Sale of Fireworks

Warinder Juss Excerpts

Monday 19th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Robbie Moore]

I absolutely agree. As the hon. Member says, the issue is about tougher licensing as well. I have seen fireworks for sale in pop-up shops in my own constituency of Keighley; it cannot be right that no regulation is associated with that. The pop-up shops could be below residential flats or units and there could be a risk to life if a hazard is associated with that environment. I take the hon. Member’s points on board; these are options that the Minister should explore.

The biggest problem with fireworks is enforcement. Until a firework is lit illegally, no crime has been committed. By the time the police spot and respond to a firework in the sky, those responsible have had plenty of time to flee the scene or to dispose of what little evidence there was to begin with. It is incredibly difficult to enforce laws that regulate firework use, so it is right that today’s petitions—and wider reform—should focus on wider supply regulations. If permits were required by individuals, as opposed to on an event-by-event basis, that added hurdle when purchasing fireworks would deter a larger number of people who are looking for a cheap thrill.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman is being generous with his time. On his last point, there has been no new legislation to deal with antisocial firework use for over two decades. Some 557 of my constituents signed these petitions. Since being elected I have dealt with 150 separate cases in my constituency of Wolverhampton West; constituents have raised a number of issues, including fireworks going off at midnight or at 6 o’clock in the morning. Does the hon. Member agree that, as a start, the least this Government could do is what the first petition asked for—reduce maximum noise levels from 120 dB to 90 dB? Decreasing the volume of fireworks is one step forward to take now.

[Robbie Moore]

I have spoken about this issue for the last six years, so if the Government take any action after today’s debate, I will welcome it. I want both the recommendations put forward by the two petitions, which have been signed by over 376,000 people, to be listened to, acted on and enforced.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lizzi Collinge]

I absolutely agree that the Government should look at limits on the decibel levels of fireworks and other measures. As the hon. Lady set out, the impact on veterans can be severe.

I was struck by the fact that even the people who are worst affected are not looking to ban fireworks. They understand that it is an enjoyable activity for many people; they just want some common sense around how they are used. One sensible place to start is with limits on decibels. It is entirely possible to have a lovely display, just slightly quieter.

I confess that I am more conflicted about the suggestion in the second petition to restrict fireworks to council-approved events. Of course, I understand the reasoning, but I also recognise that private celebrations bring a great deal of joy, so I am not convinced that removing them entirely is the right way forward. Instead, I would be more inclined to support a proposal that I have raised before and has been supported in comments from my constituents: limiting firework displays to a certain number of days a year, in line with key celebrations. At the moment, bonfire night feels like it stretches from mid-October all the way through to November, so in the same month as we celebrate remembrance, our veterans are being put under avoidable stress by constant unpredictable explosions.

[Warinder Juss]

I have spent many years celebrating with fireworks in my garden, as my hon. Friend mentioned, and I have had the pleasure of having firework displays with my children. However, does she agree that things have got a bit too far in that we are seeing fireworks throughout the year? Of course, we expect fireworks to go off during events such as bonfire night, Diwali and new year, but they are happening throughout the year and at all times of the day. Does she agree that it is time to limit the period during which fireworks can be used?

[Lizzi Collinge]

I absolutely agree. Time and again, people have told me that it is the unexpected nature of fireworks that causes the most harm. Just giving people the opportunity to plan and prepare for fireworks would be an enormous step forward, and we can achieve that by introducing set days for displays. For example, they could be on bonfire night and the nearest Saturday, and we could replicate that across the year for important events such as new year’s eve, Diwali and so on.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Pritchard. It seems to me that we have been discussing the possibility of restricting the use of fireworks to organised public events for many years and, while we talk, more people suffer life-changing injuries that could be avoided if we had tighter restrictions on the use of fireworks. In my constituency 869 people signed the petition to limit the sale of fireworks to those running local council-approved events. I agree with them. The easy availability of fireworks, which are marketed and sold in the same way as sweets or toys, belies the fact that they are in fact dangerous explosives.

On the beaches in my constituency it is the custom for the public to gather and let off fireworks on days such as bonfire night and new year’s eve. I am not sure whether people understand that they could be taking their lives into their own hands if they go on to the beach. I vividly remember running for cover with my children on Tate Hill beach in Whitby, as rockets were let off sideways. Tragically, last year two young men suffered life-changing injuries when fireworks were let off on the Scarborough foreshore near the lifeboat station. Sadly, incidents like those are frighteningly common. In 2025, there was a fourfold increase in firework-related burns to children compared with the previous year—the highest admittance rate in a decade. Most injuries are to the eyes, head or hands, resulting in loss of sight, life-changing injuries and psychological impact.

Some of my constituents will disagree with my call for fireworks to be restricted to organised displays; they will say I am spoiling their fun. I humbly disagree. The United Kingdom is out of step with other countries that have already put safety first. The Netherlands is the latest country to implement a nationwide ban on consumer fireworks, joining Germany, the Republic of Ireland, Australia and other countries that have significant restrictions or bans on public sales. Since that implementation, the number of firework-related injuries has been consistently lower.

The public are telling us that fireworks are no longer essential for celebrations. A recent poll by the Social Market Foundation found that 91% of the British public would be open to partial replacement of fireworks with alternatives such as drone or light shows. I recently attended a spectacular drone display at Scarborough castle to celebrate 400 years since the spa waters were discovered, and I am certain that not a single person watching will have felt short-changed.

Alongside the safety aspect, as we have heard, there is also the impact that the increasingly noisy fireworks have on vulnerable people and animals. Veterans have written to tell me that fireworks trigger their PTSD, and that the impact is even worse when they are set off randomly and on no particular special occasion. As an owner of a rescue dog and cat, I know how scared animals can be by fireworks. Research by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has shown that 66% of animals are negatively impacted.

[Warinder Juss]

My hon. Friend is making some excellent points. A constituent of mine has a dog that is terribly frightened whenever fireworks are going on. She is simply saying, “Can we not have some kind of a limit, where fireworks don’t go off after 11 pm, for example?”. She recalls an occasion where she had to get up at four o’clock in the morning to go to work, but could not because she had been disturbed by fireworks during the night. My hon. Friend makes an excellent point about public displays; as someone who has enjoyed having fireworks in the garden, I get much more joy now from going to a public display, being with other people and seeing much better fireworks than I would be able to at home. Does she agree that the problem is that we have no control whatsoever and that steps need to be taken now?

[Alison Hume]

My hon. Friend makes an important point, as have others in the debate, that we have passed the point where we used to watch fireworks safely in our back gardens. Fireworks are being let off all the time, every day—all day, sometimes—and I too have seen the terrible effect on animals, particularly dogs that, despite being sedated or whatever the vets recommend, are terrified out of their skins.

The time for talking is over. The evidence is clear. The current guidance and legislation need to be urgently reviewed. The maximum decibel level must be reduced immediately to 90 dB, and I call on the Government to review fireworks regulation in England and Wales urgently with a view to limiting the dangerous and antisocial use of fireworks in private and public spaces.

Fairtrade Certification

Warinder Juss Excerpts

Thursday 11th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) for securing the debate. I also thank the team at Fairtrade UK for their incredible work; it was a pleasure to attend their festive reception in Parliament yesterday afternoon.

I have been a supporter of Fairtrade for some time, inspired by some of the wonderful activists in my home city of Wolverhampton. I am very proud that recently the Wolverhampton City Fairtrade Partnership celebrated Wolverhampton’s 21st year as a Fairtrade city, showing the care and compassion of my constituents in Wolverhampton West and others in the city. I recently attended a tea party at the City of Wolverhampton College to celebrate Fairtrade fortnight, and it was a joy to see that the students had baked delicious cakes to promote the event, and to hear more about the work that Wolverhampton Fairtrade has been doing. I continue to work with the group on a regular basis to support the consumption of Fairtrade products in our city.

As we know, Fairtrade is much more than just a label: it is about justice, equality, humanity and sustainability. Fairtrade benefits the planet by helping the fight against climate change. Fairtrade certification enables farmers to respect human rights and tackle environmental risks, including by banning toxic pesticides, protecting biodiversity and encouraging sustainable organic farming practices that are free of hazardous waste and use water efficiently.

Shoppers in the UK know that when they purchase Fairtrade products they are making an ethical purchase, supporting fair, sustainable farming practices around the world. Most importantly, Fairtrade helps farmers across the globe who would otherwise live in deep poverty and very poor conditions to receive guaranteed minimum prices, with improved working conditions and a proper say in how decisions are made. On top of that, Fairtrade certification offers an additional financial premium that allows farmers to democratically decide how to invest the money in community development projects, such as schools, training and water treatment systems, thereby actively improving local communities and securing their livelihoods.

From my constituents who are choosing which teabags to buy, to major UK retailers and brands, to the more than 2 million farmers and workers across more than 70 countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America, Fairtrade ensures that human rights and environmental risks are taken seriously throughout the supply chain. From protecting the climate to ending child labour and supporting farming communities around the world, Fairtrade does it all, with Fairtrade community development premium funds being used to reinvest in education, healthcare, housing and environmental initiatives. As parliamentarians, we must continue to champion Fairtrade and the farmers and workers it supports, for the present and the future. Our planet and its people depend on it.

Employment Rights: Terminal Illness

Warinder Juss Excerpts

Wednesday 18th December 2024 Westminster Hall

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Edward. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron), whom I have known for a long time, for securing the debate.

I declare an interest: I am a member of the Justice Committee, a solicitor and a member of the GMB executive council. The GMB was instrumental in running the “Dying to Work” campaign, and the TUC subsequently adopted the charter. As of March 2024, over 1.5 million workers in the UK have employers who have committed to the charter, which requires employers to

“Review sick pay and sickness absence procedures and include a specific statement that they will not dismiss any person with a terminal diagnosis because of their condition”,

as well as take other steps to support the terminally ill employee at work.

There is very little employment law that deals with terminal illness, but we do have laws relating to disability discrimination and laws under which an employer has a duty to make reasonable adjustments for employees at work, and those laws will apply to employees who are terminally ill. The NHS defines a terminal illness as a health condition

“that you’ll most likely die from”.

Under the Equality Act 2010, people with disabilities are protected against discrimination at work. Disabilities are defined as any impairment that has a long-term and substantial adverse effect on the person’s ability to carry out “normal day-to-day activities”. Terminal illness will be classed as a disability, at least from the point where the illness begins to have an impact on the person’s ability to carry out day-to-day activities; so the Equality Act will give the employee the right not to be treated less favourably at work, and the right to reasonable adjustments to enable them to stay at work. People with cancer, HIV infection or multiple sclerosis will automatically be considered to have a disability, regardless of their symptoms. Correspondingly, anyone who is terminally ill should also be considered to have a disability regardless of their symptoms.

Under the Equality Act, the employer must make reasonable adjustments so that disabled employees, including those who are terminally ill, can continue in their job if they wish. The employer may, for example, change the employee’s working hours and working patterns, reduce their workload, reallocate duties, grant time off for treatment and medical appointments, and allow working from home. An employer must consider an employee’s terminal illness and symptoms when deciding what reasonable adjustments should be made to retain them in employment, rather than dismiss them in accordance with a sickness absence policy.

A lot of workers with a terminal diagnosis will decide that they want to continue working for as long as they can because they need the financial security, or to avoid losing any death in service benefits, as my hon. Friend the Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire mentioned, or because they find that work is a helpful distraction from their illness. Parliament recently gave Second Reading to a Bill that would give people a choice to die with dignity. Surely we can give those who are dying the dignity of work for as long as they need it.

Fireworks: Sale and Use

Warinder Juss Excerpts

Monday 9th December 2024 Westminster Hall

[Jessica Morden (Newport East) (Lab)]

I appreciate the opportunity to take part in what is obviously a wildly popular debate, and will therefore make a short contribution on behalf of the 181 constituents in Newport East who have signed the petitions as well as the 130-plus who have been in touch on social media. I apologise profusely that I cannot stay till the end of the debate as I will be chairing the parliamentary Labour party meeting, and I thank you, Sir Edward, for allowing me to do that.

Like others, I have been a regular contributor to fireworks debates over the years. This year I am very proud to be a supporter of the Fireworks Bill, a private Member’s Bill promoted by my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen). She does absolutely great work on the subject, and I wish her much success with her Bill.

I take part in these debates with a bit of a heavy heart, because from my youth, which was a while ago, I have very happy memories of bonfire night, as my late and very lovely dad would insist on fireworks in our back garden. It is fair to say he very much liked risk and hated organised fun of any kind, so we never went to displays. I therefore understand why people enjoy fireworks, and I acknowledge that many people use them responsibly and that there are enforcement measures for those who do not.

However, the days of a small tin of fireworks in the back garden are long gone, which is why constituents have a keen and passionate interest in this issue and regularly raise it with me. Fireworks are bigger, louder and more powerful than ever before and are easily available from unlicensed vendors. As the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) said, fireworks season now seems to last through autumn and winter. I agree with all the points that he made. This is distressing for animals. For constituents who are veterans with PTSD, it is difficult. The antisocial use of fireworks impacts on children and teenagers, and staff in A&E have to deal with fireworks-inflicted burns.

This is a seasonal debate, and we return to it every year. Constituents report having fireworks thrown at them at bus stops, animals being too traumatised to go out, the terrorising of livestock, fireworks being put through letterboxes, and more. As one constituent put it,

“a generation that can’t smoke but can buy mini bombs seems bizarre”.

I pay tribute to the partnership work of the council, the police and the fire service in Newport East on big nights such as firework night and new year’s eve. It is much appreciated in our communities.

The vast majority of the constituents who have been in touch with me in recent weeks want fireworks to be allowed only for organised displays. I recognise their concerns, and I fully support the efforts of my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North to restrict the sale of fireworks to licensed shops, lower the noise limit to 90 dB and remove the loudest fireworks—F2 and F3—from sale.

Finally, I want to give a big thanks to the police for their enforcement work. Let us make their lives and those of overstretched local authority officers easier by looking again at the legislation.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

Like my hon. Friend, I have grown up enjoying fireworks in the garden, especially with my children. Does she agree that the solution may be to reduce the noise levels from 120 dB to 90 dB, as is the case in New Zealand, to better enforce the rules relating to the times during which fireworks can be let off, and to increase the age limit for firework sales? That would enable people to enjoy a family firework occasion while ensuring safeguards are in place.

[Jessica Morden]

I thank my hon. Friend for that contribution. He proposes some sensible measures, which I am sure my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North will talk about.

It is time that we look again at the legislation so we do not keep returning to these debates year after year. People should not live in misery, so it is time we tackled this issue.