Craft Industry: Support

Lord Freyberg Excerpts

Thursday 12th June 2025 Grand Committee

Asked by

[Lord Freyberg]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to support the craft industry.

[Lord Freyberg (CB)]

My Lords, I am grateful for the opportunity to open this debate on the Government’s role in supporting the craft industry, a sector that combines our economy, heritage, identity and national well-being. In speaking today, I declare my interests as an artist member of DACS and a former craft practitioner, having studied ceramics at Camberwell College of Arts—a course that, regrettably, no longer exists, exemplifying the very crisis that I wish to address today.

I thank Patricia Lovett, who has worked tirelessly to raise the profile of craft in Parliament as the secretariat for the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Craft, for this and her briefing, and those from the Church of England and the UK jewellery, silverware and allied crafts sector. I thank the Minister for meeting with the noble Baroness, Lady Warwick, the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, and me earlier this year to gain a better understanding of the challenges facing the craft industry. Lastly, I extend my gratitude to all noble Lords participating in today’s debate; I eagerly await their contributions.

Craft is not an indulgence. It is profoundly human, combining creativity, skill and joy in ways that connect us to our heritage and each other. It is an economic force, a skills engine, a bridge to education, a custodian of cultural heritage and a foundation for innovation. Yet, despite all this, it remains routinely overlooked in national policy.

Let us begin with scale. In England alone, craft contributes £4.4 billion in gross value added, which is more than the fishing industry and on par with sectors such as electrical goods and sports, recreation and amusements. Approximately 210,000 people are employed in heritage crafts, which is more than in clothing manufacturing. However, reliable and up-to-date statistics remain difficult to obtain. I hope the Minister will commit to publishing new figures to help address the current lack of accurate data, as highlighted in How Do we Measure Craft?, published by the Crafts Council in 2023.

However, economic value tells only part of the story. Numerous creative industries and heritage sectors are rooted in traditional craft practices. Fields such as textiles, ceramics, jewellery, glass, leather, woodworking and metalworking—and a host of other overlooked and unsung heritage crafts that I wish I could single out individually today—demand skills that are not only materially productive but rich in cultural expression.

Craft is also deeply interwoven with wider policy goals. It improves health and well-being, supports education and skills, anchors regional identities, and drives tourism, exports and diplomacy. In short, it sits at the intersection of industrial strategy, education, heritage and soft power.

Yet this vital sector faces an existential threat. According to the latest Red List of Endangered Crafts, 165 crafts are at risk: 94 are endangered and 71 are critically endangered. These include scientific glassblowing—which is essential to advanced research—and the production of encaustic tiles, as found in the Peers’ Lobby.

We are witnessing the transition of traditional skills from viable to critically endangered status, often more swiftly than our support systems can respond. Most of these skills are passed down through person-to-person training. They are not widely taught in schools, nor can they be meaningfully learned online. Once lost, they are lost forever.

We see this decline in real time. Newark College has suspended its musical instruments degrees, the only full-time courses of their kind in the UK. In Stoke-on-Trent, three pottery firms have closed recently, including Moorcroft, founded in 1897. These are not isolated incidents; they reflect systemic fragility. Historical craft is a high-value, low-visibility sector, dominated by micro-businesses and sole traders, with limited structural support.

So what could the Government do to turn this around? First, we need urgently to review how government skills policy works for crafts. The current apprenticeship model is fundamentally unworkable for most craft businesses, which are often sole traders or firms with only one or two employees. They cannot meet the requirement for 10 employers to form a trailblazer group, nor can they afford to reduce productivity in order to train an apprentice while still paying their wages.

We welcome the new growth and skills levy, as well as the introduction of shorter and modular apprenticeships under Labour’s post-16 strategy, but we need these reforms to extend to the craft sector specifically, with direct funding for trainers, contributions to apprentice salaries and a reduction in administrative burdens. The new Skills England body has a clear remit to map skills pipelines across sectors. It must treat crafts as part of the creative economy, not an afterthought. Following yesterday’s spending review, how much of the new investment money for skills and training will be allocated to the crafts industry?

Secondly, we must reverse the collapse of full-time craft training. There are now only two single-honours ceramics degrees left. Courses in bookbinding, horology and instrument making are disappearing. The result is that only the independently wealthy can afford to train. We need targeted funding for FE and HE courses, particularly those teaching endangered skills. Many such courses currently fail to qualify for public funding. As with the performing arts, crafts education should not be confined to the privileged.

Thirdly, the Government should move swiftly to deliver on their obligations under the UNESCO convention on intangible cultural heritage, which the UK ratified in 2024. Traditional craftsmanship is one of its five domains. Ratifying states must identify, inventory and safeguard such practices, yet no safe-guarding timetable or funding has been published. If we delay too long, the damage will be irreversible; I hope that the Minister can provide an update.

Fourthly, crafts should be treated like other sectors of similar size. Fishing, for example, receives tax breaks worth up to £180 million and has a £27 million seafood scheme, as well as a new £360 million coastal growth fund. Craft, which contributes over five times the GVA of fishing, receives no comparable support. Would it be too much to ask to invest even 2% of that into preserving craft skills? A £10 million annual fund could transform training, stem skill loss, and generate lasting cultural and economic returns.

Fifthly, post-Brexit trade obstacles have significantly impacted makers. Couriers are unwilling to accept small shipments. Export guidance lacks consistency. Items are being held up at customs. Organisers in the EU are becoming more hesitant to accept entries from the UK. We urgently need a dedicated help desk—a single point of contact for craft micro-businesses to access accurate trade advice. Trade agreements ought to incorporate cultural exemptions for crafts, recognising their importance in both diplomacy and commerce.

Sixthly, crafts deserve a place in creative education. They are too often excluded from discussions about arts in schools, yet crafts improve cognition, motor skills, resilience and mental health. They also open vocational pathways for students who may not thrive academically. Let us ensure that creative education includes making and that schools have the resources to teach it. Again, I hope that the Minister can provide an update on how the spending review will support this.

Seventhly, crafts are not only a domestic concern but an export strength—a soft power asset and a driver of regional growth. Labour’s refreshed creative industries sector plan and its cultural global Britain strategy rightly position culture at the heart of our international offer. Crafts must be at the heart of that strategy. From Stoke-on-Trent ceramics to Sunderland glass, from Leicester’s rattan-weaving to Devon’s thatching, crafts are rooted in place. Small investments in such place-based industries boost local pride, employment and tourism; they also reinforce the UK’s international reputation for excellence and authenticity.

If this debate achieves anything, I hope that it establishes that craft is not marginal or an anachronism. It is a vital, economically significant, socially valuable part of our national fabric. We do not need huge sums to save the sector, but we need a strategy, data and targeted support, and we need them soon because, once these skills disappear, they will not return, and we will have lost not just livelihoods, but irreplaceable strands of our national story. Let us act before that happens.