will be subject to a review within five years. I hope hon. Members on the Committee will see the benefits that these draft regulations provide and agree with the introduction of this affirmative statutory instrument.

--- Later in debate ---

[Blair McDougall]

I am grateful for the support across the House on these regulations. It is clear from hon. Members’ constructive comments that we all agree that this is a serious problem that we need to tackle.

To respond to some of the specific questions, the hon. Member for Grantham and Bourne made a powerful case with his statistics about the impact of late payments on the economy. In terms of the burden on business, we think it will be a very small one, in return for potentially a bigger prize—I think it is 133 million hours spent across the economy chasing late payments. To his point on consistency, there is some overlap between the data that people already have to report and the data that we are suggesting be put into the annual reports through these regulations.

On the question about the powers of the Small Business Commissioner, part of the consultation we are currently running is on proposals to give the commissioner more powers to investigate and resolve late payment cases. With these regulations as part of the wider package of measures, we will be delivering the biggest reform to late payment regulations in 25 years; as I say, this measure is very much a down payment on what is coming. I urge hon. Members present to look at the proposals and to take part in the late payments consultation over the next couple of days.

These regulations are just the first step, but they are potentially the start of making a huge difference to what is a huge problem for small businesses. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry Report: Government Response to Volume 1 Recommendations

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Monday 13th October 2025 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

On 8 July, the Department welcomed the publication of the first volume of the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry report. The inquiry has provided a platform for postmasters to share their experiences of the horrendous injustice, enabling Parliament, the Government, the Post Office and the wider public to gain a true perspective of the life-changing impacts on those affected.

Sir Wyn Williams’ report commented on the redress schemes delivered by this and the preceding Government, with carefully considered conclusions. I pay tribute to Sir Wyn and his inquiry team for their work, alongside the many hon. Members and peers who have campaigned about the scandal.

Sir Wyn’s report set out 19 recommendations, which provide helpful guidance about how we should improve the existing redress schemes. I wholly share Sir Wyn’s view that his recommendations should be addressed promptly. In July, my hon. Friend, the previous Minister for Services, Small Business and Exports, committed that the Government would respond to them by 10 October, as Sir Wyn requested. I am pleased to announce that we did this on 9 October.

Response to r ecommendations

The full response to all recommendations has been shared with Sir Wyn, placed in the Libraries of both Houses and published on www.gov.uk. We have accepted all but one of his 18 recommendations relating to Horizon redress.

The only Horizon-related recommendation that we have not accepted was closing the Horizon shortfall scheme dispute resolution process, as we believe that to do so would unfairly restrict postmasters’ choices.

Sir Wyn’s 19th recommendation—for an independent body to deliver redress for future scandals—is welcome, but we will need to do more work on its feasibility before we can adopt it. This work is under way, and we will update the House when appropriate.

The Government informed the House on 8 July that we had accepted two of Sir Wyn’s recommendations already, including the principle of establishing a redress scheme for members of postmasters’ families, and the recommendation that claimants should be able to bank the best offer that they get from the group litigation order process. Today, I can confirm that we have also published the definition of what we mean by “full and fair redress”, to make this clearer for claimants and their representatives. We have already implemented a number of the other recommendations.

With Post Office and Fujitsu, we have commenced work on a restorative justice project for postmasters and their families, expertly facilitated by the Restorative Justice Council.

This work on restorative justice is separate from the contribution which Fujitsu has already agreed in principle that it should make towards the costs of the scandal. We are discussing that with it, but do not expect a conclusion until we have received the final part of Sir Wyn’s report.

Sir Wyn recommended that the Horizon shortfall scheme should close on 27 November 2025. We agree with Sir Wyn that there does need to be finality. However, having consulted the Horizon Compensation Advisory Board, we have decided to provide more time for vulnerable claimants to consider applying to the scheme. To help with this, as recommended by the Public Accounts Committee, we will ensure that postmasters are sent letters informing them that the scheme will soon be closing. The Post Office, with the Government’s blessing, has decided to close the scheme to new applications on 31 January 2026. They will also close the suspension remuneration review scheme to new applications on the same date.

We have also accepted Sir Wyn’s recommendation that people should be able to seek permission from an independent person to appeal against a fixed sum offer in the Horizon shortfall scheme. The Government will share further detail on this appeal process before the end of this year.

Sir Wyn has also recommended that we should provide legal support to those in the Horizon shortfall scheme in deciding whether to accept the fixed sum offer. As his report says, this probably makes “up front” legal advice unnecessary. We will implement his recommendation by funding legal advice for people who seek permission to appeal against the fixed sum offer. This means that such advice will be available to people who have previously settled for the fixed sum, not just to future applicants. We have consulted the advisory board, who agree that this is the right approach. In addition, a suitably qualified senior lawyer has been appointed to oversee the Horizon shortfall scheme to ensure first offers to claimants are full and fair. We are pleased to confirm that Sir Gary Hickinbottom will commence the role shortly.

Furthermore, from 9 October, claimants who have chosen to have their claims fully assessed in the Horizon shortfall scheme and the Horizon convictions redress scheme will be allowed to revert to a fixed sum offer within three months of receiving their first fully assessed offer.

It is absolutely crucial that redress is delivered with compassion, fairness and pace to enable those who have suffered greatly to begin to heal. I hope that by accepting the vast majority of Sir Wyn’s recommendations, this Government are showing their willingness to listen and make improvements where necessary.

Evaluation

To that end, I can announce that the Department is funding an independent evaluation programme to assess the effectiveness and impact of the redress schemes, delivered by external research partner Ipsos. The evaluation will explore how these schemes have been designed and implemented, what has worked well, and where improvements can be made now and into the future. It will collect and draw on a wide range of evidence, including interviews, focus groups, and analysis of scheme documentation and data. Findings will help inform future policy-making and ensure that lessons are learned for future redress scheme delivery.

[HCWS937]

Plan for Small Businesses

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Tuesday 16th September 2025 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

On 31 July, the Government launched our plan for small businesses, changing the status quo in order to support small businesses.

Economic growth remains the Government’s foremost priority. The UK’s 5.5 million small and medium-sized enterprises—SMEs—are the backbone of our economy and the driving force behind growth in every community. SMEs are vital to the UK economy, making up 99.8% of all businesses, employing 60% of the private sector workforce, and generating £2.8 trillion in turnover. This underscores the importance of our commitment to supporting small businesses and ensuring they thrive.

While the UK is home to many outstanding businesses across sectors such as life sciences and the creative industries, too many SMEs have faced barriers to growth. Businesses seeking to grow report challenges ranging from access to finance and regulatory burdens to declining high streets.

Developed hand-in-hand with small businesses across the UK, Backing Your Business is our long-term strategy to break down barriers and unleash SME growth and productivity. This plan aims to transform the environment for starting and running a business, while placing SME growth at the heart of our growth mission

Key actions include:

Opening up opportunities

Launching a new business growth service to streamline access to advice and support, aligned with our vision for a modern digital Government.

Supporting under-represented entrepreneurs through improved data collection and initiatives such as the Lilac Review for disabled business owners.

Enhancing SME understanding of export opportunities by integrating export advice into the business growth service and expanding UK export finance by £20 billion to £80 billion, including a new small export builder insurance product.

Making it easier for SMEs to win Government contracts through a new procurement policy, an SME Procurement Education Programme, and a Defence SME Support Centre.

Supporting innovation through improved guidance on intellectual property and security, with resources from the Intellectual Property Office and Innovate UK.

Fixing the fundamentals

Introducing landmark legislation to tackle late payments, which cost the UK economy £11 billion annually and close 38 businesses each day. This will be the most significant legislation to tackle late payments in over 25 years and will establish the strongest legal framework on late payments in the G7.

Cutting the administrative cost of regulation by 25%, freeing up time and resources for businesses.

Modernising the tax and customs system, including Al-powered tools and personalised digital services, as outlined in HMRC’s Transformation Roadmap.

Accelerating planning processes to address infrastructure gaps and support smaller housebuilders.

Helping businesses reduce energy costs and transition to net zero, with targeted advice and expanded training in retrofit and energy efficiency.

Unlocking access to finance



Expanding start-up loans to support 69,000 new businesses with finance and mentoring.

Committing to the British Business Bank’s growth guarantee scheme and increasing the ENABLE guarantee programme capacity from £3 billion to £5 billion.

Providing £340 million to boost early-stage equity finance for innovative firms.

Working with lenders to ensure fair use of personal guarantees, including a mandatory code of conduct under the growth guarantee scheme.

Backing the everyday economy

Introducing a new framework for local authorities and hospitality and night-time economy zones, following the Licensing Taskforce.

Supporting high street businesses through growth incubators, redevelopment of commercial space, and targeted investment.

Providing funding to up to 350 communities to support local regeneration.

Reforming business rates by introducing permanently lower multipliers for retail, hospitality, and leisure properties with rateable values under £500,000 from April 2026.

Banning upward only rent review clauses in commercial leases and continuing to promote High Street Rental Auctions and a new Community Right to Buy.

Supporting the growth of co-operatives and mutuals, including a call for evidence on how best to enable their expansion.

Enhancing community safety with 13,000 additional police officers, the Safer Streets initiative, and measures to tackle shoplifting and tool theft.

Future-proofing business skills

Promoting digital adoption through pilot schemes, industry partnerships, and expansion of the Made Smarter programme.

Supporting leadership development and mentoring through an industry-led Business Mentoring Council.

Encouraging youth enterprise through education, competitions, and a new Youth Entrepreneur category in the King’s Awards for Enterprise.

Ensuring SMEs benefit from the skills and apprenticeships system, including £1.2 billion of additional annual investment by 2028-29, and promoting access to T-Levels and apprenticeships via the Business Growth Service.

These measures are just the beginning. With over 200 actions, Backing Your Business will empower SMEs to grow, innovate and thrive in every corner of the UK. We are committed to delivering these actions over this parliament and will publish a delivery update in 2027. We launched this strategy in partnership with small businesses— and we will continue to work side-by-side with them to deliver real change.

One of the commitments in Backing Your Business is to increase the contingent liability for the ENABLE guarantee scheme administered by the British Business Bank to £5 billion. ENABLE guarantees are designed to encourage additional lending to smaller and medium-sized businesses. Participating institutions are incentivised by a Government-backed guarantee to support defined portfolios of debt finance in return for a fee. A departmental minute with full details of this contingent liability is being laid today.

[HCWS924]

Consumer Affairs

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Thursday 11th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

It is a pleasure to serve in my first debate as a Minister under your chairship, Dame Siobhain. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Matt Western) on securing this debate. I would have felt cheated had the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) not been at my first outing as a Minister. He mentioned that perhaps this work was different from the work that we had done together previously on human rights. I think there is a lot of overlap, because on human rights we are asking for people to be treated with dignity and to be treated fairly under the law, and I think it is the same with consumer protection. What there is also in common is that when those rights are not respected, that causes enormous anger, so I think there is considerable overlap.

This has been a fantastic debate, with many different issues raised. I will refer to as many of them as possible. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier). I had hoped, as a matter of professional pride, to get through the whole debate without the ministerial get-out of “I will write to you about that”, but she asked me to write to her, so I thank her for saving me.

The hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin) and my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch made similar points about ensuring that innovation is balanced with consumer protection. I am quite encouraged, in my first few days in this job, by the approach of the leadership of the CMA as a watchdog. It is very clear that it will bare its teeth at the most egregious abuses of consumers, but where having a lighter touch and some guidance would be better, it is doing that, so that the innovation that was mentioned is not lost.

I am looking forward to working on the licensing review—particularly because it means I get invited to a night out in Hackney. We will add that to the diary pile in the office. My hon. Friend gave the example of Meta and asked about acting quickly online. I think the CMA now has the online interface orders, which allow it to quickly ask companies to change or to take down content. We are looking forward to seeing how that operates in practice.

My hon. Friend and a couple of other Members mentioned algorithms and AI. I am really interested in how AI functions here. There was a case in Atlantic City in which there was some suggestion that algorithms were being used to fix hotel prices and operate a cartel, but human beings were involved in that decision making. One of the interesting questions is how we regulate things when AI might be making decisions to breach consumer law, without a human being involved in that.

To come to some of the issues mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington, it will come as a shock, in a debate talking about the size of Mars bars, that I am no stranger to the confectionery aisle. [Laughter.] In case Hansard did not pick that up, everyone cried, “No!” there. My ire, when a Back Bencher, was actually directed towards the changing size and shape of Easter eggs from last year to this year.

My hon. Friend was right to mention the changes to the price marking order that are coming in in April and which will require consistency in unit pricing, so that people, when making consumer decisions, are able to compare different goods. We are also putting in place more clarity for consumers on multi-buys and things like that, but we need to keep an eye on this. I know that my hon. Friend will continue to monitor it, and that he will make that case very strongly in years to come. In relation to his point about a consumer champion, I think that my ministerial colleague who will be primarily responsible for consumer affairs will hope to feel that that is their role, but I will take the suggestion to the Department.

Many Members spoke about concerns around variable pricing models, such as dynamic and algorithmic pricing, and a broader sense of a lack of transparency in pricing. It is a frontier for regulation—things move very quickly—but we do believe that it is our job to ensure that consumers have protection so that they can easily and accurately compare prices.

As the shadow Minister for business, the hon. Member for West Worcestershire, rightly said, pricing flexibility, when used responsibly, can be good for consumers and business. It can manage demand, improve access and support innovation. We all love a bargain; we all love the January sales. We like discounts for different groups, but against that evolving backdrop, the Government are actively engaging with regulators, industry and our watchdogs. The CMA’s dynamic pricing project is a recent example of that work.

We will strengthen the law where necessary to uphold transparency, as evidenced by the recently implemented ban on drip pricing, which my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington referred to as a particular bugbear, to ensure that the price presented at the start of the shopping process is the price that consumers pay at the checkout. The principle that underlines that, and that underpins consumer law, is that consumers must know the price that they will pay, and can make an informed decision about whether that price is right for them. Where that is not the case, the Government and our watchdogs will look to take action.

Dynamic and algorithmic pricing have been spoken about, and they are a growing concern for many Members’ constituents. We know that changing prices in response to demand is an essential part of any market economy, but it needs to be done responsibly and within consumer law. It should not be the case that businesses use technology to rapidly change prices in a way that misleads customers or is otherwise unfair, resulting in them overpaying. That would be wrong in any circumstances, but particularly when so many of our constituents are struggling to make ends meet.

Let me be clear: when consumers are misled or pressured into paying a higher price, that is unlawful. The law, including the recently introduced Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act, requires that businesses provide clear, up-front pricing so that consumers understand what they are paying for. Additionally, consumers must be able to evaluate that information in the absence of undue pressure. Aggressive tactics and pressure selling are illegal. When price fluidity or instability puts customers in an unfair position—for example, as we mentioned, in ticketing, when consumers feel that they have to immediately accept a high price for fear of it going even higher—that is unacceptable.

The CMA is acting when businesses fail to comply with those laws. For example, last year, it took enforcement action against Wowcher, which agreed to change its selling practices after concerns were raised about its use of a countdown timer to pressurise customers, among other marketing claims.

Before moving on to Oasis, I should declare an interest, which is that in the late-1990s fight between Oasis and Blur, I was very much Team Blur, so that may inform my attitude towards these matters. The CMA is seeking to make changes to the way that Ticketmaster labels tickets and provides pricing information to fans, in response to concerns about last year’s Oasis sale. Obviously, that investigation has yet to conclude. We will continue to work with the watchdog to ensure that pricing practices are transparent and proportionate, and that consumers have the right safeguards.

The CMA recently examined the use of dynamic pricing across different sectors of the economy, and its report sets out all sorts of conditions that may make dynamic pricing problematic, and the information that businesses should provide to consumers when it is in operation.

[Matt Western]

I should have congratulated my hon. Friend at the very beginning on his appointment—a very warm welcome, Minister, to the role. He talks about dynamic pricing and ticketing. He will probably be aware that in the Business and Trade Committee we looked at Ticketmaster and Live Nation. The Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin) made some comments about smaller venues. What was striking was the scale of dominance that Live Nation and Ticketmaster have—their control over this entire market.

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend makes a really good point. He referenced the comments made by the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin) on the impact on venues, big or small. It is important to say that there are ways of doing this that are advantageous to everyone. An example that was mentioned to me is Radiohead’s practices in selling their tickets to make sure there was not widespread industrial buying and reselling. There are ways of doing this. The Government really welcome the CMA’s guidance on dynamic pricing, and it has been clear that it will continue to actively review those practices and will tell us if it feels there is a need for changes in the regulatory environment and the law in future.

Another issue that has been raised is personal pricing, where technology is increasingly enabling online businesses to use personal data to set different prices and tailor them to different groups of people. It is not against the law, as with dynamic pricing, to change prices for different groups in a free market; that is part of the functioning of the market. As with dynamic pricing, it can offer consumers benefits, such as tailored deals based on regular purchases, but we know that customers worry about their data being used in more targeted and less transparent ways to set personalised prices that are higher than those they would otherwise see.

The watchword on this is transparency, in accordance with consumer law. It is an evolving issue, and the Government will keep a close eye on developments on this frontier. We will, of course, look to the watchdog to act on any suggestions that consumers are being disadvantaged.

I want to turn to the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington on the pricing of food and essential goods and services. Other Members made these points too. The difference between the smaller high street supermarkets and the hypermarket is one that I feel very personally. I grew up in a household without a car, so we had to go to the local shop, where there was much less choice and fewer bargains. It is not an easy issue to solve, but it is one that I feel particularly personally.

It is really important in those situations that there is transparency and fairness in pricing. Our role in Government is to protect consumers and ensure minimum standards, including on pricing. Sector regulators build on the framework that we set by introducing targeted regulations to support consumers in their sectors, particularly in essential services such as energy, financial services and telecoms, where affordability challenges are most pronounced for our constituents at the moment.

[Matt Western]

Several hon. Members around the Chamber raised the differential pricing between in-town and out-of-town stores. The points the Minister made are totally right, but when retailers were asked about this at the Business and Trade Committee, they just said that it was due to a different cost base. A corporate has a big cost base. It cannot make the case that there is a different cost base for in-town versus out-of-town stores. It may as well say that it has different cost bases for Cromer and Shoreditch, or wherever—it does not wash. Consumers in different parts of the country, wherever they may be, should be offered, I believe, a uniform price. Pricing should not be to the detriment of those who do not have access to out-of-town stores.

[Blair McDougall]

My hon. Friend makes his point powerfully. The argument that the Government sometimes hear from business is that it is about the cost of the property. He is shaking his head, and I will try to transmit the shaking of his head throughout the system on his behalf. He makes an important point.

I reiterate my thanks for all the contributions to the debate, and congratulate my hon. Friend on securing it. I assure him that we will not be complacent on this issue. Using the DMCC Act and the CMA’s recent work on pricing, we are working to take tangible steps to ensure that pricing practices are fair and transparent, and that businesses across the economy are held accountable.

Where specific markets require more targeted interventions, the Government have been willing to do so. We have seen that recently with the regulation of buy now, pay later arrangements and ensuring that customers continue to pay fair prices for energy. Our work will not stop there. We are always testing the case for going further, working in partnership with regulators and enforcers to ensure that consumers are adequately protected as pricing practices evolve. I thank hon. Members for their contributions to the debate.

Competition and Markets Authority Chairman

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Justin Madders]

That is a very important point. Consumers see the petrol prices every time they leave their home in their motor vehicle. There is a disparity there that sometimes needs explanation, and certainly needs transparency, so I will take that issue up on the hon. Gentleman’s behalf, and will come back to him on it.

[Blair McDougall (East Renfrewshire) (Lab)]

My constituents, particularly those living in Crookfur, have terrible mobile phone signal. How can the CMA progress the merger between Three and Vodafone, so that we get the investment in transmitters that we need to improve the mobile phone signal in Crookfur and around the country?

[Justin Madders]

That is certainly something that the CMA has been dealing with, and I am sure that we will be able to provide my hon. Friend with an update shortly.

Uyghur and Turkic Muslims: Forced Labour in China

Blair McDougall Excerpts

Wednesday 6th November 2024 Westminster Hall

[Blair McDougall (East Renfrewshire) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered UK supply chains and Uyghur and Turkic Muslim forced labour in China.

Thank you for chairing this debate, Mr Dowd, and for the opportunity to highlight the issue. I thank the Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Lothian East (Mr Alexander), for being here to respond to the debate: in his last period in office and during his sabbatical from this place he was a consistent advocate for the dignity of people all over the world.

That human rights have never been respected by the People’s Republic of China is a given, but the persecution of Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims since 2017 has been unprecedented even for the Chinese Communist party. More than 1 million Muslims have been imprisoned in an enormous network of camps; possibly as many as 3 million out of a population of 11 million Muslims have made their way through the camps at some time. This is the largest mass arbitrary detention since the second world war. Uyghur women face forced sterilisation, forced abortion, sexual violence in the camps, and forced marriage to Han Chinese men. Thousands of mosques have been demolished. Hundreds of Muslim graveyards have been bulldozed. Countless sacred Islamic shrines have been destroyed. Uyghurs are forced to consume pork, drink alcohol and eat during the Ramadan fast.

These crimes are part of a deliberate effort to destroy the Uyghurs as an ethnic group with a distinct culture and religious identity. International organisations and human rights groups too numerous to list assess that crimes against humanity are taking place in Xinjiang, and this House of Commons has voted to recognise that what is going on is a genocide—an intentional policy that seeks to destroy a people.

All of that provides context to the issue of forced labour in Xinjiang, but it is important to understand that Uyghur Muslim slavery is not a by-product of the attempt to destroy a people; it is an integral part of China’s project. Indeed, as the camps were built, factories for forced labourers were constructed alongside them. For those Uyghurs who are not inside the camps, the threat of incarceration is used to coerce them into the PRC’s wider labour transfer programme.

There is a dark contradiction at the heart of all this. The atrocities are happening in a region that is increasingly closed to those who would testify to the crimes, the journalists and human rights groups who would document them and of course those who would flee to freedom if they could. However, at the same time that the region is closing down, it is increasingly open to and integrated into the global economy. Xinjiang mines, refines and manufactures for the world. Some of the best-known global brands are profiting from the destruction of a people.

The scale of slavery in the region is enormous and is barely disputed: four years ago, official Chinese Government documents acknowledged that 2.6 million Uyghurs and other Turkic minorities had gone through labour transfer programmes. The scope of the industries affected is too large to cover in the time afforded to us today, so I will focus on three areas that especially expose the UK’s economy and that risk consumers being unwittingly complicit in Muslim slave labour: clothing, cars and climate change.

Xinjiang produces a quarter of the world’s cotton. The idea of hundreds of thousands of slaves working in cotton fields evokes an image of slavery and forced labour from another era, but this is not historical practice. It is a well-documented economic reality in the Uyghur region today.

[Dr Zubir Ahmed (Glasgow South West) (Lab)]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for securing the debate and for illuminating an issue that still too few in the international global order are willing or brave enough to talk about. I assure him that Muslim communities across the country will be particularly grateful to him for securing the debate. Important as it is for us to be ethical about our own supply chains, does he agree that as a major global player we should double down on our efforts to persuade China’s near neighbours to adopt a similar ethical approach to the one that he espouses?

[Blair McDougall]

I could not agree more. I thank my hon. Friend for the time he has taken to meet me and meet Uyghurs in the UK, and for his concern.

On cotton, it is highly likely that high streets around the UK are today selling goods made by Muslim slaves from Xinjiang for brands such as Primark, Next, Tommy Hilfiger, Ralph Lauren, Calvin Klein, Hugo Boss, Pull&Bear, Mango, Guess, Jack & Jones, Levi’s, Burberry, Nike, Adidas, PUMA and Max Mara. In my city of Glasgow, I have identified 15 retailers on the famous style mile that stock brands that have been identified as at risk of being implicated in Uyghur forced labour. The same story is true of every shopping mall and high street across the UK. The price of disposable fashion is Muslim forced labour.

I turn to cars. The automotive industry is also deeply compromised: the steel, aluminium, electric vehicle batteries, electronics, tyres and spare parts used all have chains stretching back to the Uyghur region, to companies that we know take part in PRC-mandated labour transfer programmes. Audi, Honda, Ford, General Motors, Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, Tesla, Renault, LEVC, which is the maker of electric London black cabs, Aston Martin, Bentley, Daimler, Jaguar and Rolls-Royce have all been identified by researchers as having supply chains at high risk of being compromised by Muslim slave labour.

Even if we were not appalled at the inhumanity of the persecution of Muslims, the theft of children from their parents, the sexual violence and the sterilisation, we should be angry as a nation at the economic unfairness of it. We cannot build our own manufacturing industries and create good jobs for our own people while competing with companies that have little or no labour cost. This Government are building a new green energy future for the country, but we cannot generate the green jobs that are part of that vision while competing against Muslim slave labour.

That brings me to my final point, which is on climate. The primary material for the production of solar panels is polysilicon. That manufacturers of polysilicon in the Uyghur region use forced labour is not in dispute. Every single polysilicon manufacturer in the Uyghur region has reported its participation in labour transfer programmes or is documented as being supplied with raw materials by companies that have participated in those programmes. More than a third of the global production of polysilicon takes place in the Uyghur region. No company or public authority in the UK should be sourcing solar materials that originate in that region. A further third of global production of polysilicon takes place in other parts of China, with a high likelihood that those supply chains ultimately begin with Muslim slave labour.

I am keen to hear the Minister expand on the welcome pledge that the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero made during the passage of the Great British Energy Bill that the Government are working to ensure that the extension of solar energy in the UK is not built on Uyghur forced labour. I would argue that the only real solution, given the Chinese dominance of the market, is an urgent international effort to develop alternative supply chains that, from quartz to panel, never pass through China. The measures in the Modern Slavery Act 2015 have not stopped companies profiting from the slave labour of Uyghurs and other Muslims in China.

Nothing that I have said today is new. These stories have been splashed over front pages and broadcast on television news. Shame, it seems, is not a greater motivator than profit margin. Sunlight is not disinfecting. Legislation based on transparency and reporting alone is not getting the job done. Other nations in the European economic area have gone further than us by requiring companies to conduct human rights due diligence on their supply chains. I ask the Minister whether it is time to introduce UK legislation that emulates the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which was signed into law by President Biden and which creates a presumption that any goods manufactured wholly or in part in the Uyghur region should be assumed to be the product of forced labour unless clear and convincing evidence proves otherwise.

I recognise that supply chains can be difficult to unravel and that exports often pass through multiple companies on their way into our economy. However, there is a direct freight flight from the Uyghur capital Ürümqi to Bournemouth that brings goods from the epicentre of forced labour in China. Yesterday, a flight from Ürümqi arrived just before 7 pm; another will arrive on Friday, and another on Sunday. That will continue week after week. This is not opaque or convoluted: it is a clear and obvious route and there is a significant risk that those flights will contain goods compromised by Muslim slave labour. I ask the Minister whether import inspections have been or can be carried out on the goods arriving on the freight flight to Bournemouth from Ürümqi.

After the results of yesterday’s election in the United States, there will be much debate about the state of the global struggle between autocracies and democracies and between strongmen and human rights. As we look for a policy response, we can begin by ensuring that our own economies are not funding the worst excesses of such regimes.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Blair McDougall]

Thank you, Mr Dowd, for the opportunity to close the debate. I thank hon. Members for speaking up on behalf of the dignity and humanity of Uyghurs and other Muslims in this situation. I thank them for not using sanitised language in describing what is going on in the Uyghur region, which I was potentially guilty of myself. We talk about “labour transfers” when we are really talking about slavery. We talk about “sexual violence” when we are talking about women being raped. We talk about “re-education centres” when we are really talking about concentration camps. We talk about “the removal and transfer of children” when we are talking about state kidnapping.

I particularly thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). In the short time I have been in the House, I have been in the room countless times when he has spoken up on behalf of religious freedom. He made a point essential to understanding the nature of what is happening in Xinjiang: it is religiously motivated. He mentioned the small infractions for which people can end up in the internment camps. I would add that having a beard, going on a pilgrimage to Mecca or simply travelling to another Muslim country is enough for someone to find themselves in a camp.

Sometimes, in politics, the word “Orwellian” is used. It has become a hyperbolic cliché that we turn to, but I do not think that there is a more appropriate word to describe what is happening in the Uyghur region. I have heard stories of people phoning home on FaceTime or video calls to find a uniformed Chinese state security person answering their relative’s phone, stories of artificial intelligence being used to identify particular ethnicities, and stories of the collection of biometric information on millions of people. It is almost impossible to imagine the traditional approach to forced labour and due diligence working where the oppression of people is so intense and so pervasive.

In Parliament, the causes and intent behind human rights issues are often a matter of nuanced debate. When it comes to the situation of the Uyghurs, it is incredibly clear what the intent, plan and motivation are. My hon. Friends the Members for Macclesfield (Tim Roca) and for St Helens South and Whiston (Ms Rimmer) both hit the nail on the head: the political and economic power of China is driving the forced labour crisis. The longer it continues without being challenged, the deeper the problem becomes. Others in the debate have spoken about how pervasive it is, from the cars we drive to the clothes we wear. It is also in the food we eat, whether it is tomatoes or seafood. Our moral complicity grows, and the longer it goes on, the more our own economic ruin grows as well. We cannot possibly compete with industries that have no labour cost.

Some of this is about international action as well as the action of individual Ministers. We know that authoritarians are increasingly organised, and those of us who believe in the rule of law and in basic standards have a responsibility to pursue the same multilateral actions. The hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) and others named and shamed some of the companies that are involved in this process. The awful truth is that some companies are literally shameless. They are more motivated by the bottom line than they are by public reputation and international opinion.

I thank the Minister for showing such moral clarity. Given China’s economic power, all Governments have to work with it, but to hear the Minister give such clear and unambiguous condemnation of the attacks on Uyghurs is important. From my time working with Uyghurs, I know that they often feel forgotten and unheard. Many of the things that hon. Members have spoken about today that happen to them, happen unseen. Today, we have shown that they are not happening unheard. That is incredibly important.

I welcome the Minister’s use of the word “innovative” about the approach to supply chains, which is essential given the dominance of China in the polysilicon matter. I also welcome his commitment to continue to assess, monitor and learn from the approaches that other countries have taken. He knows that other Members and I will continue to press him to do that at speed.

I close by paying tribute to those who, at considerable risk to themselves, ensure that the story of what is happening in Xinjiang escapes an increasingly closed society—to the Uyghurs who have lost contact with their families and risk imprisonment when they travel. I also pay tribute to civil society organisations such as Anti-Slavery International and the World Uyghur Congress. Uyghurs often feel forgotten, and if this debate has done one thing today, it has shown the world that we will not forget them and that they have a voice within our Parliament.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered UK supply chains and Uyghur and Turkic Muslim forced labour in China.