Independent Lifeboats: Government Support

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 29th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I commend and congratulate the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes) on bringing this debate to Westminster Hall and thereby giving us all a chance to participate.

As the MP for a coastal constituency with a very large length of coast—the name of Strangford is the giveaway and tells the story—I am incredibly familiar with the role of lifeboats and the vital nature of having a well-trained and well-equipped lifeguard in post. We have lifeboat stations dotted throughout the coastline. Indeed, Portaferry—on the Ards peninsula, where I live—has one of seven RNLI lifeboat stations operating a lifeboat funded by viewers of the BBC television programme “Blue Peter”. I am old enough to remember the first “Blue Peter” programme, and it has had a commitment to lifeboats ever since.

In the last 10 years, the lifeboats of the charity’s 10 lifeboat stations in Northern Ireland have launched some 9,500 times. Their volunteers have saved 1,535 lives and come to the aid of thousands of other people. There is so much they have done and so much more they can do. In the last five years, there have been almost 3,000 incidents. The lifeboats have come to the aid of 3,500 people, and 47 lives were saved. If anyone wants a reason for backing this, that is what it is all about—the lives saved and the commitments given. The coastguard operates from Bangor marina, in the neighbouring constituency, but without charitably funded lifeboats, it simply could not handle the need and the load. It is sad that the RNLI really is the last emergency service, yet—I say this very respectfully—the Government pay less than 1% of its funding. I believe that the service deserves more than that.

As well as the RNLI, which I argue is basically independently funded, Northern Ireland has independent lifeboat services, such as Lagan Search and Rescue in Belfast and Lough Neagh Rescue. These services operate on inland waterways and estuaries and are not part of the RNLI, but are part of the focus that the hon. Member for Hamble Valley put forward at the beginning. Other independent groups, such as Foyle Search and Rescue, also provide water rescue services, and many are recognised by the coastguard as declared resources.

Part of our tourism strategy for Strangford is to try to highlight the availability of great family fun on the water, and a lot of that is found on the beautiful waters of Strangford lough, in my constituency. I live just on the edge of it, so I am very privileged to be able to wake up in the morning and look out across the lough. The activities range from paddleboarding to standard sailing and from jet skis to canoes. Anyone who drives around our coastal areas will see people enjoying the lough in all seasons.

However, with all that fun must come safety, and we know how much we rely on the good men and women who volunteer on the lifeboats. The availability of those crews means that we can welcome families to the lough and know that there will be help if the worst happens. That offers great reassurance for me as the MP for the area, but also for those who want to mess about in the water. I think there is a song that goes along those lines. I probably can remember it very well. I can even sing it, but if I sing the rain comes so that would not be a good idea.

The fact of the matter is that the lifeboat service really should be recognised as an emergency service and funded accordingly. Whether we are talking about the coastline in Scotland, England, Wales or beautiful Northern Ireland, as people have less disposable income to give to charities, the need for Government to step up will increase. I am pleased to see the Minister in her place; I wish her well. In her reply, maybe she can indicate what the possibilities are to help lifeboats. There might be some law that prevents it, but she will clarify that when the time comes.

My last comment will be to once again thank every volunteer, past and present, who gave their time and talent to fundraise and co-ordinate fundraising events, every person who so generously gives and every volunteer who gives their time and puts their life on the line to carry out the rescues. There is nothing quite as dramatic as those RNLI lifeboat adverts that come on between the films on a Sunday afternoon. If we need a reason for supporting them, seeing the drama of the rescues that they do will convince people to do that. To them, I say: we could not do without you, and we respect you as we respect all those who serve our communities in emergencies.

Family Farming in Northern Ireland

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 28th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the impact of agricultural property relief and business property relief on family farming in Northern Ireland.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. I am very grateful for the opportunity to bring forward this debate on an issue that cuts right to the heart of rural Northern Ireland and indeed Britain.

The proposed changes to agricultural property relief and business property relief will have devastating consequences for family farms across our nation. Agriculture is not just another sector in our economy; for Northern Ireland it is our very foundation. It sustains our rural communities, feeds over 10 million people annually, underpins our agrifood industry and provides work for tens of thousands of families. I make no apology for repeating a comment that I have made previously, and that my grandfather tells me every Sunday at the dinner table: if the farmer is not doing well in this country, no one is.

In Northern Ireland we have over 26,000 farms. They form the backbone of our rural life—

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend my hon. Friend for that point. She is absolutely right to underline the impact on family farms of the Chancellor’s proposals. In tandem with decisions being made by the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Minister in Northern Ireland, they will leave many farmers feeling that their generational family farms have no future. My hon. Friend will probably have seen “Countryfile” on Sunday. It highlighted two things for farmers: first, the mental health impact and that there have been suicides; secondly, the generational loss of the farms. If farms are not working, they are not viable, do not produce the food and the impact is great. The Government really need to sit down, take account of where we are and change the decision.

[Carla Lockhart]

I thank my hon. Friend for his consistent voice on this issue. I will come to “Countryfile” later in my speech.

The vast majority of our farms in Northern Ireland are family run, often handed down proudly through several generations. The farm is not just a business: it is a home, a heritage and a legacy. That is why any policy that affects how farms are passed on to the next generation goes to the very core of who we are as rural people. For many families, the dream is simple: to see the next generation take over, work the same land and continue the proud tradition of stewardship. The reality of that dream is now under threat like never before.

Agricultural property relief has existed for a reason. It recognises that farming is asset-rich but cash-poor, or as we would say in Northern Ireland, “We are asset-rich but penny-poor.” A farm may be worth millions on paper, but that value is tied up in land, livestock, machinery, buildings and—most concerningly for many farmers—debt. Farmers spend money and they thrive in advancing. But for what—when they see what this Government are doing to them?

Stamp Duty Land Tax

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 28th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Kit Malthouse]

No, the people best positioned to decide where houses should go are local people. That is why, for many years, I have been a strong proponent of neighbourhood planning. It has been proven time and again that neighbourhood planning produces more houses—15% to 20% more—than other forms of planning, especially local plans. If we get the design right and put power in the hands of local people, they will very often make the right choices, not just for their community but for the next generation.

A point that the shadow Chancellor has made powerfully is that we should recognise that a gummed-up housing market, which is currently stagnating, suppresses the renovation and construction supply chain. When people move house, they invest in redecoration; they invest in extensions, put a new roof on the house, build on the side, and do all sorts of things to their new house that are good, valuable, productive economic activity. At the moment, we are missing out on that activity.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the right hon. Gentleman for what he is saying, and I commend the Opposition on bringing forward this debate. In Northern Ireland, house prices have risen by 7.7%, which is the highest in all the United Kingdom. What is happening in my constituency—I suspect other Members have had this—is that young people are coming up to me and saying, “I cannot get a mortgage.” They need help. I hope that the proposal brought forward by the Opposition can give that hope. The right hon. Gentleman refers to the aspiration, which I have as well, that every person wants to own their own house. This proposal would be a method of ensuring that young people have that opportunity.

[Kit Malthouse]

I understand the hon. Gentleman’s hope for the next generation, and I completely agree with him. As somebody with three children, I hope they get the same housing opportunities and economic opportunities as I did. Sadly, given how the housing market has gone and is going, it does not look as if that will be the case, but he neatly makes the point that I made in opening my speech. To get young people on the housing ladder, a subsidy scheme would see us come full circle. Instead, we should think again about how we can have a deregulated free market that functions for them and allows the houses to be built that can accommodate them. Taking tax off young people and then giving it back in the form of housing subsidy is nonsensical.

To return to my point on the supply chain, thousands of small builders around the country are desperate for this kind of work and are seeing the housing market stagnating and their work reducing. Worse than that, in areas of high property value, those who do have capital decide, instead of moving, to build down, up or out. We therefore get densification, particularly in areas such as central London, which often causes significant problems.

Moving on, this tax does not work very well for Government either. First, as Members will know, it is pro-cyclical and crashes when the Government need it most. During the 2007-08 crash, stamp duty receipts fell by 60%. We saw a surge in stamp duty receipts during the window a year or so ago, but since then, they have been falling significantly. The Chancellor, who is facing significant fiscal problems, will see that fall even further, so the tax does not work for Government on that basis.

Secondly, stamp duty is a bad tax because of its salience. Economists have this idea that taxes have a salience, which is how much people notice they are being taken. VAT has low salience, because we do not really notice it. It is in the prices that we pay. Income tax and pay-as-you-earn have low salience. Stamp duty is enormously noticeable at a moment when people are making a huge decision about their lives. They are trying to progress their families and wham, here come the Government saying, “We are going to have a slice of your wealth.”

Financial Inclusion

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Martin Rhodes]

I agree that we need to do more to encourage savings, but we also need to encourage the incomes that are required for people to make those savings.

The driving reason for this level of financial exclusion has been attributed to an increase in low or unstable incomes, lack of savings and life events such as loss of work or bereavement.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing this important debate. I am a firm advocate of local credit unions that provide access to affordable loans and help with learning how to save. Does he agree that financial inclusion must be available in small villages and towns through sound help and advice? Does he also agree that banks need to come back to the villages and stop the centralisation of services, which isolates people from the guidance they need?

[Martin Rhodes]

I agree that we need to look right across the board at the different ways in which people are excluded from financial services, including people living in smaller villages and towns. I also agree about the importance of credit unions to financial inclusion.

It has been reported that 41,500 people in Glasgow North are in financially vulnerable circumstances. That is 44% of the adult population, which is far higher than the national average of 38%. With financial exclusion increasing, the Government must take steps to mainstream inclusive policies and practices in our financial system, which is why I support the Government’s appointment of the Financial Inclusion Committee and the soon-to-be-published financial inclusion strategy.

Community Helipads: Rural Access

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 15th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mr Angus MacDonald (Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered access to community helipads in rural areas.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I am delighted to be speaking on an issue that impacts not just my constituents, but pretty well the whole of rural Britain.

I spoke in this Chamber earlier this year during the debate secured by my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) on coastguard helicopter services. At that time, I pointed out that search and rescue helicopters are an extremely valued facility; I think everybody who has had any dealings with them would respect the quality of people involved. I have personal gratitude to them, because my wife was going along a ridge and fell off and was scraped up by Arrochar mountain rescue team and flown to Glasgow hospital, where they fixed her up—which was good news, she tells me. In addition, my father was involved in the Glencoe mountain rescue team for the whole of my youth. He said the search and rescue helicopters were probably the biggest positive change for saving people’s lives in the mountains, so this is a very important debate.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing this debate. Representing a rural community, I, like him, understand how important this is. We are very blessed to have an air ambulance available for our communities in Strangford and Northern Ireland. It truly has been the difference between life and death for so many. However, there is a definite issue with safely landing and taking off. Does he agree that there must be access for that purpose alone? It is sometimes possible to land near where an accident takes place, but they must also be sure not to interfere with telephone lines or traffic, and safety must be paramount.

[Mr MacDonald]

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

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

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

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

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

Energy Profits Levy: North-east Scotland

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 14th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)]

I secured this debate because what is happening in north-east Scotland simply cannot go on. Hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs are being lost on a regular basis across our region from the world-class energy sector that we are so proud of, not least because of the energy profits levy. These are geologists, engineers, technicians and project managers—highly skilled workers who are nothing but of value to the UK—but they are also people with mortgages, people with families and people who have given decades to an industry that this Government are now destroying through deliberately punitive policies.

Offshore Energies UK warns that, largely because of the EPL and other Government policies on the North sea, almost 1,000 direct and indirect jobs will be lost every month. That is 1,000 livelihoods, 1,000 mortgages and 1,000 families facing uncertainty every single month. OEUK also projects that 42,000 jobs are at risk between now and 2030. Energy workers in north-east Scotland feel like they are on borrowed time. No one really celebrates when they manage to survive a round of job cuts, because they know it is likely just to be short-term relief, with more cuts coming soon.

The energy profits levy was introduced in 2022, at a time when oil and gas prices were spiking after Russia invaded Ukraine. At that time, Brent crude peaked at over $130 a barrel and averaged $99 a barrel in 2022. Similarly, in 2022, gas peaked at 640p a therm and averaged 165p a therm that year. Let us compare that with this year. In August 2025, Brent averaged $71 a barrel and gas 81p a therm. That is a 28% and a 51% drop on the 2022 averages, and oil this week is at a six-month low. The energy profits levy has ceased to be a windfall tax. The windfall has gone, and the prices have returned to normal levels. The Competition and Markets Authority found that in 2025, oil markets are now relatively stable, and exceptional circumstances seem to have receded.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Will the hon. Lady give way?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Mr Shannon on the north-east of Scotland.

[Jim Shannon]

Madam Deputy Speaker, I spoke to the hon. Lady beforehand to ensure that I was here to support her in what she is trying to achieve in north-east Scotland. It is very important that we add our support to her.

Does the hon. Lady agree that while investment in tidal energy has not produced the desired result of sustainable, reliable energy, the levy on energy profits has achieved a result that is absolutely undesirable and is seeing investment in our countries being moved to the USA and other regions with a more favourable approach? Does she also agree that the economic black hole cannot be filled by more levies but must be filled by investment in our businesses and creating future job security? I commend her.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 9th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[James Murray]

The hon. Member asks about an important matter. As a constituency MP, I have met families who have an interest in the fund and who are in the process of adoption themselves, so I know on a personal level from my constituency work how important it is. What the Department for Education was able to announce last week was important in confirming the extension of the fund, which will offer some certainty to the affected families. I will continue to work with colleagues in the DFE to ensure that we are doing all we can to support those families, who are playing such an important role for their children and for society.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for a very positive answer and for that commitment. What steps are being taken and what discussions have taken place to ensure that vulnerable young people in Northern Ireland can benefit fully from the better futures fund, particularly in the areas most affected by educational disadvantage?

[James Murray]

We want to ensure that the better futures fund is targeted where it is most needed and that the investment is spent in a way that really improves life chances, in particular for young people and children who face some of the biggest challenges ahead. I note what the hon. Gentleman says about the area he represents and the part of the UK he comes from; it is something we will consider as we develop the details of the fund.

Property Taxes

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Sir Mel Stride]

My right hon. Friend, as ever, is absolutely right. The reality, as we see in the bond yields at the moment, is that the markets have no confidence in the ability of this Government to get on top of spending. We saw the farce of a Government who came into office scrapping the £5 billion of welfare savings that were already baked into the OBR’s scorecard because we had brought them in, and attempting to bring forward their own reforms only for their Back Benchers to vote them down. My right hon. Friend is so right; this Government do not have the will or the plan to deal with spending, and that is at the heart of the reason why we will all be punished and pay the price of more taxes come the Budget in November.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the shadow Chancellor for bringing forward this subject for debate. He clearly shares my deep concern that I have, and that I think everyone in this Chamber should have, that the Government are considering a further tax on property, despite the fact that the Prime Minister committed to not imposing capital gains tax on residents of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Last year, it was the family inheritance tax; this year, those who own property—those who have scrimped and saved for their house, those who are middle class, those hard workers—have now become the latest target of Labour tax policy.

[Sir Mel Stride]

The hon. Gentleman is entirely right. Of course, if the Government have got into a situation where they are having to scrabble around and look at property taxes, as we are debating this afternoon, than really nothing is safe from the taxman under this Government.

Living Standards: East of England

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Clive Lewis]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention and for all his work in this area. Council homes are overwhelmingly the solution to this country’s housing problems. There is always space for private housing, for affordable housing and for housing associations, but it is council housing, built in a sustainable way, that will solve the housing crisis in this country. I agree with him that developers—not climate, nature or local democracy—are the block to building more houses here, and I am firm in making that point.

Public transport in my region is patchy at best. Broadband in rural Norfolk is slower than a tractor on a Sunday morning—people who live in Suffolk or Norfolk will know what I mean. Child poverty levels run at one in three in Norwich once housing costs are factored in and, although we are blessed with extraordinary landscapes, too many of our neighbours live in what I can only describe as nature deserts—no green space within walking distance, and no safe place for kids to play.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing the debate. He is right to underline the issue of low income; the quality of life for working families on low incomes is the worst that it has ever been. When I spoke to him beforehand, I referred to my constituency, and indeed all Northern Ireland, where I understand that the rates are the same as in his constituency: 16% of working-age adults are in relative poverty. It should never be the case that working people are in poverty. The Government need a strategy to address that issue, but they do not at present. Does the hon. Gentleman agree?

[Clive Lewis]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his contribution. I do not raise this in this speech, but I think that one of the key ways of lifting people out of poverty is by strengthening trade unions and their sectoral pay bargaining ability, which I do not think even this Government—my Government—are going to do. That is key, particularly in the areas of social care and many other low-paid sectors. It would ensure that people get decent pay and attract people into those areas. It would make a massive difference.

We face real and urgent challenges in the east of England. Now, the Government—my own party’s Government—tell us not to worry, because living standards are going to rise and we have a plan for growth. But what do we mean by that? In practice, it means looking overwhelmingly at one number: disposable income, or what is left jingling in our pockets at the end of the month. Useful, yes—but adequate? No.

Reducing the richness of life to something we can measure is like trying to paint a rainbow with a single grey crayon: we get the outline, but none of the colour, none of the joy, none of the lived reality. The Indian economist and philosopher Amartya Sen warned that dignity cannot be reduced to decimal points. Martha Nussbaum, a US philosopher and ethicist, reminds us that the question is not just what we earn, but what we are free to do and to be. Kate Raworth is also right: paper prosperity that trashes the planet leaves our children bankrupt.

When we are told that living standards are up because the averages look rosy, we should remember what Danny Dorling pointed out: an average can hide a multitude of sins. If Jeff Bezos walked into a Norwich pub, the average wealth in the room would shoot through the roof, but not a single person’s pint would get cheaper—and I doubt he would get to the bar ahead of anyone else, either.

Government Performance against Fiscal Rules

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Monday 7th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Darren Jones]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on being so successful. The amount of investment that he has secured for his constituency is clearly a testament to his ability to represent it. He is right to point to all those investments, because part of the Chancellor’s economic strategy is investing in the renewal of Britain to benefit not just his constituents, but all our constituents across the country.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Although I very much welcome the Government’s decision last week to roll back on proposed welfare changes, it has undoubtedly put considerable pressure on the fiscal rules. I have the greatest concern for the middle class, who get little help to raise their children, pay for their education or feed them other than child benefit, and who will feel the squeeze of a wage increase without an increase in the child benefit threshold. With respect to the Chief Secretary, and always conscious of the importance of looking after people who need help, may I ask how he will ensure that middle-class families are not squeezed further, which can only have the effect of them robbing Peter to pay Paul, thereby landing themselves in debt to both?

[Darren Jones]

Let me point to the fact that wages are now increasing faster than costs—for the first time in many years. He also invited me to comment on childcare provision, which the Government agree is important to families, whether middle-class or otherwise. We have extended school-based nurseries and breakfast clubs in schools, and have subsidised childcare in nurseries across the country to help working families get to work and be able to afford to do so.