Northern Ireland Hospitality Sector

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 15th July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Robin Swann]

I agreed with the hon. Member until his last point. The McKeever group owns the hotel in which he was married. I had my wedding reception at the group’s Dunsilly hotel, and it is just celebrating the 40th anniversary—[Interruption.] Of the hotel, not my marriage, just to be clear to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). The group is being forced to make difficult decisions, looking at staff numbers, reducing opening hours and stalling or even cancelling investment plans. It is simply fighting to survive.

The Northern Ireland Food To Go Association has told me that over 200 of its businesses have closed in 2026 to date, but Northern Ireland faces an additional challenge that does not exist elsewhere in the United Kingdom, as we share a land border with another jurisdiction.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman, who is a friend and colleague, for securing this vital debate. I rise to support the UK-wide #VATsTheProblem campaign, alongside our local champions at Hospitality Ulster. The hospitality sector in Northern Ireland is an industry trapped in an impossible competitive vice. This month, the Republic of Ireland dropped its VAT on food and café catering to 9%, meaning that our border communities face a 120% tax disparity compared with neighbours just a short drive away. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we are asking only for a fair fighting chance for our hospitality sector?

[Robin Swann]

I thank the hon. Member for raising that point, because we do share a land border with another jurisdiction. In the Republic of Ireland, hospitality businesses already benefit from a significantly lower VAT rate of 13.5%, but the Irish Government have gone further by moving towards a 9% rate for food-led hospitality, as he said. That creates a clear competitive imbalance.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dan Tomlinson]

rose—

[Jim Shannon]

Will the Minister give way on that point?

[Dan Tomlinson]

I will.

[Jim Shannon]

It is no wonder that the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) had to go all the way to Northern Ireland to get an Ulster girl to marry. That tells you what Ulster women are like. They are the best.

[Dan Tomlinson]

rose—

--- Later in debate ---

[Dan Tomlinson]

There are a whole range of challenges and also benefits from the protocol and the Windsor framework. I agree with the hon. Member that they do not provide constraints on the policy choice on VAT. I always find it frustrating when Ministers hide behind legal constraints that perhaps are not always there, and I want to be up front with him: if a Government chose to do this, the protocol would not be a barrier.

Members have focused on the potential merits of a Northern Ireland VAT reduction pilot for hospitality, but VAT is a broad-based tax on consumption that applies to a range of sectors, and it also applies on a UK-wide basis. The Government’s view is that different VAT rates would create divergence between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and impact the competitiveness of businesses between the two regions. I understand that Members are specifically talking about Northern Ireland, but across the country as a whole—some hon. Members did mention the broader campaign around reductions in VAT across the UK—a reduction to 10% in VAT for hospitality would cost around £11 billion a year, which is equivalent to the total expenditure on the Royal Navy or the annual child benefit bill.

There would be significant practical challenges associated with introducing a pilot for a different VAT treatment for hospitality in Northern Ireland only. Businesses, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, and consumers would then need to operate in a system that created different treatments for otherwise similar transactions. There would be boundary issues and administrative complexity to work through.

The fact that I am not announcing this change today does not mean that the Government do not take this issue seriously and understand the representations being made. We are also not standing aside. The Chancellor has introduced the Great British summer savings scheme, which is a temporary reduction in VAT on eligible family attractions and children’s meals over this summer, helping families with costs and encouraging footfall during the summer holidays. In England, the Government have also introduced new business rates multipliers for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure properties, a package of transitional reliefs, and the supporting small business scheme, which together amount to £4.3 billion of additional spending. The Barnett formula is applied in the normal way to those changes, so the Northern Ireland Executive received £185 million in consequentials as a result of those decisions.

The Government—and I personally, if I have the honour of staying in this role—will continue to listen carefully to representations from the hospitality sector, from the Northern Ireland Executive and, of course, from hon. Members. We will meet after the summer recess; I am as good as my word. However, we do not believe that a Northern Ireland-specific hospitality pilot is the right approach. As tempting as it is to burnish my devolution credentials ahead of an impending reshuffle, I will not make that commitment today.

I thank the hon. Member for South Antrim for securing this debate and for strongly representing his community. This is an important issue, and I am happy to continue discussing it.

[Jim Shannon]

The Minister is making a very good and clear speech. He referred to parts of Europe whose Governments are considering a VAT reduction because they recognise the importance of the hospitality sector. Are the Government considering that? If there is an evidential base for it, perhaps they and the Minister will at least consider it at some stage to see what can be used to our advantage.

[Dan Tomlinson]

Right now, we are engaging in what could be seen as a similar proposal to the one put forward today. We are doing a time-limited reduction in VAT, not for one sector and one part of the country, but for particular leisure and hospitality activities and consumption across the country as a whole. I am sure that His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and others will conduct thorough evaluations of that, so that we can see the impact that it had.

We expect businesses to pass the reduction in VAT on to consumers. Some big organisations, such as Merlin Entertainments, have already done that by setting new ticketing prices for families this summer, and many small businesses have been changing the prices on their menus for children’s meals. I hope that once this Great British summer savings period ends on 1 September, we will review that and look at the impact.

Of course, the challenge with any VAT reduction is whether it will be passed on to consumers. To be clear, I do not begrudge businesses having more margin, but the objective of the hon. Member for South Antrim is to see prices fall. When VAT changes have been made in times gone by, the gains have not always flowed entirely to consumers. The Government have been working really hard to ensure that businesses pass on the reduction in the Great British summer savings scheme. As I say, we are really glad that many have done so. I look forward to continuing to discuss this important topic, and to seeing the impact of the temporary and targeted changes that we have made to VAT this summer.

Question put and agreed to.

Human Rights in Kashmir

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for Bradford East (Imran Hussain) for setting the scene, and I commend him for his words of wisdom and his directions for finding a peaceful way forward. I have supported him every time he has had this debate over the years, and I am happy to be doing the same again. I declare an interest as chair of the APPGs for international freedom of religion or belief and for Pakistani minorities, so this issue is close to my heart, and the hon. Member made the case incredibly well.

I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak on this matter. I commend all hon. Members who have consistently brought the plight of the Kashmiri people before the House. I have spoken on this matter before and make no apology for returning to it. The situation in Kashmir is not a distant abstraction; it is a lived reality for millions of human beings—people with families, faith and hopes for their children. This United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has both a historical connection to that region and a moral obligation to speak truth to power. I look forward to the Minister’s answer—she is much liked and respected by all of us in the House.

Kashmir, divided, disputed and suffering, represents one of the most protracted human rights crises of our age. Whether we speak of India-administered Kashmir or Pakistan-administered Kashmir, the reality for ordinary men, women and children on the ground is one of fear, repression and silenced voices. Amnesty International has documented with harrowing clarity the realities of life in Kashmir: arbitrary detention, torture, restrictions on freedom of assembly, the suffocation of civil society, and many killings and injuries. These are not abstractions; they are human beings deserving of dignity, justice and freedom.

In any debate, I try to think of the words of Micah 6:8 in the Holy Bible:

“And what does the Lord require of you

But to do justice, and to love kindness,

And to walk humbly”.

That is the reason I am here: to obey that Holy Scripture and speak up for my brothers and sisters across the world, wherever their human rights are being suppressed and wherever they are being persecuted. That is the standard of this House, and we must hold ourselves to it when we speak of Kashmir.

I have been on delegations to Pakistan in the past, and I am due to return, if God spares me, because I feel so strongly about the human rights of the people of that part of the world. I have sat with community leaders, religious minorities, and mothers and fathers who simply want safety and freedom for their children. Freedom of religion or belief—that intrinsic, God-given right—is denied across the Kashmir region. Muslim, Hindu, Sikh and Christian communities have all experienced the fragile nature of life when the state does not protect fundamental rights as it should.

The situation in India-administered Kashmir since the revocation of article 370 in 2019 has illustrated the dangers of unchecked Executive power: communications blackouts, thousands detained and journalists criminalised. In Pakistan-administered Kashmir, democratic accountability remains a transformative aspiration rather than a lived reality. Can we honestly say in this House that we are doing all in our power to stand against that? This debate is a chance for us to show our united resolve to speak up for our brothers and sisters in Kashmir.

You told us earlier to be conscious of time, Mrs Harris, so I conclude with this: we must use every diplomatic channel—bilateral, multilateral and through the United Nations—to press both India and Pakistan to uphold their international human rights obligations. I look to the Minister to ascertain how we can seek to play our part in ensuring that the people of Kashmir are not disenfranchised from justice for geopolitical convenience. The heartbeat of this Government’s foreign policy must be not only simple human rights but simple humanity. It is with that simple humanity that I speak.

Financial Inclusion: Young People

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered financial inclusion for young people.

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir John. Today, young people are one of the groups most at risk of financial exclusion. Analysis by Fair4All Finance has identified 2 million unsteady starters in financially vulnerable circumstances across the UK. That includes 11% of financially vulnerable adults in Hertford and Stortford. Predominantly under 35, those young people are facing a combination of pressures: low financial resilience, higher housing costs, insecure work, rising insurance costs and a growing exposure to online financial risks. They experience poorer financial wellbeing as a result, closely linked to poor mental health, creating a vicious cycle that can undermine their educational attainment, employment prospects and economic participation.

Financial inclusion is about more than access to banking; it is about access to affordable credit, insurance, savings, trusted financial guidance and opportunities to build a financial track record. I am pleased that the Government have recognised the importance of tackling financial exclusion in the financial inclusion strategy. If we can break down the barriers to financial inclusion, we can improve the lives of millions of people and unlock growth across the country. In this afternoon’s debate, I want to examine the barriers to financial inclusion that young adults face, and consider where Ministers could build on the financial inclusion strategy to prioritise practical interventions to support young people.

Although a young person may pay rent regularly, meet mobile phone payments or have built responsible financial habits, they often lack sufficient credit history to access mainstream financial products on fair terms. We know that young adults are over-represented in the gig economy, temporary employment roles, part-time work and on zero-hours contracts. The insecure and variable income they receive is compounded by the high cost of living. It is harder for them to budget effectively or qualify for mainstream financial products, and they are more reliant on costly forms of borrowing as a result.

As the cost of living crisis continues to eat into disposable incomes, young people struggle to build emergency or long-term savings. They typically have fewer savings than older adults, which leaves them acutely vulnerable to financial shocks: losing a job, an unexpected bill, increased rent or transport costs. In those circumstances, without emergency savings to draw on, many face a poverty premium, paying more in the long term through instalments because they cannot afford the cost of an up-front payment.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing this forward. The situation in Northern Ireland is no different from the one he described in his constituency and the wider United Kingdom. Young people face unprecedented barriers to building financial security. High street bank closures are turning rural and working-class communities into banking deserts. At the same time, the aggressive use of unregulated “buy now, pay later” schemes and predatory online lending apps is driving vulnerable young adults into spirals of unmanageable debt before they even secure their first mortgage or full-time career. Does he agree that the Government must implement comprehensive, mandatory financial literacy education in our schools, as a priority?

[Josh Dean]

I could not agree more about the importance of financial education for young people, which I will come to in my speech.

We can already see how those overlapping pressures exacerbate a young person’s financial insecurity. Insurance is another area where they are left facing vulnerability to financial shocks that they are already ill-equipped to absorb. I was shocked to learn that 18 to 24-year-olds are significantly less likely to hold contents insurance, even though they are more likely to experience flood damage, escape of water, fire damage, burglary and theft. That is especially true when they live in rented accommodation, which many young adults do.

I want to draw particular attention to the cost of motor insurance. Young people often make significant personal investments in driving lessons, to make it easier to get to work or education, only to find they cannot access affordable insurance when they pass their test. That directly impacts their ability to access work, training and other opportunities, especially in semi-rural communities such as the one that I represent, and it highlights how young people can face financial exclusion even when they are doing everything right.

Too often, young people are entering adulthood without the tools, confidence or support networks that they need to navigate increasingly complex financial decisions.

Transport: Marston Vale

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 17th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Blake Stephenson (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered transport requirements in the Marston Vale.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I hope this can be a constructive debate. I am not here to bash the Government or to stand in the way of progress; I am here to open a dialogue with the Minister on behalf of the people I serve in Mid Bedfordshire.

The Marston Vale in Mid Bedfordshire contains historical villages such as Cranfield, Marston Moretaine, Lidlington, Stewartby and Brogborough, as well as the new town of Wixams. It also sits at the heart of the Government’s growth agenda. The Universal UK resort will be a £50 billion boost to the UK’s economy, bringing millions of visitors every year to Kempston Hardwick. East West Rail, connecting the intellectual powerhouses of Oxford and Cambridge, will run along the Marston Vale line, stopping at Ridgmont, Lidlington and Stewartby. The merger of Cranfield University with King’s College London will bring further world-class research to the Marston Vale.

The Marston Valley development will see 5,000 houses delivered across new villages between Marston Moretaine and Brogborough, and the Stewartby brickworks development will see 1,000 houses delivered on a brownfield site in Stewartby. The new town of Wixams will continue to be built out over the coming years, with thousands more houses and a new train station. The Government’s proposed new town at Milton Keynes and potential developments at Keepers Place and the Aspley Guise triangle could see tens of thousands more houses built in and around the Marston Vale.

All in, the roughly 7.5 miles between junction 13 of the M1 and the town of Kempston will soon see two nationally significant infrastructure projects, thousands of new homes and one of the UK’s leading universities, all at the centre of the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor. That is on top of existing significant sites including the Millbrook proving ground, the community forest of Marston Vale and the Woburn Forest Center Parcs.

As I said, I am not here to stand in the way of the growth that our area is set to contribute to the UK. If it is done right, there are immense opportunities for the Marston Vale, with thousands of new jobs, brilliant new transport links and new communities in our area.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing this debate. I very well understand the absolute devastation caused by bad management. As I said to him beforehand, I have similar problems in my constituency in relation to the Ballynahinch bypass. We must have robust Government involvement in prioritising infrastructure, and it must be managed, wherever it may be. We cannot have a piecemeal system; we must have central Government pushing it. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that is the clear way forward?

[Blake Stephenson]

I agree entirely with the hon. Gentleman. With the scale of the change that we are discussing, particularly in my constituency and also in his, it is vital that the proposals are done with, not done to, the residents of the Marston Vale and Strangford, in order to retain public support.

That means proper planning on transport infrastructure that considers the cumulative impact of these nationally significant projects on the local communities they will sit within. At the moment, I am afraid that is not happening, and public support is slipping away. Transport modelling for the various projects has been siloed and has failed to properly take into account the cumulative impact of proposals. For example, outline planning permission for the 5,000 houses at Marston Valley was granted on the basis of transport modelling that does not consider the impact of Universal UK, and Universal UK’s transport modelling does not consider the impact of the 5,000 houses at Marston Valley.

East West Rail’s proposals will increase capacity to serve Universal, but they fail to properly plan for the impact that they will have on the local road infrastructure by severing local communities. For example, to increase the number of trains on the line in response to Universal UK, East West Rail plans to close a number of level crossings in the Marston Vale and leave others with significant downtime throughout the day. That will have an enormous impact on local communities, effectively bisecting the Marston Vale along the rail line.

One of the level crossings that East West Rail has proposed to close, at Station Lane in Millbrook, is a key local route for the Marston Valley development. It is also a vital link for the Millbrook proving ground, including for the transport of military vehicles. The alternative route would direct enormous volumes of traffic down country lanes even with today’s level of demand, but we are adding thousands more houses and Europe’s biggest theme park. Roads such as Bury Ware in Lidlington are simply not equipped to cope with the volumes of traffic they are expecting.

Previous East West Rail proposals have broad local support, but the new proposals, which fail to plan for the cumulative impact of transport pressures in the Marston Vale, now risk eroding that. I urge the Minister to work with East West Rail to reconsider the impacts of its proposals on level crossings in the Marston Vale, in the light of the cumulative development impacts. We cannot allow it to irreparably damage our communities and turn our country lanes into gridlocked rat runs.

Plans to deliver a new multi-storey car park in Lidlington have also caused concern that the village could end up as a park and ride for Universal UK, just one stop up the line on East West Rail. That is not nimbyism; it reflects a real local concern that good intentions alone are not plans. We cannot prevent people from parking in Lidlington and hopping on the train to Universal, but we can alleviate residents’ concerns and reduce the risk of it happening by properly planning for and delivering a park and ride elsewhere.

The new Ridgmont station just off the M1 is a prime candidate for such a park and ride, but that station’s delivery has been predicated on house building that does not yet have planning permission and is not yet included in any local plans. Disjointed planning and concerns about delivery timetables at Ridgmont leave residents in Lidlington and elsewhere fearing the worst.

Another impact of the changing demand for transport in our area is that East West Rail’s plans for Stewartby station are now out of touch with the needs of local residents. Stewartby station is relatively busy. Despite a limited rail service, the station sees around 90,000 passengers a year, almost all of them local and many of them students at Kimberley college, which is located a short walk from the current station. East West Rail’s plans for the station involve removing it from the village entirely and turning it into a gateway station for Universal UK.

To be clear, we absolutely need an East West Rail station to serve Universal UK, but very little work seems to have been done on the implications of the new station location for Stewartby residents and students of Kimberley college. If the plan remains to build a new Universal station and axe the Stewartby station entirely, Ministers need to ensure that East West Rail urgently works to produce a detailed plan for transport links between the station, Stewartby village and Kimberley college.

That plan should include details on how residents with mobility challenges will be able to get to the station, and it should set out the safeguards that Ministers will put in place to ensure that hundreds of students at Kimberley college will be kept safe when using an extremely busy station and making a much longer journey, likely on foot, from the station to the college. The alternative that I have been calling for would be to keep the current Stewartby station operational in addition to a new station serving Universal UK, with a limited stopping service operating only at peak morning and evening times.

More generally, despite a much-publicised announcement on the Government’s infrastructure investment to enable Universal UK earlier this month, neither the Chancellor nor the Transport Secretary has written to me to outline specifically what that investment will deliver in my constituency. Residents in the Marston Vale want and deserve clarity from the Government on what infrastructure, particularly transport infrastructure, will be delivered to facilitate the arrival of millions of visitors to Europe’s biggest tourist attraction in their backyard. I hope the Minister will be able to offer some further detail in her response.

Another good example of transport pressure in our area is junction 13 of the M1, which the Minister knows I am going to mention. The Government have indicated that junction 13 will be upgraded in the early 2030s, for which my constituents are grateful, but the timeframe for upgrades needs to be urgently reviewed. Junction 13 is unsuitable now; it is already acknowledged that it is regularly severely congested. While the Marston Valley development will provide some upgrades to cope with the demand brought by those new houses, it will not consider the volume of additional traffic brought by Universal UK. Junction 13 is a key route for local traffic as well as traffic passing through our community. Given the significant increase in traffic volume, we need that upgrade now.

Junction 13 is not the only significant road infrastructure impacted by local development plans. Vehicle traffic will also use the A421 to get to the Universal UK resort from the M1. The Government have acknowledged this with their investment in slip roads from the A421 to Universal UK, but we have recently seen the significant congestion caused, even with the current levels of demand, when the A421 is closed. In September 2024, there was severe flooding on the road, which saw a dip fill with 72 million litres of water after a pumping station was overwhelmed.

Work has been done to solve that particular vulnerability, but the traffic chaos that occurred in 2024 demonstrates what happens in the Marston Vale when the A421 is out of commission. That congestion would be many times more significant if the A421 had to be shut for any reason after Universal UK is built. Any respectable transport plan for the Marston Vale must address one key question: what is our contingency plan if the A421 is out of action? We have seen no answer to that question.

Junction 13 is not the only project for which timing will be crucial. From the day that the Universal UK resort opens in 2031, millions of visitors will pour through its doors, whether we have built sufficient transport infrastructure or not. But if we have not, they will pour through its doors via gridlocked local roads designed for local traffic, not for the largest theme park in Europe. It is imperative, therefore, that the Marston Vale is home to a national effort to deliver new infrastructure as swiftly as possible. That includes having the new station at Wixams on the midland main line open from day one, it means ensuring that East West Rail between Oxford and Bedford has services running to completed modern stations with step-free access, and it means having a road network, especially junction 13, that can cope with the volume of traffic we are expecting.

As I said, I did not come here to play party politics, to bash Ministers or to rail against the march of progress. I came with a specific request. What we see in the Marston Vale is not unique, but it is unusual: several projects of national significance contained within roughly 7.5 miles of Bedfordshire, split across Central Bedfordshire council and Bedford borough council. The myriad challenges are difficult to address because there is no centralised master planning and, as a result, there is no way to mitigate the cumulative impact of the various individual proposals. That is leading to contradictory solutions.

Because there is no centralised masterplan and no single body overseeing these projects, it is also much more difficult to leverage funding to ensure that it is spent in the right places. I would like Ministers to commit to working with me, local councillors, local residents and key stakeholders, such as Universal and local developer O&H, to develop a master plan for transport in the Marston Vale. That should set out exactly what communities in the Marston Vale need to manage the various pressures on our area. It should include detail about how to manage transport pressures strategically during construction periods, and it should open a conversation about how we secure the right funding to deliver those projects.

The rewards of success are clear: enabling the Marston Vale and its residents to play the fullest part in delivering the Government’s growth agenda, right at the heart of the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor. But the costs of failure are stark: residents in the Marston Vale waking up in the 2030s to discover that they have suffered all of the downsides of growth in their communities, and that some of the benefits for the country as a whole have been squandered.

Rural Pubs: Fiscal Support

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 17th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I give big thanks to the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti) for raising this issue. As always, I will give a Northern Ireland perspective on the issues.

I speak for the small villages, the crossroads and the tight-knit rural communities where the pub is not merely a commercial business but a vital community hub. It is the village town hall, the local meeting place and the frontline defence against rural isolation; it is a cornerstone of our £2 billion tourism economy. However, those historical institutions are hanging by a thread, suffocating under a mountain of unsustainable operational costs.

We have heard the warnings loud and clear from the industry’s frontline. I pay special tribute to Colin Neill MBE, the chief executive of Hospitality Ulster, who I have met on numerous occasions. All Members in the Chamber have probably met him—I know that the Minister has. Colin has been a tireless champion for our publicans, masterfully making the case both at Stormont and here in Westminster. He has warned the Government in no uncertain terms—forgive me for being graphic, Minister, but we must be factual in presenting this case—that our local hospitality sector is in deep distress as a result of the cumulative impact of soaring energy bills, skyrocketing national insurance contributions and upcoming business rates revaluations. Colin has rightly pointed out that the current tax burden is squeezing the very life out of local employment. Hospitality Ulster data shows that nearly half our operators have been forced to reduce staff numbers. We are looking for economic growth and job creation, but we have lost them—this is a full-blown crisis.

Our rural pubs face a unique structural disadvantage compared with the rest of the United Kingdom. In Great Britain, pubs have benefited from various configurations of business rates relief, but publicans in Northern Ireland face the terrifying prospect of massive hikes in their rates bill—a move that Colin Neill has warned would be the “ruination” of our hospitality industry and, by extension, a severe blow to the Northern Ireland economy. Furthermore, our traders are forced to compete on an uneven playing field with the Irish Republic right across the border, where the Government have previously used targeted VAT reductions to protect their hospitality trade, to our disadvantage in Northern Ireland.

We cannot stand idly by and watch our rural heritage be wiped out by fiscal inertia. The sector accounts for four of every five tourism jobs in Northern Ireland, so we cannot deny or ignore that it is critical. If the Department for the Economy is to meet its growth targets—the Minister will want to encourage Northern Ireland to grow and meet them—it needs a thriving hospitality sector to anchor it, so, alongside my DUP colleagues and the Minister back home, I call on the Chancellor and the UK Government to co-ordinate directly with the Stormont Executive on delivering a targeted and ringfenced package of fiscal interventions.

We need three things: a reduction in the hospitality VAT rate to lower the structural burden on food and drink operators, energy cost reform to protect rural businesses that do not have the footfall of Belfast establishments, and a reformed, reality-based rates system that treats hospitality as an economic driver to be supported, not as a cash cow to be milked until it is dead, which is what I see happening.

The hospitality sector is asking for the chance to survive and grow, and I echo that sentiment. I ask the Government to give our publicans the breathing room that they deserve—especially for rural pubs that cannot work on economies of scale—and to deliver the fiscal support that rural economies desperately need, before the lights go out for good in rural pubs. I thank the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East for bringing this issue to the Chamber. I hope that the Minister can give us the answers that we desperately need.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dan Tomlinson]

I thank the hon. Member for raising that issue; it is one that publicans in my constituency have raised with me as their MP. Of course, there are benefits to having a link with a major supplier, and I understand why many publicans choose that route, but it is clear that there are significant challenges, too. DBT has looked at this, and I am sure that conversations are ongoing with the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my hon. Friend the Member for Halifax (Kate Dearden), about what reforms could be made. This is not my policy brief, so I do not want to speak too far out of turn, but I totally understand the issue. I will raise it personally with my hon. Friend. I have done so in the past, after being asked to by my constituents.

On a related point, guest beers and access to the bar for guest beers in tied pubs was mentioned. DBT has met the parties involved in the beer market access review to hear their evidence directly, and it is giving due consideration to all the evidence, along with input from competition policy experts. This is under active review by the Government, and we are committed to making sure that we can have a diverse and competitive beer market. On a personal level, I hope that the Government can look really closely at this so that we can improve competition and choice, but it is being led by my hon. Friend the Member for Halifax.

As has been mentioned, in January this year we went further to support pubs, with a further 15% off their business rates bills and a real-terms freeze in business rates for pubs in the next two years of this revaluation period. That support is worth £1,650 for the average pub this year. It means that three quarters of pubs are seeing their bills either fall or stay flat this year and, as a sector, pubs will pay 8% less in business rates in 2029 than before the revaluation took effect.

Moving on from business rates, the Government recognise that pubs often serve as crucial community assets, particularly in rural communities, as the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East and many others have mentioned. They support local economies and communities, provide spaces for gatherings, support those in need and foster a great sense of local pride.

[Jim Shannon]

The circumstances around VAT in Northern Ireland, and reduced VAT across the border, are peculiar and particular to us compared with other parts of the United Kingdom. Has the Minister had chance to speak to Colin Neill, the chief executive of Hospitality Ulster, to ascertain some of the things that he feels might be a way forward? If so, have there been discussions not only with him but with the relevant Minister in the Northern Ireland Executive?

[Dan Tomlinson]

I have not managed to have that conversation, but the hon. Member is very welcome to write to me, and I am happy to consider those representations. Of course, I have heard calls from Members to cut VAT for hospitality, and I am aware that there is a campaign on that matter. I just say that cutting VAT for hospitality from 20% to 10% would cost £11 billion. A range of policy ideas have been raised, all of which involve cutting tax. The right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen) was right to acknowledge that there are important fiscal considerations for the Government. It is important that we manage the public finances and bring down Government borrowing, and we are forecast to have the fastest reduction in Government borrowing of any G7 economy, with our deficit falling below the G7 average for the first time in a very long time. Of course, I will listen to the representations made and the asks from campaigners, but I caution that we have to ensure that we have sufficient revenue to fund our public services in a sustainable way.

Rail Freight

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the role of rail freight in the transport network.

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Stuart. Compared with many other aspects of the transport network, rail freight rarely gets the attention I feel it deserves, yet it can help us to achieve so much of what so many of us say we want for our communities, our economy and our planet. From cleaner air and less congested roads to building new homes and a more resilient economy, rail freight is not a niche industry concern but a national infrastructure priority.

The Tarmac site at Bredbury in my Hazel Grove constituency receives daily freight trains carrying construction materials from the Peak district, North Yorkshire and south Wales. I was lucky enough to be invited to visit last year and don my hi-vis. What struck me was how tangible the benefits were. I was joined by Huw Merriman from the Rail Freight Group and Chris Swan, among others, from the great team at the Tarmac facility. A single train delivery to that site can provide enough materials to build up to 30 new homes and, in doing so, removes around 60 HGV movements from the A6 and the surrounding residential streets. That is 60 fewer lorries on roads that my constituents use every day to get to work, school or the shops.

The north-west is one of the busiest regions in the country for rail freight. Aggregates move daily from Peak district quarries through my constituency and beyond. Container trains run on the west coast main line bound for Scotland, Trafford Park and Seaforth in Merseyside. Those flows matter not just to the industries that depend on them, but to every driver who would otherwise be sharing a road with the lorries that would replace them.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady for securing this debate. I envy her region’s constructive approach. We unfortunately do not have any rail freight in Northern Ireland, and it is very disappointing, but there is a need to emphasise and build on the east-west relationship. We are all part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, so it is really important. Does she agree that, when it comes to looking at rail transport links, maybe the Minister should cast an eye towards Northern Ireland? Maybe—just maybe—she might be able to encourage the Minister there to do something.

[Lisa Smart]

The hon. Gentleman has, in his customary way, championed the needs of his constituents and the whole of Northern Ireland. I agree that rail freight is a very good thing of which there should be more. I am very keen to hear what the Minister has to say.

Banking Hubs

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 20th May 2026 Commons Chamber

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

It is pleasing to see a significant number of Members in the Chamber to be part of this Adjournment debate, by hearing it and perhaps by participating. I am aware of about 15 hon. Members who have asked to intervene on me, which is a high number for an Adjournment debate. There may be more whom I am unaware of. The Minister has kindly indicated that she is also happy to take interventions, so if hon. Members feel like spreading the love when they think I have had enough, that would be much appreciated.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

On that point—[Laughter.] First, may I commend the hon. Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey (Graham Leadbitter) for bringing this matter forward? I spoke to him beforehand, and I thought it was important to put this point on the record. I have had 11 banks close in my constituency, and seeing the decline of banks in rural areas has been excessively worrying and frustrating. Although every bank that has pulled out of the peninsula in Ards has promised working hubs, the reality is that a member of staff in a room without even the facility to print off a bank statement for a client is not acceptable. Does the hon. Member not agree that a hub must have banking facilities, as well as a post office, and that we must make sure that there is not just a member of staff for two hours a day or a week?

[Graham Leadbitter]

I absolutely agree with that. It is important that, where there are hubs, they are open for a reasonable period of time and are accessible at different points of the day to different people with different needs.

The important subject of banking hub criteria has been raised many times in this place and in Westminster Hall, and it is an issue I have campaigned on since I was elected and during my time as a councillor and a council leader. In 2015, Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey had 22 bank branches. Just 11 years later, the number has dropped to just six in the latest data from January this year; that is a 77% reduction. That is six banks for almost 100,000 people living in the fifth largest constituency by geographical area in the UK—a constituency that it takes about two and half hours to drive from end to end.

The following bank branches alone have closed since 2020: in Forres, the Bank of Scotland and TSB closed their branches in 2022; in Badenoch and Strathspey, the Bank of Scotland closed its branch in Aviemore in 2024; and in Grantown-on-Spey, the Bank of Scotland and the TSB closed their branches in 2020 and 2021; while in Nairn, the TSB closed its branch in 2021, and most recently, the town lost its last bank. Link, the organisation that monitors bank closures and which is tasked with determining where new shared services should be, reports the total number of bank closures across the UK as 2,237 since 2022. For the same period, 276 banking hubs have been recommended by Link.

In this modern age, when there is digital banking on websites and through apps and when, frankly, fewer and fewer people are using physical bank branches, it is not a surprise to see those closures. However, it is how we respond that is important. There remain many vulnerable people and, indeed, certain types of businesses that rely heavily on cash banking and we cannot allow the rug to be pulled out from under them.

High Speed 2: Impact on Communities

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 19th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Joy Morrissey]

My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. Our constituencies border one another, and I remember visiting him in his constituency at Dogs Trust. I remember the vibration, noise and disruption from HS2. We could feel the vibrations when we were there. It is about not just the construction, but the noise pollution and disruption to residents in Hillingdon and Buckinghamshire. Our communities were completely disrupted because of HS2 construction. Until my hon. Friend’s council took HS2 to court—that was a great moment—little regard was given to the amount of countryside, land and green belt being destroyed by HS2.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady for securing this debate. Does she not agree that the United Kingdom has become so entangled in planning delays, legal challenges, environmental regulation and bureaucratic red tape that we are now struggling to build even the most basic strategic infrastructure in a reasonable timeframe? Lessons have to be learned UK-wide from that failure.

[Joy Morrissey]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for saying that, but I also pay tribute to the first person who radicalised me on the importance of fighting HS2: the former MP for Chesham and Amersham, Cheryl Gillan. Before I even became a Member of Parliament, she made sure that I knew, as she did, the importance of fighting against HS2 and of the need—no matter who was supporting HS2—to stand up for our residents and put them first. Cheryl knew it would be a terrible blight on Buckinghamshire, and she was right. She was ahead of the curve there.

Transport

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Monday 27th April 2026 Written Corrections

The following extract is from the Westminster Hall debate on Mountain Rescue on 22 April 2026.

[Jim Shannon]

First of all, I thank the Minister for those suggestions and for the direct help from Government. I know that this is not in the Minister’s remit, but I ask her to ringfence the moneys being sent to Northern Ireland in Barnett consequentials, because if they are ringfenced, they go to where they should be.

[Lilian Greenwood]

I note the hon. Member’s question, and I understand that support is provided to mountain rescue services within Northern Ireland, but that is a matter for the Northern Ireland Assembly.

[Official Report, 22 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 167WH.]

Written correction submitted by the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood):

Gambling Advertising

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 23rd April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Alex Ballinger]

I will not accept that. Having met lots of people with lived experience of gambling and having seen the evidence in our report, I know there is a clear link between gambling advertising and halting the recovery of people with gambling addictions.

An argument often used by the industry is that more evidence is needed, but I will come later in my speech to why that is not a problem—it was not a barrier, for example, when we introduced restrictions on tobacco advertising several years ago.

For children and young people, the situation is even more concerning, because gambling advertising normalises gambling long before they are legally able to gamble. Our report highlights data from the Gambling Commission’s “Young People and Gambling” report, which found that 79% of children had seen gambling adverts or—64% of them on television, and 74% online. That is four out of five children in the country exposed to gambling advertising, which is more than the proportion of children who read for pleasure.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I have already apologised to you, Mrs Harris, to the hon. Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) and to the Minister for the fact that, because of the strikes, I need to take a taxi to catch my plane, so I cannot, unfortunately, be here for the whole debate. However, I spoke to the hon. Member for Halesowen before the debate about Northern Ireland’s gambling laws, and although I think he is already aware of this, I would like to put on record that those laws predate the internet, meaning that remote or online gambling is completely unregulated in Northern Ireland. Gambling operators can advertise in Northern Ireland if they hold a licence from the Gambling Commission. However, it is notable that the Gambling Commission does not have jurisdiction in Northern Ireland, meaning that the Advertising Standards Authority cannot refer operators that commit multiple breaches of its codes there to the Gambling Commission. Does the hon. Member agree that that lack of regulation must be rectified urgently? I suppose that that is also a question for the Minister to respond to at the end.

[Alex Ballinger]

The hon. Member is completely right: gambling regulation is devolved in Northern Ireland, and the problem there is similar to the one we have in the rest of the country; in fact, the scale of gambling harm is even higher than it is in Great Britain. Members of the APPG have been talking to colleagues in Stormont in a similar all-party group, and they face similar challenges in calling for greater regulation. I completely agree with the hon. Member’s comments, and I am glad he has put them on the record.

Gambling advertising is all over spaces that children spend time in, and unfortunately our regulations have completely failed to keep pace. We rely far too much on self-regulation and voluntary codes that deliver only partial measures, even as evidence mounts that children continue to be widely exposed. The evidence presented in our report is unequivocal: these measures have not worked.

The so-called whistle-to-whistle ban is a case in point. It was introduced with the intention of protecting children from exposure during live sports, yet research shows that thousands of gambling messages still appear during matches through pitch-side advertising, sponsorship and branding that falls entirely outside the scope of the ban. It is similar online, where regulators have struggled to respond to the rise of content marketing and influencer promotion. Those forms of advertising are often not recognised as advertising at all by younger audiences, who are less equipped to identify and critically assess what is being advertised to them.

The UK is also falling behind other jurisdictions. Countries such as Italy, Spain, Australia, the Netherlands and Belgium have recognised the risks to young people and have introduced meaningful restrictions on gambling advertising, sponsorship and promotions. By contrast, the UK is delaying action, with a demand for ever more evidence. However, as our report makes clear, that sets an impossible standard. We do not apply that standard to other areas of public health, especially where children are concerned. We did not wait until the evidence became overwhelming before restricting tobacco or junk food advertising to children. Instead, we acted based on credible evidence of harm and a duty to protect the public, especially children and young people.

[Jim Shannon]

I spoke to the hon. Member about this beforehand, but problem gambling is a critical issue for us in Northern Ireland, where rate is 3%, compared with 2.7% here on the mainland. A recent survey found that 65% of adults in Northern Ireland felt there were “too many gambling advertisements”, 71% supported a watershed for gambling advertising and 42% said gambling advertising should be banned altogether. Does the hon. Member not agree that this House can and must work with the Northern Ireland Assembly back home to ensure that immediate protections are enshrined in law?

[Alex Ballinger]

The hon. Member raises the scale of public interest in this issue in Northern Ireland, and the number of people who are fed up and have had too much of gambling adverts, particularly those that are bombarding our children. I am glad he raises the situation in Northern Ireland, and we should be working together more to tackle this issue.