Air Pollution

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 2nd July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I say a big thank you to the hon. Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner) for raising this issue and, as always, for his passion for it—well done. As the Democratic Unionist party’s health spokesperson, I am most interested in it, due to the serious and too often fatal effects that air pollution has on public health. It is great to see the Minister in his place. He was here last night in the fishing debate, and he is here again today, so well done. We thank him for his perseverance and his energetic commitment.

Air pollution is associated with 30,000 deaths a year across the UK. The question that we are all asking, and that the hon. Member for Brent West asked when he set the focus for the debate, is, what are we doing to prevent those deaths? The United Kingdom Government and the World Health Organisation have acknowledged that air pollution is the largest environmental threat to our health. Of course, its effects do not just stop at the lungs; the pollutants go on to be absorbed into the bloodstream and have the potential to harm every organ in the body. The harm is greater than just the breath we breathe; it can manifest itself as heart disease, cancer, dementia, stroke or diabetes—I declare an interest as a diabetic—and has even been linked to mental health conditions. In addition to the devastating human cost, treating the effects of air pollution is likely costing the NHS billions. The Royal College of Physicians estimates the cost at as much as an eye-watering £27 billion annually.

Cars and vans remain among the largest sources of harmful air pollution, but we must also recognise the impact of indoor air pollution. Poor ventilation, damp, mould and emissions from domestic heating all contribute to poor health and can be particularly damaging for children, older people and those with existing and complex health conditions.

Alongside efforts to reduce emissions, targeted support should be provided to the most affected communities. It is often those living in the most deprived areas who experience the highest levels of air pollution, as the hon. Member for Brent West said. They are more likely to live close to busy roads or industrial sites, and, as a result, they face a greater risk of ill health. Clean air is not just an environmental issue; it is also one of health inequality. Quite clearly, across this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, there is much inequality.

As the Member of Parliament for Strangford, a largely rural constituency, I must raise concerns about the effects of ammonia, a major emission from agricultural production. Although we can reduce emissions, we must accept that they are often a by-product of farming and food production. It is essential that the farming community works with the Department to reduce emissions in a sustainable way. I ask the Minister whether there have been discussions with the farming community on reducing ammonia emissions in some way so that everyone in this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland can reap the benefits.

Evidence demonstrates that taking action can make a difference. In London, deaths linked to air pollution fell by an estimated 40% over five years from 2019. I put on record my thanks to the Government and the Mayor of London for that massive reduction over those five years—or seven years as it is now—which correlates with the introduction of the ultra low emission zone.

There is no safe level of air pollution, of course, but every improvement in air quality has the potential to reduce illness, relieve pressure on our health service and save lives. The hon. Member for Brent West set that out very clearly. The objective is to save lives; we are all greatly perturbed by the loss of life each and every year.

I know that the Minister will agree that more should be done to tackle air pollution, and particular attention paid to communities in the most deprived areas, whose health is at greater risk simply because of where they live—where pollution is particularly high, indoors and outdoors—and the houses they live in. This must be done hand in hand with the farming industry, not with a boot on its neck. There is work to be done, from industry and farming to individuals in their homes. Together, I believe that we must do the best we can to be good stewards of the world we live in.

Fishing Industry: Government Support

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I especially thank the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) for his opening of the debate. It is a real pleasure to work alongside him in addressing the issues of visas, quotas and many other things that he referred to. He and I have had separate meetings with the Immigration Minister, the hon. Member for Dover and Deal (Mike Tapp). The Minister today, the hon. Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), may want to engage with him on the visa issue. I think we had quite positive meetings with the Immigration Minister about a way forward, and I thank him for that.

I will speak specifically on the Northern Ireland fishing sector. In 2024, it generated some £50 million in landing values, employed 445 people full time, and supported some 6,500 jobs ashore across Northern Ireland’s rural and coastal communities. The impact of fishing in Northern Ireland is massive, as it is in the constituency of the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East and across all Scotland. Fishing is woven into the very fabric of Northern Ireland’s identity—culturally rich, diverse and shaped by a maritime heritage that stretches back to the 14th century, when Northern Irish vessels supplied fish throughout Ireland, across the British Isles and into European markets.

The importance of the long-term survival of the Northern Ireland fishing industry cannot be overstated. Fishing is at the heart of the cultural identity of coastal communities. Without fishing, these communities lose their soul, identity and pride. I represent the village of Portavogie in Strangford. I do not represent directly the villages of Ardglass and Kilkeel, but they are represented by a Member who does not attend Parliament. On behalf of them, through the Anglo Northern Ireland Fish Producers Organisation, I represent all three ports.

The Northern Ireland fishing industry is facing an unsustainable decrease in the Irish sea’s available fishing grounds through expanding offshore marine protected areas, proposed bans on bottom-towed gear, rapid offshore renewable development and new restrictions imposed by the Isle of Man authorities. The Northern Ireland fishing industry has lost nearly 9,000 km of fishing grounds in the Irish sea over the last couple of decades, through a combination of marine protected areas, active and consented wind farm developments and other spatial restrictions. That is more than half the land area of Northern Ireland, and it is threatening the sustainability of the remaining fishing grounds through displacement of fishing effort into an ever-decreasing area.

The industry has two greatest spatial concerns. First, there is the ongoing Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs consultation on management measures restricting bottom trawling in marine protected areas in the Northern Ireland offshore region, which strengthens a further loss of key fishing grounds for the nephrops fleet.

Secondly, there is the issue of UK skilled visas, which the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East referred to. The Northern Ireland offshore area is crucial to the fleet, particularly to those vessels with crew employed via the transit visa mechanism, who can only fish outside territorial waters. That refers specifically to the loss of access to the Isle of Man waters for all Northern Ireland vessels with any crew on transit or UK skilled worker visas.

I am very pleased to see the Minister. He always gives us helpful responses, and we will test him again today. I ask him again to engage with the hon. Member for Dover and Deal, who came up with some ideas that I think the industry is sympathetic to. As you will know, Sir Alec, life as an MP is about solutions. The hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East and I believe that there is a solution, so we would be very keen to see the hon. Member for Dover and Deal’s suggestions taken up as a way forward.

I urge the Government to support a balanced planning system that protects fishing and our fishermen as a legitimate food-producing industry vital for the UK’s fishing industry. Access to Isle of Man waters for Northern Ireland vessels with any crew on transit or UK skilled worker visas has disadvantaged us greatly, so we are deeply concerned about that.

The Northern Ireland industry wants to work with the Home Office to co-design a visa system that is fit for purpose, that meets the needs of Government and industry and that delivers a sustainable seafood supply chain for the future. The hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East and I, along with others in the Chamber today, wish to work with the Home Office to co-design a visa system that is fit for purpose. To do nothing puts at risk an industry that is at the heart of Northern Ireland’s coastal communities, which provides jobs, delivers economic growth and is core to the cultural pride and identity of local fishing villages.

Oil prices have been a real bugbear for the sector back home. Although oil prices are now starting to come down, the increase in the cost of fuel has had a significant impact on the operating costs of fishing vessels and therefore on profitability. Before the Iranian war, fuel represented between 15% and 30% of operating costs. The price increases during the war meant that fuel prices rose to 50% of operating costs, which is quite unsustainable.

Fishing communities in Northern Ireland that have already faced decades of disruption now face a series of simultaneous pressures that threaten their long-term viability. Fishermen confronted with such changes are left with profound uncertainties that exacerbate financial stress as well as mental health issues for them and their families.

Food security and economic security will depend on the ability to maintain a sustainable fishing industry in Northern Ireland. With the right foresight and with a committed cross-Government policy, we all believe that the industry can sustain itself, remain productive and remain, as it has been for centuries, the cornerstone of the communities that have long lived along our coast. If we ignore the concerns of the Northern Ireland fishing communities, our rich and irreplaceable heritage could be lost.

I know that the Minister will never ignore us, but we will make sure that he does not. I thank the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East for introducing the debate. I look forward to hearing from other Members, including the hon. Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Lara Bird), who has become quite a regular in Westminster Hall today. I congratulate her: it is a real pleasure to see that, having made her maiden speech yesterday, she has come to Westminster Hall twice today. I had better watch out.

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (in the Chair)]

Well, with an introduction like that, I call Lara Bird.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Shannon]

I commend the hon. Lady, who has brought a matter to my mind and probably to the mind of the Minister and others. We have just seen a record price for a cod supper—I think the paper this week said that it was £11.51. I go back further than most Members, but I can remember when £11.50 would have bought a fish supper for four people or more. It really does put pressure on the hospitality sector.

[Lara Bird]

I thank the hon. Member for that point, which highlights how deeply the issue is being felt across many different industries, not just among those who are going out and catching the fish.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East mentioned in his opening remarks, the pitiful and arguably insulting allocation of funds from the UK Government to support fishermen and women in Scotland not only fails to reflect their contribution to the fishing sector, but fails to hold up other businesses and industries that rely on it. That is just an example—the tax on jobs is another—of the destructive Labour policies that mean that businesses in my constituency are really struggling.

A historic, integral fishing industry on an island nation cannot be allowed to struggle and decline while the UK Government sit back and do nothing. From my experience of speaking to my constituents, it is not about a lack of will or demand for fish in Scotland. As my hon. Friend outlined, the situation we are in is purely about the lack of engagement from the UK Government to experience what is happening to the fishing industry in Scotland and provide adequate policies to support it.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Morgan]

I will make some progress.

I strongly believe in working with those in industry who best know the solutions and how to deliver lasting change, so I will be listening to and working with the industry. I look forward to getting out on the quayside, accepting the invitation from the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East to visit his constituency and engaging with fish markets and processing facilities to hear at first hand what fishermen and those working across the supply chain have to say about our world-class fish and seafood.

[Jim Shannon]

Previous Ministers all made a journey to Portavogie, and I extend the same invitation. If he is not going anywhere on holiday during the summer, will he please come to Portavogie? He is very welcome, and he will have the best scampi in the world—I know the hon. Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Lara Bird) makes the same claim, but that is by the way. If the Minister has a spare day, he should come to Portavogie. He would be very welcome.

Farming: Financial Sustainability

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith), who set the scene incredibly well. I have four points of 30 seconds each. When we talk about farming in Northern Ireland, we are talking about family farms. Over 27,000 farming families across Northern Ireland work the land day in and day out. Financial sustainability requires three things from this Government: certainty, equity and protection. We need an increased multiannual farm support budget that is fully inflation-proofed. If there are no farmers, there is no food. That cannot be right.

Financial sustainability is impossible if farmers are forced to sell their top-quality, world-leading produce at or below the cost of production. The Government must use their powers to enforce fair dealing and transparency right across the agrifood network, and they must protect the family farm structure from punitive taxation. Recent proposals and changes threatening agricultural property relief and business property relief strike at the very heart of generational sustainability. Forcing a grieving family to sell off parcels of land just to pay an inheritance tax bill destroys the viability of enterprise overnight. It is a tax on food security and the Democratic Unionist party will stand four-square against it.

Animal Shelters: Regulation of Euthanasia

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Reform)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the regulation of the use of euthanasia in dog and animal shelters.

It is a pleasure once again to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I am truly grateful for the opportunity to raise an issue that is of deep concern to animal welfare organisations, rescue centres, veterinary professionals and millions of animal lovers across the United Kingdom: the regulation of the use of euthanasia in dog and animal shelters, and the wider challenges facing animal welfare across this country.

Before I begin, I pay tribute to my dear late friend, Sir David Amess. Sir David was one of Parliament’s most passionate champions of animal welfare. Throughout his distinguished parliamentary career, he consistently spoke up for animals—God’s creatures—who could not speak for themselves. Whether campaigning for stronger welfare protections, raising welfare concerns in Parliament or supporting charities working on the frontline, his compassion for animals was unwavering, and I am determined that his legacy on animal welfare will live on, hence this debate today.

I would also like to recognise the work of his daughter, Katie Amess, who has continued that commitment with great determination and dignity. Through her engagement with rescue organisations, campaigners and welfare charities, she has ensured that these issues remain firmly in the public consciousness. Those working tirelessly to improve animal welfare across our country are grateful for her continued advocacy.

Sir David understood a simple truth: the way a society treats its animals says much about the values it upholds. It is in that spirit that I bring this debate before the House. The issue before us is not simply one of euthanasia; it is about transparency, accountability, responsible ownership, animal welfare and whether our current systems are equipped to cope with the pressures they now face.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

First, I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing this issue forward. I spoke to him beforehand, to make him aware of my intervention. He will not be aware—indeed, nobody will be—that my wife has been a volunteer in animal shelters for a great many years, so we have had the cats and dogs that could not be homed living in our home, and they became, as they often do, family members. Does he agree that we must implement strict, legally binding regulations that mandate compassion, force transparency and ensure that destruction is only ever a last medical resort?

[Andrew Rosindell]

The hon. Member is, of course, absolutely correct. The laws in this area are completely inadequate, and as I will go on to say later, this is something that people across the British Isles care deeply about. We are a nation of animal lovers, and there is no greater animal lover than the hon. Member. He speaks very passionately for the people of Northern Ireland, and I thank him for his intervention.

Across the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland, rescue organisations report that they are overwhelmed. Shelters are full, waiting lists are growing and charities are being forced to make impossible decisions as increasing numbers of dogs and other animals are abandoned, surrendered or left as strays. The RSPCA has reported significant increases in abandonment in some areas, and rescue organisations throughout the country consistently warn that they are operating beyond capacity. The consequences of the cost of living crisis, combined with irresponsible breeding practices and impulse pet purchases have created what many in the sector now describe as a genuine animal welfare crisis.

When shelters are full and rescue spaces cannot be found, local authorities and contracted kennels face a difficult decision. Under existing legislation, once a stray dog has completed the statutory holding period and remains unclaimed, authorities may rehome the dog, transfer it to an appropriate establishment or euthanise it. The law therefore clearly provides alternatives to euthanasia, but campaigners, rescue organisations and those working directly with council pounds have serious concerns about how the system operates in practice.

Many local authorities no longer operate their own pounds. Instead, they contract the service to private kennels or commercial providers. Those facilities often have limited space and resources and significant operational pressures. As a result, many do not conduct the full behavioural assessments and adoption processes required for direct public rehoming. The practical reality described by many rescue organisations is that once the seven-day statutory holding period expires, the race begins to find a rescue space before a healthy dog loses its life. Volunteer groups known as pound pullers spend countless hours attempting to find rescue placements for dogs facing euthanasia. Rescue organisations report that they are frequently contacted to take dogs from council pounds, but many are already operating at full capacity.

One of the most troubling aspects of the issue is that we do not actually know the true scale of it. There are no centralised systems recording how many healthy or treatable animals are euthanised by local authorities, contracted kennels or veterinary practices. Freedom of information requests often produce inconsistent results, records vary significantly between local authorities, and veterinary practices are not required to report such figures centrally. There is no direct knowledge of what is really happening on the ground.

The absence of data is a serious problem. Good public policy demands that evidence is provided, and depends upon it, yet there is a remarkable lack of transparency in this area. We cannot properly assess the scale of the issue, identify trends or develop effective interventions if the information is not collected. I therefore urge the Government to consider establishing a national reporting framework for healthy and treatable companion animals euthanised in the stray dog and shelter system. Such a measure would not seek to criticise local authorities, rescue organisations or veterinary professionals; rather, it would provide transparency, improve accountability and ensure that future policy decisions are informed by evidence rather than assumption.

The Government should also review whether the current seven-day holding period remains fit for purpose. Rescue organisations argue that seven days is often insufficient to locate an owner, complete necessary assessments or secure an appropriate rescue placement. Given the unprecedented pressures facing the rescue sector, it is reasonable to ask whether a framework established decades ago remains adequate for today’s circumstances.

Although euthanasia is the issue we are debating today, it is not the root cause of the problem. The real question is why so many animals are entering the system in the first place. Time and again, rescue organisations tell us the same thing: there are simply more dogs than there are homes available for them. The reality demands action.

First, we should examine whether it is appropriate to continue issuing large numbers of new breeding licences when shelters and rescue centres are already struggling to cope with existing demand. Responsible breeders have an important role to play, and this debate is not about penalising those who adhere to high welfare standards. However, when rescue organisations across the country report that they are full and that healthy animals are being put at risk due to lack of capacity, we must ask whether the current rate of licensed breeding is sustainable. The Government should therefore consider temporarily restricting or reducing the issuing of new breeding licences until pressure on shelters and rescue organisations has eased.

Secondly, all animals rehomed through shelters and rescue organisations should, where medically appropriate, be compulsorily spayed or neutered and microchipped before adoption. Many reputable rescue organisations already operate in that way. Introducing a consistent national standard would help reduce unwanted litters, improve traceability and prevent future generations of animals from entering the shelter system unnecessarily.

Thirdly, we should continue strengthening laws on animal cruelty and abandonment. Animals are sentient beings, not disposable commodities. The law must reflect that principle. Stronger enforcement with tougher penalties for serious cruelty offences, and greater support for prosecutions, would help deter neglect and abandonment while reinforcing the responsibilities that accompany pet ownership.

Fourthly, the Government should establish a central national database for stray, abandoned and lost animals that is accessible to local authorities, shelters and authorised welfare organisations. At present, information is fragmented across multiple systems, charities and regions. A unified database would improve communication, reduce duplication, increase opportunities for reunification and significantly improve the efficiency of rescue efforts.

Fifthly, every stray animal should be routinely scanned for a microchip upon entering a veterinary surgery, local authority facility, contracted kennel or rescue organisation. We desperately need a more unified approach here. Surprisingly, there is no single microchip database for those organisations to check. I understand that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is working with the 11 databases of the Association of Microchip Database Operators to build a single point of search, but what happens with the 14 databases that are not AMDO members? Furthermore, although some databases are free of charge, some are now charging one-off amounts. Others are starting to charge subscription fees, which I am concerned will create a financial barrier to a legally mandated obligation on owners to microchip.

I commend to the Minister the work of Vets Get Scanning, an organisation established by the late Sir Bruce Forsyth and his fabulous daughter Debbie Matthews, who has been campaigning for this for many years to stop pet theft and return animals to their rightful owners. I invited Sir Bruce Forsyth to the Houses of Parliament some years ago to promote this very cause. He met many Members of Parliament at that time, including Sir David Amess, to promote the importance of all veterinary surgeries scanning animals when they are brought in, to check who the real owner of the pet is and to ensure that stolen dogs are returned to their rightful owners.

This recommendation carries a particular significance because of the tragic case of Tuk in 2017, which exposed serious shortcomings in the identification process and highlighted the devasting consequences that can occur when procedures fail. I must also pay tribute at this point to the hon. Member for Castle Point (Rebecca Harris), who has championed this cause.

Routine and repeated microchip scanning would be a simple, practical and cost-effective safeguard that could prevent similar incidents in the future while increasing the likelihood of lost pets being reunited with their families. Taken together, these proposals would not require vast new expenditure. They are simple, preventive measures that address the causes of the crisis rather than merely responding to its consequences. By reducing the number of animals entering the system, improving traceability, strengthening accountability and supporting responsible ownership, we can reduce the circumstances in which euthanasia becomes necessary.

I want to acknowledge the extraordinary work undertaken by rescue charities, volunteers, local authority officers, kennel staff and veterinary professionals. Those on the frontline of animal welfare frequently face heartbreaking decisions. They do not do so because they lack compassion, but because they are operating within a system and are under immense strain.

This debate is not about assigning blame, but about identifying solutions. Sir David Amess often reminded us that animals cannot speak for themselves. It therefore falls to us as legislators to ensure that their welfare is properly protected. The measures I have outlined today would increase transparency, support rescue organisations, encourage responsible ownership and reduce the number of healthy animals at risk of unnecessary euthanasia. Most importantly, they would tackle the underlying causes of the crisis rather than merely its symptoms. In doing so, we would not only improve the lives of countless animals across the country, but honour the legacy of Sir David Amess, whose lifelong commitment to animal welfare inspired so many, and support the continuing efforts of Katie Amess and others who work tirelessly to ensure that vulnerable animals are given the protection, dignity and compassion that they deserve. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response.

Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) for setting the scene incredibly well. I welcome the Minister, who we are very fortunate to have. She is committed to the very things that we are asking for. I wish her well as she pursues these matters. We are not talking about a minor inconvenience or a bit of harmless litter; we are talking about deliberate, criminal environmental vandalism that directly devalues people’s homes, attracts vermin to their doorsteps and robs law-abiding citizens of their hard-earned money.

I am going to give a Northern Ireland perspective, which will not be a big surprise to anybody, but it is important that we put on record where we are. The Northern Ireland environmental statistics report confirms that public anger has reached a boiling point. A staggering 73% of citizens are deeply concerned about our environment. For the first time, air and water pollution has been officially overtaken as the single greatest environmental anxiety for households in Northern Ireland by illegal dumping and littering, which was chosen by some 34% of respondents.

When I am at home, I live in Greyabbey. The main town is Newtownards, where my office is. I drive up and down that road two to three times a day—maybe more. People litter their KFCs, their McDonald’s, their sandwiches and their tins. They go out the window and are usually hidden in the grass until the grass is cut. When the grass is cut, guess what? The litter that has been lying there for maybe six months suddenly becomes accessible. The National Trust in Mount Stewart is out, as is the council, trying to do something.

We have a beautiful nation. Recent figures show that almost 340 major illegal dumping sites were actively investigated in Northern Ireland in the past year alone. There is an epidemic. My constituency crosses two council areas: Ards and North Down, but I also partially represent Newry, Mourne and Down. They suffer some of the worst littering. They have some 31 major investigated illegal waste sites.

That is not counting the mattresses that the hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes referred to. People do not take their mattress down to the dump; they throw it into the laybys of the Ards peninsula. They do not count the black bins full of rotting household waste, abandoned in the scenic coastal paths of Bangor or the rural lanes of the Ards peninsula. Every single week, local councils are forced to divert immense resources just to clean up after these waste cowboys. The Northern Ireland Environment Agency has spent some half a million pounds clearing up illegal sites just in the past period.

[Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)]

I feel honoured to intervene on the hon. Gentleman; it is often the other way around. Fly-tipping is a big issue in my constituency, as it is in his. There is frequent fly-tipping around the cemetery in Kilmarnock, for example. Does he agree that part of the problem with tackling this is a lack of proper funding for local government? In Glasgow, for example, the Scottish Government have not properly funded Glasgow city council. Does he agree that tackling this requires resourcing for local government?

[Jim Shannon]

I certainly do. It is an absolute disgrace that, across Northern Ireland, we see fewer than six successful illegal dumping prosecutions per year. Criminal fly-tippers are treating minor fixed penalties as nothing more than a business expense. That must change. We need to back our local authorities in Ards and North Down with the statutory teeth that they need. If a person is caught destroying a residential neighbourhood with illegal waste, the authorities should have the immediate power to crush their vehicle and publicly name and shame them.

Our communities deserve clean, safe and dignified places to raise their families. It is time to stop mollycoddling these criminals, clean up our streets, and restore pride to residential areas in the whole of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I support the comments from the hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes, and look forward to the Minister’s response and the other contributions.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)]

It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) for bringing us this important debate. We have heard many contributions about the impact on local pride, sense of belonging and importantly mental health, but it was uplifting that pretty much all Members spoke about the great work that volunteers do to tackle litter and fly-tipping in their area. It seems that everyone has some Wombles in their area—I am not 100% sure of the collective noun for Wombles, but I think it might follow the wombat and be a wisdom of Wombles. I am very pleased to say that in Epping Forest we have the Loughton town council Wombles.

[Jim Shannon]

They are not Wombles, but the Strangford Lough and Newtownards Wildfowlers clear the foreshore at Strangford Lough every Sunday—they did it this Sunday past. Their work as volunteers is very much admired.

[Dr Hudson]

I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. We have heard great contributions from across the House today.

Let me turn to some of the figures, which speak for themselves. Councils in England dealt with 1.26 million incidents of fly-tipping in 2024-25. That was a 9% increase on the previous year, and both the fifth successive annual increase and among the highest figure on record. The majority of those incidents, 62%, involved household waste. The most common sources were not lorry loads from organised criminals, although that is an issue I will come to, but car boots and small vans—everyday domestic dumps.

Across the country, our constituents have sadly become all too familiar with the sight of dumped bin bags, mattresses and white goods including fridges, freezers, washing machines and dishwashers. The effects are serious. As well as the obvious awful environmental consequences and the effects on nature and wildlife, fly-tipping is a public health problem, as dumped waste attracts vermin, creates fire risk and can contaminate soil and local watercourses. The harm is not only physical. Antisocial behaviour such as fly-tipping causes real anxiety and distress to residents who live with it.

Sadly, my constituents in Epping Forest are not immune to the blight of fly-tipping and its harmful impacts, with many serious cases across our area caused by shameless criminals who should face the full extent of the law. Fly-tipping threatens the precious wildlife and biodiversity that our forest of Epping Forest is so privileged to enjoy. As a positive counter to that situation, I have been privileged to meet unsung heroes, litter-picking groups right across Epping Forest, including Waltham Abbey community group and Theydon Bois parish council, who selflessly give up their time to clean up our communities, as I have seen at first hand on joining their litter picks.

However, the sight of copious numbers of discarded large nitrous oxide canisters, used illegally for drug misuse and then chucked on the side of roads for those who do the right thing to clear up, is incredibly concerning. As I have raised in the House many times—I raised it with the Minister just last week—any activity to clear up waste needs to address that issue as a priority for urban, rural and semi-rural communities alike. Will the Minister outline the steps that the Government are taking to tackle the illegal use of nitrous oxide and the subsequent discarding of dangerous canisters, damaging our environment?

The previous Conservative Government understood the fly-tipping problem and the need for further action. We increased the upper limit for fixed penalty notices for fly-tipping from £400 to £1,000 and established the Joint Unit for Waste Crime, a multi-agency taskforce bringing together key stakeholders, including the Environment Agency, the police, the National Crime Agency, the British Transport Police, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, the National Fire Chiefs Council and the Chartered Institution of Wastes Management. Through intelligence sharing and resource prioritisation, it has supported hundreds of operations contributing to arrests. I am pleased that the current Government are continuing with that measure.

We Conservatives also introduced several projects across England that sought to crack down on fly-tipping in residential areas, including portable CCTV cameras to patrol and capture footage across Northumberland, anti-climb fencing to protect neighbourhood areas in Hyndburn and larger recycling bins in better locations in Mansfield to ensure that the public have access to the correct disposal facilities. Those projects had demonstrable positive effects.

In Durham, which received funding from the last Government, the county council introduced educational bin stickers and permanent signage and installed CCTV on existing lighting columns. As a result, fly-tipping was cut by more than 60%. In Hyndburn, installing fencing and gates to prevent access to fly-tipping hotspots saw fly-tipping decrease by 100% in those areas in the following three months. The council saved approximately £4,000 in waste removal and clean-up costs over that period.

In addition, the Conservative Government passed the landmark Environment Act 2021, which laid the foundation for electronic waste tracking, a measure the current Government are now implementing. I had the opportunity to discuss that with the Minister just last week as we passed a necessary piece of secondary legislation on that subject.

The Minister will be aware that His Majesty’s official Opposition tabled amendments during the passage of the Crime and Policing Act 2026 that would have added points to driving licences for fly-tipping. That was a Conservative manifesto commitment and it is most welcome that the Government have finally adopted that policy.

On the subject of manifestos, the Labour manifesto included this commitment:

“Fly-tippers and vandals will…be forced to clean up the mess they have created.”

I am sure that the Minister will have had the same conversations as I have had with farmers and landowners about the issue of fly-tipping on private property: that is not the responsibility of the local authority, whereas on public land it tends to be. We have heard about that from across the House today.

When the fly-tipping is on private property, the landowner in many cases is left to pay sometimes thousands of pounds to clean up someone else’s mess. To make the situation worse, the landowner may sometimes face landfill tax liabilities despite being the victim, not the perpetrator. Meanwhile, offenders frequently face little or no meaningful action. Once again, the figures speak for themselves: nine in 10 members of the Country Land and Business Association report being targeted within the past year, with over three quarters suffering a significant financial impact. Although stronger enforcement and prevention measures will help to reduce incidents happening, can the Minister outline what support is available to landowners and farmers who are being particularly targeted?

I would like to touch on the fact that although fly-tipping happens all over the country, some areas suffer more than others. The last Government provided targeted investment to the areas most affected by fly-tipping. Furthermore, just as the very act of fly-tipping varies geographically, so too does the rate of enforcement action. Only 31% of fly-tipping incidents are investigated, and over half the investigations result in no further action. Across England in 2024-25, there were just 13 custodial sentences for fly-tipping offences.

The Government have issued guidance to local councils, but guidance is one thing and action another. The Minister may be aware that the Countryside Alliance has called on the Government to incentivise local authorities to use the enforcement powers available to them. I would be interested to hear the Minister’s thoughts on that suggestion.

We are united across the House in our shared desire to end fly-tipping and to ensure that those who commit this crime are punished appropriately. To do that, local authorities need the right resources and tools, but more importantly they need to use them. We can do more to tackle fly-tipping, and I hope that the Government come forward with ambitious proposals.

It has been great today to see so many people from across the House talking not only about this issue, but very much about what it means to their local community. A sense of optimism comes from highlighting the great work that local volunteers do. To conclude, I thank for their great contributions and interventions my hon. Friends the Members for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune) and for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) and the hon. Members for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer), for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge), for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan), for Hexham (Joe Morris), for Strangford (Jim Shannon), for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin), for Broxtowe (Juliet Campbell), for North West Leicestershire (Amanda Hack), for Kilmarnock and Loudoun (Lillian Jones), for Stevenage (Kevin Bonavia) and for Ilford South (Jas Athwal).

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) for securing this very well attended debate. Let me also thank hon. Members from across the House who have made valuable points. It is great to hear from the Opposition Front-Bench spokespeople about everything that this Government need to do, but it was under the coalition Government and their cuts that the beginnings of this public squalor occurred. In the so-called big society of David Cameron, we did not realise we were all going to have to become litter-picking Womble troops, set up our own food banks to feed our communities and end up being lollipop crossing wardens as well, because of the severe cuts that happened to local government on the coalition Government’s watch.

It is fitting that we are having this debate at the beginning of London Climate Action Week. Everybody’s environment starts at their front door—it is not something out there in the oceans and forests; it is about stuff that is literally in the streets where we live. As my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) said, this is a matter of social justice. It is about environmental justice, but also about the poorest people bearing the consequences of environmental crime. It is an epidemic that proliferated under the coalition and it became a pandemic from 2015. The failure to implement any new policy and the starvation of local government that saw local tips close led to this criminal activity and this waste crime epidemic.

Fly-tipping scars our streets and parks and takes pride away but it also robs us, as taxpayers. In the 2024-25 financial year alone, waste criminals—they are not cowboys; they are criminals—evaded at least £1 billion of landfill tax. Every fridge and bit of kitchen equipment dumped as a result of a refurb has not been disposed of correctly in either landfill or incineration; that is unacceptable. We are determined to take back control of our streets, parks and countryside from those criminals.

The hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson) talked about setting up the Joint Unit for Waste Crime. Since coming into office, we have boosted the Environment Agency’s enforcement budget for the current financial year by 50%, from £10 million to over £15 million. Over the next three years, we will give the Environment Agency an additional £45 million, so that budget is going up from £10 million to £15 million this year and then up to £30 million—we have trebled it. We are not producing action plans, but putting our money where our mouth is. That will mean more boots on the ground and more drones in the air.

We have pursued major regulatory reforms and boosted the Joint Unit for Waste Crime. Since the Government came to power, the EA has stopped illegal waste activity at over 1,500 sites and has achieved 125 prosecutions, with 10 people going to prison. Crimestoppers has launched a national campaign encouraging the public to play their part by calling 0800 555 111 to anonymously report suspicious activity. I encourage all hon. Members to amplify that campaign, which is running on social media at the moment. Our waste crime action plan is the next step and it is a scale-up. First, we are preventing illegal activity before it starts; secondly, we are strengthening enforcement so that offenders are caught and punished; and thirdly, we are cleaning up the most harmful sites. Let me take each of those points in turn.

First there is prevention. Stopping waste crime means putting legislation through Parliament that will replace the outdated paper systems, an issue neglected under the previous Government, with mandatory digital waste tracking: a single UK-wide platform that will monitor waste movements in real time. Regulators will be able to spot diversion away from legitimate pathways and spot fraud, such as misdescription of waste, at a much earlier stage in the chain.

We have laid secondary legislation that will overhaul the regulation of the waste carriers, brokers and dealers system so that there will be no more Beau Vines registered as waste dealers. We are moving from a light-touch system to full environmental permitting. We are removing widely abused waste permit exemptions on tyres, end-of-life vehicles and scrap metal, and tightening up seven other waste permit exemptions. We are also going after the tax avoiders. HMRC is expanding tax check rules to the waste sector, so if someone’s tax record is questionable, we will ask them questions before renewing their licence.

[Jim Shannon]

Will the Minister give way?

[Mary Creagh]

I will make some progress. We are matching prevention with tougher enforcement and pursuing the criminals with every tool in the box. We are increasing the Environment Agency’s budget, as I mentioned, and giving it new police-style powers to intervene earlier, disrupt the criminals and bring them to justice before their illegal operations become established. We have to nip this in the bud when it happens; that is what we know works.

Water Supply in Kent

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered water supply in Kent.

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair this afternoon, Mr Twigg. I am grateful to colleagues for coming to the debate, but it is disappointing that we are having to have it at all, after the fourth incident—and the third major one—disrupting the supply of water to South East Water customers in six months. Between November and December, approximately 24,000 customers experienced low water pressure or little to no water supply. When supplies were restored, a boil water notice was issued. In January, about 30,000 customers again had to put up with little or no water supply. In April, around 6,000 customers experienced water supply problems, which South East Water said were

“caused by a burst water main.”

At the end of May, as we know, customers had to cope for 11 days with interruptions to their water supply. On that most recent occasion, around 22,000 customers across Kent, including roughly 4,000 in my constituency, were impacted.

Last week, during an urgent question secured by the right hon. Member for Herne Bay and Sandwich (Sir Roger Gale), I spoke about how, like many of my constituents, I have lost all faith in South East Water due to its repeated failures. Access to clean, reliable water is not a luxury; it is a fundamental expectation. When people turn on their taps, they should be able to rely on a consistent supply of water. That is the absolute minimum any water company should guarantee, but all too often South East Water is not meeting that minimum expectation.

The repeated disruptions are not only inconvenient but deeply distressing for residents, who should be able to rely on water. The impact of these repeated failures is evident from the Consumer Council for Water report last week, which showed that trust in South East Water had been “materially weakened”. More than half of those surveyed now store bottled water at home in case of future incidents.

The most recent incident occurred during a short period of hot weather, when the consequences of shortages can be especially acute. It affected households; farmers, whose livelihoods depend on a steady supply of water; and vulnerable individuals in care homes, where continuity of basic services is critical to wellbeing and safety. The wider economic impact must also be recognised. Hotels, restaurants and pubs across parts of the county were forced to close, losing vital income during what should have been a busy period coinciding with the school half-term holidays.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

The hon. Gentleman talked about farmers, who need water to give to their cattle. If they cannot do that, it is almost an animal tragedy waiting to happen. When there are water supply problems, many people suffer, but particularly farmers, who may have to look after 150 to 200 cattle, sheep or whatever it may be. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that farmers need to be looked after as a priority?

[Sojan Joseph]

I absolutely agree. There are many farmers in my constituency, and I have heard about the challenges they face when there are water shortages and they do not know when the water will come back—even the uncertainty is difficult for them.

For businesses, loss of trade is not simply a temporary inconvenience; it can have lasting repercussions. Taken together, South East Water’s failures highlight a pattern of underperformance that is no longer acceptable and that demands urgent attention and accountability. I welcome the confirmation from Ofwat that the recent incident will be part of its ongoing investigation into South East Water, but can my hon. Friend the Minister set out what actions the Government are taking to strengthen compensation arrangements for customers and what is being done to ensure that those affected by serious outages receive proper support and redress?

I want to recognise those who did their best during very difficult circumstances, including staff from local authorities, other agencies and the health and social care sector, as well as South East Water’s employees on the ground. I would also like to pay tribute to the Water Minister and her officials for the way they actively engaged during the latest incident. In the conversations the Government had with South East Water, did the company give any assurances that lessons would be learned? It is important to have a robust evaluation of the measures put in place to assess what was effective and, more importantly, what needs improving.

According to the company, it used tankers to supply more than 2 million litres of water to its network. More than a week after taps started running dry, I was still being contacted by constituents experiencing supply issues. The company needs to explain why it took so long to restore supply during this and other recent disruptions.

South East Water reported distributing more than 1 million litres of bottled water to customers. However, one constituent on the priority services register did not receive water at her property. After my office intervened on her behalf, we were informed that water would be delivered later that day, by which time the constituent had confirmed that her supply had already been restored. The issue of people on the priority services register being left waiting for water was raised in the House during previous outages, but it continues to arise. In any evaluation that takes place, consideration needs to be given to the location of water distribution stations. Those living in rural areas, elderly residents or those without access to a car cannot travel far to collect bottled water. Provision must reflect need.

Communication is another persistent failure. Constituents received little or no information, and updates were often inconsistent. I know that is something that the Water Minister has raised with the company, but it is simply not good enough for constituents to be left wondering what is happening to their water supply, or when it will be restored.

South East Water’s communication with Members of Parliament also needs to improve. During the recent meningitis outbreak, alongside daily updates from the UK Health Security Agency, MPs were offered regular virtual meetings to answer questions. Although South East Water sent out daily email updates, the information I received from constituents often contradicted what the company was saying. It took direct contact from my office to request a virtual briefing before one was arranged.

Of course, the most important lesson to be learned is how to prevent future water supply disruption in the first place. Each time an incident occurs, a different reason is given, whether that is a plant failure, severe weather, a burst water main or increased demand during hot weather. Those explanations do not change the underlying reality: for years the company has prioritised shareholders’ interests over those of its customers, and has failed to make the necessary investment in its infrastructure.

After years of under-investment, South East Water’s ageing and leaking infrastructure is struggling to cope. That cannot be allowed to continue. After all, if my constituents have poor service from their telephone provider, they can change their network, but because water companies have a monopoly, South East Water’s customers have no choice but to put up with this failing company.

This lack of resilience in our water infrastructure is particularly concerning, given the need for more housing in my constituency and across the county. During the Conservative Government’s last year in power, planning applications were at their lowest point for a decade. As we look to fix this problem, it is important that housebuilding takes place with natural resources such as water in mind. That includes ensuring that water companies and housing developers make the necessary investment in infrastructure.

What action can the Government take to give councils, such as Ashford and Folkestone and Hythe in my constituency, and other planning authorities confidence that all water companies make that investment, to ensure that current needs are met and that future growth, including the demand for affordable housing, can be supported? Building on the proposals set out in the water White Paper, will the Minister update the House on what action the Government are taking to deliver a water system that the people of Kent can depend on?

Climate change makes this challenge more urgent. Last week, the Environmental Audit Committee took evidence on the impact of extreme heat, and we heard that we are likely to see more frequent heatwaves and periods of extreme temperatures. Kent and the south-east of England will be particularly exposed, which will have implications for water supply. Hotter weather increases demand, while dry summers reduce availability. As the Environment Agency has pointed out, Kent is already marked by exceptionally low rainfall.

While I welcome the proposed Broad Oak reservoir, South East Water is not expected to submit a planning application until 2028 at the earliest. That will take time to deliver, and even if it is in place, further action will still be required to safeguard supply. In last week’s urgent question, the Minister mentioned that the Government are looking at desalination plants as part of the longer-term answer to water supply challenges. Those could provide a reliable source of clean drinking water that is independent of rainfall, particularly during prolonged dry periods. I would welcome further details on the role the Government see for desalination within a balanced, long-term strategy for Kent’s water supply.

I would like to ask the Minister one final question. This Government have taken strong action by nationalising the steel industry to protect it for future generations. They have also addressed the failure of rail privatisation by bringing rail companies back into public ownership. Given the steps they have already taken on water, which include passing the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025 and giving the Environment Agency more powers to monitor water companies, what consideration have the Government given to taking failing water companies into public ownership?

Water Safety

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 9th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. A big thank you to the hon. Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) for highlighting this issue at such a timely moment as we begin—hopefully—to enjoy the better weather and are seeing preventable deaths, particularly of young people, in our waters. It saddens us all greatly when we hear of the unnecessary loss of life.

As we look to the summer, we look for those days of summer fun. I grew up in a different time, but I learned to swim at school, and that probably gave me an advantage. Our school had swimming classes and everybody learned to swim, and it did not do us any harm. I am reminded of the time that I went on holiday to Florida and the three boys were small—aged eight, six and four. We arrived at the villa and they were all excited to be getting into the pool, as we always are when the sun is shining. The youngest boy just walked straight on to the water. I do not know what he thought he was going to do, but he certainly was not going to walk on it. The second boy shouted to him, “Swim, Luke, swim!” but Luke was not swimming anywhere, so I dived into the pool and pulled him out. There is danger in water, wherever it may be—even in swimming pools and ponds. My five-and-a-half-year-old grandchild learned to swim this year in Portugal. The Minister does not have responsibility for education, but she will understand, as we all do, that it is really important that we all learn to swim.

My summer holidays were spent with my friends, jumping into the quarry and enjoying the cool water on a sticky day. I can probably go back further than just about anybody in the Chamber—my loss of hair and wrinkles are an indication of that. Times have changed, but the joy of cooling off and splashing with friends has remained. We would have jumped into the quarry and off the harbour at Ballywalter, down where we lived when we were younger. I am old enough to remember depth charges: you curled yourself into a ball, jumped into the water and the water splashed everywhere. It was part of the youthful exuberance that we had. We were never alone; we always had friends with us, and maybe that was one of the things that made it all right.

However, the danger appears to have been enhanced, and those simple pleasures can have deadly results. My heart goes out to every family feeling the pain of the recent losses in water. The hon. Member for Southampton Itchen read out the names of those who have died. That was a very poignant moment. It focused our attention on where we need to be, and we thank him for doing it, even though it was hard to comprehend the massive loss of life. My prayers and thoughts are with all those families at this time.

In Northern Ireland, our emergency services and local authorities have been warning that open water sites have hidden life-threatening hazards. Disused quarries are exceptionally dangerous due to unpredictable depths, submerged machinery, sudden drop-offs and stagnant toxic water conditions. The water in quarries does not flow; it just gathers and gets toxic. The water might look refreshing, but jumping into it can have dire results. I understand the temptation to enjoy our beautiful local landscape when the sun comes out, but I cannot stress enough how dangerous unsupervised open water swimming can be.

Quarries, in particular, are death traps. Their water may look calm and inviting on the surface, but underneath lies intense cold that can cause immediate muscle paralysis and shock, even in the strongest swimmers. The hon. Member for Southampton Itchen outlined the theory of floating in the water. That is very easy to say, but it is not easy for someone to realise that they can float, because panic sets in. Maybe one of the things that we need to be doing in schools is teaching people how to have that immediate reaction of letting themselves go completely still and float. That could save their life.

I went to the local press to urge parents to have frank conversations with their children about the risk of trespassing on industrial or abandoned sites, because peer pressure can often lead to tragic decisions. We have seen devastating tragedies across Northern Ireland in the past, and the UK mainland has seen more deaths of young boys and girls in the recent heatwave. It is devastating trying to understand the loss of life. I do not want to see one more local family heartbroken this summer. My plea is clear: “Please stick to designated supervised swimming areas, obey all the safety signage and look out for one another. A split-second decision to jump into a quarry is simply not worth your life. Enjoy the sun and water responsibly.”

More can and should be done. We should make a co-ordinated effort in schools to talk about the danger, and have a social media campaign and a television campaign about it. All those things are important, and they should come in March, April or May, as the summer months arrive and people’s minds turn to water, rather than in December—unless they are targeted at wild water swimmers, of course. I wouldn’t be swimming in December, that’s for sure.

All these tools must be utilised, because we saw 19 people lose their lives during the May heatwave in the UK, 13 of whom were children. The question must be asked: are we doing all that we can? The answer is that we could do more to prevent these deaths, and we must do more UK-wide. We need to ensure that, if residents spot individuals trespassing or swimming in prohibited high-risk areas, they report the activity to local authorities immediately to prevent potential accidents, and that there is an immediate response from a staffed police service that has the manpower to make a difference. In addition, lifesaving rubber rings should be provided in harbours and other potential swimming places. Water safety affects every constituency in the UK and the response must be greater, so that we never again have a month in which so many lives are lost and so many families are broken.

Those families who have lost loved ones are in my prayers—they are in all our prayers—but we must act to prevent more deaths, if at all possible. I look forward very much to hearing the Minister’s response. She always gives us encouragement, which helps us all to deal with difficult situations. I again thank all the Members who have participated in the debate.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mary Creagh]

I thank my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for his question. I know about the issues around Coventry and Rugby, and I share his frustration at fly-tippers. Courts now have the powers to issue up to nine penalty points on fly-tippers’ driving licences, to ensure that they think twice before doing a job for their mates at the weekend. We expect these powers to be used consistently. We have the National Fly-Tipping Prevention Group, and the Environment Agency is stepping in on serious cases through increased funding, stronger powers and joint action.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

May I thank the Minister for her commitment and for her response to the hon. Member for Rugby (John Slinger)? It is good to have a policy that seems to be working and, here on the United Kingdom mainland, it is very obvious that it is. I know the Minister is off to visit Northern Ireland; we have similar problems in Northern Ireland, but there does not seem to be the same drive or the same action taken. Will she involve herself with the Minister in Northern Ireland’s Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Andrew Muir, to ensure that he is proactive as well?

[Mary Creagh]

I am always happy to visit Northern Ireland, not least because I have relatives in Magherafelt. I can tell the hon. Gentleman what we are doing about digital waste tracking. It is now impossible for a cow to be registered, as happened under the legacy system. We will have identity checks, criminal record checks and competency checks, so it will not be a free-for-all. Waste carriers will have to show their permit numbers on advertising and on their vehicles.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Solicitor General]

I recognise that all those affected by the Grenfell Tower fire have faced a long and deeply painful wait for answers. Justice needs to be delivered as swiftly as possible. I understand that my colleagues in the Ministry of Justice have been working for months with police, prosecutors and courts to ensure that the system is ready to hear complex cases without further delay.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Solicitor General for that reply. In recent times in Northern Ireland we have successfully concluded two corporate manslaughter cases in a positive fashion; there were guilty verdicts in both cases. If it is the intention, as I think it may be, for the Solicitor General to look at making changes to corporate manslaughter cases, will she share the detail with the Northern Ireland Assembly and the relevant Minister?

[The Solicitor General]

It is good to hear about those successful cases in Northern Ireland. There may be lessons to be learned from those, so I am happy to look into the detail and work with the hon. Gentleman.

Agriculture: Government Support

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 29th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Richard Foord]

My hon. Friend rightly mentioned farming profitability. Minette Batters, the former president of the NFU, conducted a review of farming profitability in December and came up with more than 50 recommendations. It would be interesting to hear from the Minister the Government’s reflections and progress on fulfilling some of those.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I congratulate the hon. Member on securing this debate. On profitability, the Treasury has treated agriculture support as a discretionary expense. Does he agree that we need an increased, ringfenced, multi-annual farm support budget that is fully inflation-proof, taking into account the fact that otherwise we cannot expect our farmers to meet world-leading animal welfare standards?

[Richard Foord]

The hon. Member is right to talk of inflation-proof, because we have seen costs skyrocket in recent months. Fuel and fertiliser costs have shot up, while the price of feed for livestock is set to follow. Farmers are facing volatile international markets, while being told constantly that support is under review or “being monitored”.

Regulation of the Marmalade Market

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady for securing this debate, and I spoke to her this morning to ascertain her thoughts on this matter. We were brought up on marmalade back in Ballywalter. My mum made marmalade. She is now 94 and not making marmalade any more, but although I am no Paddington Bear, I love nothing more than a good round of marmalade and toast. When I say that I enjoy it, I mean marmalade and not citrus jam. Does the hon. Lady agree that my constituents in Strangford and across Northern Ireland, with EU labelling interfering with our produce, deserve the same consideration as her constituents, and that labelling must reflect the hard-won distinction of marmalade, and not fruit jam or jam, just for the ease of the EU?

[Tessa Munt]

I partially agree with the hon. Gentleman, although if we were part of the EU, we might find ourselves in the position of being able to influence that a little more. He is right to recognise that our jams, spreads and marmalades have a distinctive characteristic. Indeed, they are one of our largest exports to countries such as Japan and Australia, because of the quality of our jams and marmalades.

While the 60% requirement remains in law, the Breakfast Foods (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2026 removed the requirement to display total sugar content as a percentage on labels. Instead, producers will have to display

“energy value amounts of fat, carbohydrates, sugars, protein and salt.”

Unfortunately, that does nothing to encourage marmalade to be made with 60% sugar content, although I understand the driver behind the regulations.

This matters, because the rules governing marmalade are not arbitrary, but grounded in just over a century of scientific research and culinary practice. The requirement for 60% sugar content was not dreamed up by bureaucrats; it was developed through rigorous experimentation in the early 1920s at the University of Bristol’s Long Ashton research station. That facility is not in my patch, but I am proud to consider Bristol University one of my local universities. Long Ashton research station—now closed—is but 15 minutes’ drive from the boundary of my constituency, and I believe it is also famous for being where Ribena was developed.

The scientists were interested not merely in taste but in consistency, preservation and reliability. Before their work, recipes varied wildly, yields were unpredictable and the shelf life of marmalade was uncertain. They established a standard that ensured that marmalade would set properly, taste balanced and keep for extended periods. That west country connection is not incidental; it is foundational. The work carried out in Long Ashton helped to define what we now recognise as traditional British marmalade. It brought together food science and domestic practice, producing recipes that became a benchmark for generations of home cooks and commercial producers. To depart from those standards is not to innovate; it is to move away from a carefully developed and distinctly British product.

The 60% sugar threshold is critical. At that level, marmalade achieves the correct gelled consistency, a bright and appealing appearance, and a balanced flavour that is neither overly bitter nor cloyingly sweet. It also ensures a shelf life of up to a year when properly sealed. Drop below that threshold, and the product becomes fundamentally different: looser, duller, less stable and far more perishable. In my debate back in 2013, I described such products as “gloopy sludge”. I then had to apologise to the Americans and the French for describing their efforts as such, but I am not doing that this time, of course. These are not minor variations, but material differences that consumers have a right to understand.

Under the new labelling rules, that understanding becomes hard to access. While full nutritional information will still be provided, the removal of a clear, single sugar percentage risks obscuring whether a product meets the long-established British standards. An obvious response might be that the reduction in sugar is a good thing, as we are rightly encouraged to reduce our sugar intake. However, lower-sugar marmalades tend to be boiled for longer, which lowers the water content and ultimately results in a higher sugar content following the boiling process. The right response for those who wish to reduce their sugar intake is to moderate the amount of marmalade we put on our toast in the morning.

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

I confess to the House that I prefer English strawberry jam to marmalade, but my wife is an assiduous and loyal orange marmalade fan—

[Jim Shannon]

Of course—she’s Northern Irish!

[Adam Jogee]

It must be a Northern Irish thing. She often purchases marmalade at one of the excellent shops in Newcastle-under-Lyme. May I congratulate the hon. Lady on an excellent and interesting speech, and on giving voice to the sweet, sweet tastes of Paddington Bear himself?