Independent Lifeboats: Government Support

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Wednesday 29th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I am delighted to respond to this debate on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, and congratulate the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes) on securing it.

In coastal communities such as North Norfolk, independent lifeboats are not just a valued community asset but a vital part of our network of emergency response on the coast. North Norfolk is proudly home to two excellent independent lifeboat services in Mundesley and Sea Palling. Both have a long history of offshore rescues dating back to the early 1800s, but the current voluntary lifeboats date from the early 1970s. In both cases, villagers reached into their own pockets to support the establishment of an independent rescue service to protect locals and visitors along our coastline. Since then, they have served our communities loyally and saved countless lives.

It is not just coastal communities that benefit from the lifeboats: Mundesley lifeboat also supports floodwater rescues. It is a valuable service but, as with so much of the support for flooding, no additional funding is forthcoming to support that vital work. I hope the Minister will take that back to colleagues at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to think about further.

Independent lifeboats in Norfolk also keep us safe inshore. Just over the border, in the constituency of the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe), is the Hemsby independent lifeboat, which hosts the lifeboat Broads Marley, which serves inland rescues for those in distress on the Norfolk broads in my constituency and, no doubt, in that of the hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew). It is a valued service that ensures that everyone who comes to our precious national park and enjoys its waterways can do so safely. I put on the record my gracious thanks to the crew at Hemsby for all that they do in my area and across Norfolk.

Lifeboat services are valued by my Lib Dem colleagues across the country, from the Hope Cove lifeboat in Devon to the Anstruther RNLI base in North East Fife. The issues that affect lifeboat services matter to a huge range of communities. Challenges at sea do not discriminate, and all coastal communities rely on their support. However, independent lifeboats face a range of challenges in carrying out their vital role. Their independent nature means that they can suffer from a range of funding struggles and do not have the same sure footing as many RNLI bases. In tandem with the rising cost of fuel, maintenance, training and equipment, this creates a difficult environment for these groups to survive in.

That is why we in the Liberal Democrats are encouraging the Government to increase their support for independent lifeboat organisations through targeted, practical assistance that strengthens the work of these volunteer teams. The Government could take many different steps to provide such support. They could introduce a specific grant scheme for independent lifeboat stations, similar to those available for mountain rescue of community fire services. That could help to cover essential operational costs, such as fuel, insurance, crew training and vessel maintenance. Furthermore, they could expand VAT relief for essential rescue equipment—which the RNLI receives for fuel and safety gear—to other independent lifeboat organisations.

Affordable access to training and skills is also vital for independent lifeboats. That is why we want the Government to offer all volunteer lifeboat crews free or subsidised access to training, accredited by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, and to support volunteer crew members with access to maritime qualifications, which benefit both rescue operations and personal career growth. This upskilling would be hugely beneficial to the coastal communities where crew members live and work, and could create a wider economic boost, as well as keeping lifeboats staffed with the best possible experience and expertise. We are also keen for the Minister to see whether Government maritime agencies could share access to coastal radar data, weather tracking and communication systems, to enhance rescue co-ordination.

With the Budget coming up, I am sure the Chancellor will be pleased with any Minister who can provide her with a relatively cheap, impactful and universally popular policy, so here we go. I would like to share with her a reform that one of my local independent lifeboat services has encouraged: exempting charitable search and rescue vehicles from vehicle excise duty. Emergency vehicles are already exempt, but those that perform search and rescue for registered charities are not. Independent lifeboat groups may require large vehicles, such as Land Rovers or 4x4s, to pull their lifeboats in and out of the sea or transport them to other launch points. These vehicles attract a high tax, which adds hundreds or thousands to the groups’ expenses.

Modelling suggests that providing the charities with this tax break could cost the Exchequer as little as £500,000 a year, which would effectively be a direct cash injection back into the independent lifeboat charities, supporting their sustained existence and allowing them to carry out their important work. Will the Minister make a case for this tax break to the Treasury ahead of the Budget next month? It would be a hugely positive step and an important recognition of the work of our independent lifeboats.

There is no distinction in the urgency of emergencies that lifeboats respond to. When someone is in distress off our coast, every second counts, just as it would in responding to a heart attack or a house fire. The teams need the best vehicles for the job, and they should not be punished by a punitive tax regime that discourages them from owning them. As it stands, the original Chitty Chitty Bang Bang and the A-Team van are exempt from vehicle tax, but independent lifeboat vehicles are not. I hope that the Government can recognise that our lifeboat crews are a real-life A-team, and support them as such.

I will finish by acknowledging the incredible work of the independent lifeboats that support us across the country, particularly in North Norfolk. If I had endless time, I would be delighted to read into the record the names of all the crew members in my area who work so hard, but as I do not, I want to note my thanks to the coxswain of Mundesley lifeboat, Dave Francis; the coxswain of Sea Palling lifeboat, Mick Clarke; all the members of their hard-working teams; and all those who support their work. I hope the Minister will not only join me in thanking them for all they do, but go further by providing them with the hope that the Government will give them the support they need to continue their vital work in decades to come.

Living Standards: East of England

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd September 2025 Westminster Hall

[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.

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

The hon. Gentleman knows as well as I do how rural and isolated much of Norfolk can be. I represent the oldest constituency in the country, and I have been shocked by the living standards of some of my elderly residents in isolated communities, who simply feel that there is no help out there to give them the quality of life they deserve. They, too, are lost among averages. Does he agree that poverty in rural communities across the east of England is often more hidden than in metropolitan areas, and needs to receive a similar level of attention?

[Clive Lewis]

The hon. Gentleman is a champion of such issues in his constituency, and I agree: poverty is very often out of sight, out of mind. The dispersal of rural poverty makes it easier to hide, and harder for organisations to point out, but he does a very good job of doing so. His point was well made.

Crown Estate Bill [Lords]

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Report stage
Monday 24th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mrs Brackenridge]

I do agree with my hon. Friend, and based on the make-up of our constituencies, we come from a different angle from other Members who have raised important points in the debate. For us it is about jobs, apprenticeships and our local economy, so I back this Bill and I hope that the House will join me in doing so.

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

I want to speak to amendment 3, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings), which deals specifically with coastal erosion. My constituency plays host to a whole load of energy infrastructure that is vital to our security and our renewable transition. We have the Bacton energy hub, which is on track to make the exciting transformation from being a key asset in national gas to hydrogen production and carbon capture. It is one of my constituency’s largest employers, but it is also of national significance because of the role it plays in our energy ecosystem. It is therefore understandable that, a few years ago, a £20 million sandscaping scheme was welcomed. It gave protection not only to the energy terminal but to the villages of Bacton and Walcott that surround it. One local business owner spoke of how such a scheme means he no longer feels “trepidation” when he checks the weather forecast.

Just down the coast in the village of Happisburgh, the Norfolk Boreas and the Norfolk Vanguard wind farms make their landfall. Happisburgh has been at the frontline of the coastal erosion suffered in north Norfolk, with 40 homes already lost to the ever-encroaching North sea. This is a village battling the real-world impacts of climate change, and it is doing its bit to fight back by hosting renewable energy infrastructure, but it has had no additional protections. This double standard seems deeply unfair. It is in our interest to protect the renewable energy infrastructure we are building, but it is also in our interest to protect the communities that live alongside it.

People in Happisburgh have lived with the looming threat of coastal erosion and frequently feel left behind or forgotten about, and it seems as though this is just another example of this happening. I am sure that if there were an erosion risk of this scale in central London or the south-east, the Government would move heaven and earth to take action, but in North Norfolk, right at the eastern edge of our island nation, people feel despondent about the situation they are facing. Our amendment seeks to right this wrong. We believe that when these reforms to the Crown Estate allow for new renewable energy products, efforts must be made to secure the coastline where they make landfall. Renewables are our future, and we have to make sure that the communities that host key infrastructure have a future too.

I am aware that the Minister did not support this amendment in Committee. I am not expecting the recess to have led him to a Damascene conversion, but I hope that he can provide some reassurance today on how the Government will look at this double standard for energy products and what steps they will be taking to provide protection to villages such as Happisburgh that are doing all the right things but feel they do not get their fair share back. I would also be happy to welcome him and any of his Government colleagues to Happisburgh to see the situation for themselves. I honestly believe that bearing witness to the way that our coastline is being ravaged by climate change, meeting the people it affects and understanding what we are set to lose will spark anyone into supporting radical action to stop this coming to pass. I would be delighted if the Government could back our amendment today, but if they are unable to do so, I hope that the Minister’s team will be able to provide promises of progress for the residents of Happisburgh and all the other communities who live with the existential threat of coastal erosion.

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

I was on the Bill Committee and I have followed the Bill throughout, mainly because I represent Truro and Falmouth, which has huge potential to benefit from floating offshore wind, with Falmouth docks and our position in the Celtic sea. If the build-out in the Celtic sea is done quickly and done well, our young people will benefit from good, well-paid jobs in a strong local supply chain. I also want to mention the CBI report published today, which shows how the green economy has grown three times faster and has higher wages than the national average across the board. We in Falmouth could really do with some of that, so I welcome this Bill.

Inheritance Tax Relief: Farms

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Monday 10th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

I speak today on behalf of the 392 signatories from North Norfolk, and our wider community as a whole. A couple of weeks ago I had the pleasure of spending Saturday morning with farmers outside a supermarket in my constituency; many people who might not have initially been supportive of their cause really appreciated the opportunity to hear directly from farmers.

Historically, North Norfolk has relied heavily on agriculture for employment and economic prosperity. We still have a lot of agricultural employment, but the knock-on is also felt in other sectors. Farmers supply local businesses with high-quality, locally sourced produce. They are custodians of our natural environment and more and more are using their land for sustainable farming and natural flood management, to protect the wider community. Farming is a beating heart ever present at the core of our rural economy, but the changes proposed by the Government run a real risk of ripping that heart out altogether.

While our area is diversifying in a number of innovative and exciting ways, the simple fact is that our farmers will always be there to put food on the table. Keeping farming alive locally allows us to be part of the exciting progress that science and agriculture can make together. The Norwich Research Park, in the neighbouring constituency of the hon. Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough)—undertakes incredible agri-science and is very near to us, so family farms in Norfolk are the perfect test bed for latest in gene editing of crops, which can bring about higher yields, smaller carbon footprints and less need for pesticides.

This is not a debate about protecting exemptions for multimillionaires and tax dodgers. If the Government had proposals to truly tackle that issue, I would fully support them, and I am sure my local farmers would too. However, this proposal is hugely damaging for family farmers who, year on year and generation on generation, hope to stay in a business that has been made virtually unprofitable by years of Government failure. They are being dragged into a punitive tax by spiralling land costs that are out of their control.

If these were greedy individuals looking to duck tax, they would have left this tough industry many years ago. No one would take on a relentless job that involves hard, lonely labour in all weathers—a job with skyrocketing rates of suicide—just for a tax exemption. People do it because they value the family farm, the people they employ, the supply chains they support and the communities they have served for generations. I urge the Government to listen to farmers, listen to their communities and think again.

Christmas Adjournment

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

Happy Christmas, everyone. Patricia is a young, intelligent woman with a severe eating disorder. Despite the tireless work of professionals involved in her care, her mental health treatment needs are not being met, and her progress has stalled. The east of England provider collaborative, which is responsible for referrals to specialist eating disorder units—SEDUs—is intended to ensure co-ordinated care close to home, but in Patricia’s case, it has failed profoundly. Since becoming involved in July, I have observed a pattern of miscommunication, delays and systemic neglect. My attempts to engage with professionals at the Cambridge and Peterborough foundation trust, which provides local eating disorder services, were initially referred to lawyers, and the communications relationship between Patricia, her family, and care providers is all but broken. Meanwhile, there appeared to be no overall co-ordination of or plan for Patricia’s care.

This summer, Patricia stabilised medically during a long admission at Norfolk and Norwich hospital. She was promised an assessment for referral to a SEDU, but faced prolonged delays, only to be rejected for admission. She was devastated, yet resolved to continue to seek help. At the time, I accepted that it might simply be the case that Patricia was not medically stable, despite that being at odds with what her clinicians at the hospital were saying.

National NHS guidance requires

“coordinated care and efforts to reduce and prevent gaps during service transitions”,

yet Patricia’s transitions between services have been anything but co-ordinated. Crucially, she has been denied care based on her disability and mobility needs. In meeting with those involved in her care, I sought closer collaboration between acute and mental health trusts, a patient-centred care plan, a dedicated caseworker and the appointment of an external specialist. Instead, the response was a shared email inbox—hardly the co-ordinated expert oversight required.

Patricia’s eating disorder is not “treatment-resistant” or “untreatable”, as some have claimed; these terms lack empirical basis and perpetuate stigma. Yet Patricia has been judged for behaviours symptomatic of her condition —at one point, her care team removed her from a SEDU waiting list after she “confessed” to such behaviours. This stigmatising approach is unacceptable.

Patricia’s complex needs, including autism and pathological demand avoidance, require an integrated approach. Some of the things that I and others have advocated for her to receive have been denied; others are taking a very long time to materialise. I understand that external psychiatrists are no longer invited to the weekly meetings about her care. Instead, the same individuals who seem to have given up on her also advise the integrated care board, creating a troubling conflict of interest. The collaborative care model appears to have failed her, and concerns raised by other professionals have been ignored. That led me to request NHS England’s intervention. Disturbingly, I learned that Patricia’s court ruling, which prevents forced treatment, is being used to justify withholding all care unless she complies with rigid, unattainable demands. That ultimatum—our way or the highway—is unethical and counterproductive, particularly for someone with autism and PDA.

Further, Patricia’s care documentation reveals a fatalistic approach that misrepresents her condition, effectively ensuring rejection from SEDUs. I believe this is a systemic issue, reflecting the toxic ideology in certain parts of the eating disorder treatment system that some patients are untreatable and should not be treated. This ideology, detailed in a controversial article in the Royal College of Psychiatrists newsletter, has no basis in evidence, yet it appears to influence Patricia’s care. She is sadly not alone in facing that. Eating disorders have the highest mortality rate of any mental illness, yet Patricia has been systematically excluded from lifesaving treatment. NHS guidance has been repeatedly breached. CPFT rejects external opinions, and even offers of eating disorder specialist therapy support within the hospital setting. Patricia needs a stable, specialist placement, with integrated medical and mental health treatment, yet she remains trapped in a cycle designed, I believe, to have her fail.

Clinicians who find themselves believing that there is nothing that can or should be done in a case should step aside from any role in it, not preside over it. Differences of opinion are essential to developing areas of healthcare, but they should be supported by supervision and challenge, not be encampments of ideology. Characteristically, Patricia refuses to die. I urge the House to support direct NHS England commissioning of a SEDU placement for her, bypassing CPFT and its affiliates. Her case needs a proper second opinion, and we need support for settings that are being asked to consider admitting her. The case will then need very careful handling to ensure her consent and participation, but I believe that can be achieved.

Patricia’s experience is a stark reminder of the injustices faced by vulnerable individuals in a system that should protect them. Her story echoes other national scandals where institutional neglect has caused immense harm. I am speaking today because Patricia, her family and I are at our wits’ end. She has a huge amount of value to offer the world. She is at a desperate stage of her illness, yet she refuses to give up. Treatment is her only chance and we must not abandon her. She will continue her fight. Her family will continue to fight, and I will be by their side every step of the way, but the NHS must act urgently to hold its services accountable, ensure adherence to guidelines, and provide the care that Patricia and countless others deserve.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill

Steff Aquarone Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 3rd December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

Since the changes to national insurance were announced in the Budget, I have been contacted by constituents from a whole load of different sectors who have said how worried they are about the changes.

I have had deeply concerned GPs tell me about the impact the changes will have on their already overstretched budgets. Local dentists, of whom there are already far too few, have said the changes make it even harder for them to deliver treatments under the current NHS dental contract. Small business owners, who, as we have heard, are the backbone of much of the local economy, especially in North Norfolk, are worried the changes might push their slim profit margins into the red.

I want to raise the plight of a very important part of the North Norfolk business economy: our small cultural venues. I heard recently from Debbie, who runs the much-loved Sheringham Little Theatre, which might be little in name but is big in impact. Sheringham Little Theatre has nurtured the careers of dozens of young theatre performers, as well as technicians, writers and directors. It is a fantastic venue to put on productions, and was supported by one of North Norfolk’s most famous residents, the late and great John Hurt. As a registered charity, Sheringham Little Theatre also provides volunteering opportunities that are vital to reducing social isolation and supporting the local community. The changes in the Budget are a cause for serious concern to Debbie and her team. They have been able to secure fundraising in the past for exciting new projects and capital investment, but now they will need to raise thousands of pounds in donations just to keep the lights on.

Even in commercial venues, the pressure of a blanket increase in employer national insurance is threatening jobs and entire venues. Cromer pier is one of the most famous icons in North Norfolk, and is 2024’s pier of the year. Even with a commercial operator, who has brought it from loss making to net revenue generating for the local council, these changes risk shuttering Europe’s last end-of-pier theatre.

The lack of protection for arts and cultural venues is hugely demoralising for both those venues, and prevents them from making new investments and providing more opportunities locally. North Norfolk’s creative industry is incredibly exciting and growing at pace. The loss of venues and organisations such as the Little Theatre would be a hammer blow for a blossoming sector in my constituency. Our small cultural and arts venues contribute so much to North Norfolk, both through the joy they bring with their events and through their contribution to our local economy. They are crucial to our tourism industry as well.

Unlike those on the Conservative Benches, the Liberal Democrats are happy to share our alternative solutions when it comes to our concerns with the Budget. Rather than imposing a blanket pre-profit tax such as this, why do the Government not try a tech tax, tighten up on tax havens that are still Crown dependencies or disallow brand licensing as a deduction against profits by global corporations? Where we were once promised radical reform, we have ended up with hope-crushing, growth-stifling jobs taxes. It cannot be fair that organisations such as Sheringham Little Theatre are forced to struggle while billionaire tech barons such as Elon Musk and others continue to sit on great hoards of taxable revenue.

I hope the Government will listen to the Liberal Democrats’ proposals and go back to the drawing board to make their plans fairer for everyone. Unfortunately, the Bill punishes small businesses, burdens local authorities and adds even more strain to our health services. I will vote against it this evening.