Ben Goldsborough
MP for South Norfolk · Labour · United Kingdom
“It has spread across Europe and Asia, but thankfully has never been detected here in the UK. We have a window of opportunity to keep it that way, but only if we take border biosecurity seriously. If ASF got into this country, the consequences would be devastating for farmers and could cost the industry an estimated £100 million.”
“When witnesses from the Veterinary Medicines Directorate gave evidence to the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, I asked about the resilience of veterinary vaccine supply chains. Their evidence highlighted the risk posed by manufacturing disruption, changing demand and wider global shocks.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Around one in five pigs in the country are reared in my part of the world: Norfolk and Suffolk.”
“That leaves a significant stretch between the port and the inspection site. Will the Minister look again at whether that arrangement provides the level of biosecurity our farming sector deserves? I would suggest that it does not.”
“South Norfolk is one of the fastest growing constituencies in the United Kingdom, but that population growth is putting increased pressure on local GP services like the Humbleyard Practice.”
“There are 124 round-tower churches in Norfolk. In South Norfolk, we have St Peter’s church in Forncett and St Mary & St Walstan church in Bawburgh, to name just two. I have written to all my local churches to make them aware of the fund, but will my hon. Friend help to ensure that all rural churches are encouraged to apply?”
The complete record
Every one of 265 lines we hold for Ben Goldsborough, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 6.
“Many of our villages still experience patchy mobile signal and poor internet connectivity, and when card machines go down or wi-fi drops out, it is cash that keeps the local economy going. We must remember that rural Norfolk has one of the oldest populations in the country. Many residents prefer, or simply need, to manage their money in person. For them, travelling 20 or 30 miles to the nearest bank in Norwich is not going to work. That is why we need to be far more imaginative about how we can ensure that people have access to cash. One idea is to reimagine how we use our post offices and pubs. We all know that pubs are the hubs of our communities in village life, but too many are struggling to stay open.”
“That is not a service in decline, but a service in demand. It is absolutely clear that a new banking hub must be up and running before the bank branch closes next March. I am pleased to report that this has now been arranged and that the site is currently being finalised. I will continue to do everything within my power to ensure that Wymondham is not left behind. However, this issue is not limited to my largest town in South Norfolk. Loddon lost its Barclays bank in 2017, Long Stratton lost its Barclays bank in 2015, and if we are not careful, the story will be repeated across every rural constituency in the country. For rural communities such as mine, access to cash is not a matter of convenience; it is essential.”
“I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Blyth and Ashington (Ian Lavery) on securing the debate. South Norfolk is no stranger to the creeping erosion of our local banking infrastructure. In January this year, Lloyds bank announced that it will close its branch in Wymondham, which is the last high street bank in the town. That leaves only a single branch of the Nationwide building society to serve a growing population of over 17,000. The day after the closure was announced, on 30 January, I secured an emergency meeting with Lloyds bank and made it clear that, without alternative provision, the closure would have serious consequences, especially for small businesses, and the data bears this out. Lloyds bank’s own data shows that Wymondham cashpoint use increased by 17% between 2019 and 2024.”
“Prison has two purposes: rehabilitation and punishment. We need offenders to pay back to the communities and individuals they have harmed. I welcome my hon. Friend’s actions to punish offenders in the community. Can I give him a list of all the potholes that need filling in Norfolk?”
“In the last four years of the previous Conservative Government, the number of foreign national offenders increased. Now, call me old-fashioned, but I believe that non-UK citizens who commit crimes within the UK should not serve their sentences here. Today’s report makes good progress, and I welcome the Lord Chancellor’s tackling this issue urgently; it is what South Norfolk wants to see, and it will get capacity back in our prisons.”
“The wonderful Wymondham train station in my constituency will mark its 180th birthday in July, which is great news, but we cannot bring out the cake just yet because it is not fully accessible—the centre platform cannot be reached by all. May I call for a debate in Government time on how we can get Access for All funding for all the stations up and down the country that desperately it?”
“They contacted six emergency dentists but could not be seen by a single one. They were forced to go private, paying more than £1,000. That simply is not good enough in a modern society.”
“A crisis has unfolded in Norfolk, quietly but painfully; a crisis that we can afford to ignore no longer. It is the urgent and worsening state of NHS dentistry. Just 33.6% of adults in Norfolk have seen an NHS dentist over the past two years, well below the national average of 40%. For children the picture is even worse: only 42.7% have been seen, compared with 55% nationally. A&E visits due to dental problems are rising—in the east of England, there have been 152.6 visits per 100,000 people. That is worse than London, the south-east and the midlands. The only region doing worse than us is the south-west. We now have just 328 dentists in Norfolk and Waveney with any NHS activity, down from 423 in 2019. That is one dentist for every 3,177 people. One of my constituents recently rang 111 with a swollen face from an infected tooth.”
“My hon. Friend makes an extremely good point—as though he had read the next part of my speech. The Secretary of State has described our area as the Sahara of dental deserts. I agree, but we need more than just a diagnosis; we need solutions. I urge the Government to invest in a new dental school in the Edith Cavell medical campus in south Norfolk. We need to train dentists where they are needed and keep them there. I also encourage all dentists to complete the Government’s new survey before 16 June. Insight must lead to reform, starting with the broken NHS dental contract. Norfolk has been taken for granted for too long. Our county is ready for change, and I know that my hon. Friends will work together to deliver it, because only by working together can we unlock the dental revolution that we need across Norfolk.”
“The petition states: The petition of residents of the constituency of South Norfolk, Declares that the allotmenteers of Wymondham are saddened by the ending of the lease of the land by Anglian Water to Wymondham Town Council, which will result in the loss of allotment plots. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to encourage Anglian Water to uphold its corporate responsibilities to local people and areas, including the allotmenteers of Wymondham. And the petitioners remain, etc. [P003057]”
“I rise to present a petition concerning the future of allotments in Wymondham, signed by 391 residents of South Norfolk. These signatures reflect the strength of feeling in the town about the importance of these much-loved growing spaces. The decision by Anglian Water to end the lease of this land risks tearing up decades of community gardening, friendship and pride. It is clear from the response of local people that this is not just about soil and sheds—it is about the social fabric of Wymondham. It is vital that this issue is brought before the House, so that those in positions of power understand what this land means to those who tend it.”
“A sanitary and phytosanitary agreement—sensible, simple alignment—would remove unnecessary barriers and allow our horticulture sectors to flourish, too. Jobs, investment, international strength and, most importantly, economic growth in Norfolk and across the UK—that is what a closer pragmatic relationship with the EU can deliver. Let me say this, Sir Jeremy: people in Norfolk are not led by ideology. We are a practical bunch. If something works, great. If it does not—let’s fix it. This debate is not about going off at an ideological angle; it is about putting Britain first, taking control of our future once more and refusing to let the greatest nation on the planet be relegated to the status of a secondary power on the world stage.”
“Innovation does not happen in isolation, and a more pragmatic relationship with the EU would allow those centres to collaborate more freely, access essential data and funding streams, and unlock discoveries that could change our lives for the better. In Hethel, Lotus Cars is preparing for the next generation of electric vehicles. An opportunity is opening up, with European consumers losing faith in Tesla; with fewer trade barriers, Lotus can step into that gap and become a leader in the EV market across the continent. Our farmers, too, are watching closely. South Norfolk grows and rears some of the best British produce. With a market worth $2 trillion lying just over the channel, we should be exporting more of our food, not less.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I, too, thank my hon. Friend the Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Andrew Lewin) for securing this debate, in which he has spoken with passion and insight. I know that his constituents, and indeed many people across the country, care deeply about our future relationship with the European Union. In South Norfolk, this relationship is not abstract but tangible. It is in the labs of the Quadram Institute, the Sainsbury Laboratory, the Earlham Institute and the John Innes Centre—the world-leading institutions that make up Norwich Research Park and whose discoveries in genomics, health and crop science are shaping the future.”
“Fantastic local businesses, such as SugarBeat on the A140 in south Norfolk, are being hammered by drawn-out roadworks that have been signed off by Norfolk county council and carried out by EDF, with little care for the financial damage caused. Can we have a debate in Government time on holding utility companies to account when roadworks run riot?”
“The local highways remain unadopted, and the water and sewage infrastructure is still being managed by a private management company, because Anglian Water has not yet adopted it. Kevin and his neighbours are left paying for a system that does not work properly, and they are rightly asking: why? I want to put Kevin’s question directly to the Minister: why can developers not be made responsible for the upkeep of estates until full adoption by the relevant authorities is complete? This is not just a question of regulation but a matter of fairness. If we believe in levelling up and supporting our families in every part of the country, we must act to ensure that residents are treated with respect, and to give them the services they pay for. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response.”
“Secondly, there is no effective legislation compelling developers to hand over services and responsibilities in a timely and orderly fashion, resulting in confusion, inconsistency, and, in many cases, residents caught in limbo. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, residents on these estates are paying twice: once through council tax, and again through ever-increasing estate management fees. In return, they often receive a poorer level of service than their neighbours who do not live on managed estates. I recently sat down with Kevin, a constituent who lives on a Persimmon estate in Wymondham. Like many others, Kevin’s experience has been frustrating and, frankly, unacceptable. Some services on his estate have been adopted; others have not.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I thank the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for securing this important debate. This issue comes up time and again in my postbag, particularly from residents in Wymondham town in South Norfolk. My constituents have raised three clear and pressing concerns, which I hope the Minister will be able to address in his closing remarks. First, there is a glaring lack of accountability and transparency when it comes to estate management companies. Residents are often left with no clear route to challenge fees or demand better services. At a time when every penny counts, we cannot allow these companies to make up charges on a whim and profiteer at the expense of hard-working families.”
“The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to clean up British waterways, call upon Anglian Water to uphold the highest possible water quality levels, and for the Environment Agency to provide residents with the information they need so they can enjoy the River Yare all year round. And the petitioners remain, etc. [P003056]”
“I rise to present a petition about the water quality on the River Yare, and I hope the Government will take note of the 254 residents who have signed it. The signatures were gathered by residents of Bawburgh, who worked hard to collect support from nearly every household in one of my picturesque South Norfolk villages. This demonstrates the strength of feeling about the risks to both people and wildlife when our waterways are not properly protected. The petition states: The petition of residents of the constituency of South Norfolk, Declares that the water quality on the River Yare is deeply concerning, putting wildlife and people at risk.”
“The housing crisis is an issue in not just our city centres but our rural communities. A new town would be excellent for our area of South Norfolk. It would help tackle our local housing crisis and ensure that we could deliver affordable housing for local people, where they need it.”
“South Norfolk is proudly home to Lotus Cars. This morning, I had a conversation with the management team, who welcomed the announcement. In our long-term plan for the car manufacturing industry, what action will the Government be taking for UK-based original equipment manufacturers to ensure that we have a good plan for the EV transition so that we are competitive in future markets?”
“The juridification of law should worry us all, and we should make sure that primacy remains with this House; the Lord Chancellor has taken an important step towards that today. What is worrying is that for 14 years, no action was taken by the Conservative party. Does my right hon. Friend believe that that was because of incompetence or just a lack of understanding of what it meant for the country?”
“Norfolk’s economy, to fire on all cylinders, needs a decent rural road network. The Thickthorn junction in my constituency is outdated and urgently needs upgrading to support growth and unlock new homes. Will the Minister back the project and visit to see at first hand why the Government should put Norfolk at the heart of our investment plans?”
“As the Member of Parliament for the rural constituency of South Norfolk, which is formed of a patchwork quilt of farms, I am honoured to lead this debate and, in doing so, to give a voice to the farmers in my constituency who have contacted me to share their thoughts about the planned changes to inheritance tax on agricultural businesses.”
“The petitioners argue that “changing inheritance tax relief for agricultural land will devastate farms nationwide, forcing families to sell land and assets just to stay on their property.” I put on the record my thanks to the diligent staff of the Petitions Committee who have secured for me, as a representative of the petitioners, meetings with the National Farmers Union, the Country Land and Business Association, the Tax Policy Associates, the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Rural Accountancy Group.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered e-petition 700138 relating to Inheritance Tax relief for working farms. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Edward. To date, the petition in question has received just shy of 150,000 signatures, which is a mark of the strength of feeling that exists about the proposed policy change.”
“Today is a day for calm, thoughtful debate on behalf of the petitioners, and I welcome all Members’ contributions in that spirit. I suggest that the endgame—a more acceptable policy for farmers—will not be achieved by bashing the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Treasury or the Minister, or by simply repeating the well-worn arguments we have heard over the past few months. Let this debate be a reflection of what this House does best, which is to consider a complex problem from all sides and seek to offer potential solutions to the Government.”
“I want to touch on three key areas that I have discussed with the NFU, the CLA and others: first, the feeling of many farmers about the planned policy changes; secondly, the statistics that underpin the debate; and thirdly, proposals put forward by petitioners, stakeholders and experts that it is important for the Minister to hear and respond to based on the Government’s current thinking. I will aim to cover those topics on behalf of petitioners without being sensationalist. After all, a lot of emotion and politics has been attached to this debate so far, and understandably so. Nonetheless, that has arguably been done at times to obscure the rational arguments that many farmers, MPs and organisations have been making, some of which accept that agricultural property relief is likely to change but advocate for more graduated approaches.”
“No matter what our opinions on the proposed policy changes, this issue has created public engagement with politics from the countryside that has not been seen in over 20 years. That is why this debate is both needed and important to demonstrate to farmers that, by peacefully engaging with Parliament, their voices can be heard. They have been effective in successfully shedding light on the daily challenges that face this fundamental sector. I thank them for that and encourage them to continue to advocate positively for rural Britain.”
“I thank the right hon. Member for his intervention after one minute and 26 seconds. I will try to get through my speech so that he can hear what I am about to say. As I was saying, I want to give a voice to the farmers in my constituency who have contacted me to share their thoughts about the planned changes to inheritance tax on agricultural businesses. It is their views, not mine, that I will focus on today. Not many petitions submitted to the Petitions Committee can demonstrate not just a willingness to engage in online activism but real-world engagement with Parliament. Campaigns by the NFU, the CLA and the Campaign to Protect Rural England have been effective in drawing attention to petitioners’ concerns, as has the “Stop the family farm tax” campaign, which has placed banners across many constituencies, including mine.”
“Today, I have had the opportunity to do that as a member of the Petitions Committee, and I welcome the opportunity to lay out the arguments I have heard over the past few weeks in preparation for this debate.”
“I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention; I will cover that later in my speech. Since being elected as the MP for South Norfolk, I have made a conscious choice to sit around as many farmhouse tables as humanly possible. It has been clear to me that South Norfolk needed politics to be done differently and, instead of being on broadcast mode, I have done all I can to listen, engage and try to deliver for all constituents in my little slice of Norfolk. I know that many of my colleagues on the Government Benches have done exactly the same. Not all conversations have been smooth but, as I said to my recent meeting with the NFU’s Norwich and Loddon branch, I will never shirk away from my responsibility to be their voice in Parliament and to raise their views with Ministers.”
“There is significant work for the Government to do to ensure that farms up and down the UK become more profitable during this Parliament, and I know the Minister is working hard on that.”
“Friend the Minister will address those feelings in the sensitive manner required. There can be no doubt that the arguments that land values are artificially high due to APR have credence. It is also undeniably true that we see non-farmers buying land for tax-efficiency reasons. Neither of those trends are positive but, to be clear, that does not mean that farmers are wrong when they raise concerns about paying a large one-off inheritance tax bill with anything other than the land they need to keep their heads above water, even if the bill is spread over 10 years. The proposed policy change has arguably pointed to a fundamental issue for agriculture, which is the annual profitability of British farms.”
“Farming is who we are, it’s in our blood, it’s all we want to do.” And another farmer, Tim, requested that I share this: “I have spent my entire working life trying to build this farm up and have added about 200 acres in my time. I see myself as a custodian of the land which I know like the back of my hand and I feel responsible for it…to have to sell would be devastating and would go against all that I have worked for.” Will, Robert and Tim all fear the significant consequences of the proposed APR changes on smaller family farmers, and I believe that their views are shared by many farmers who have historically operated under a 100% agricultural property relief system. There is no getting away from their genuine concerns and I know that, in his response, my hon.”
“I am about to share the testimonies of my local farmers in South Norfolk. All too often as politicians we are keen to take the limelight for ourselves instead of listening to those on the ground who want us to put forward their opinions, which is what I am about to do. One of my local farmers, Will, asked me to share his words: “The government’s decision to make major changes to APR and BPR”— business property relief— “will spell the end for many family farms. Before this announcement, agriculture was already going through a difficult period and for many farmers, this news has left them without hope.” Another farmer, Robert, wished for me to say: “We are trapped with no way to mitigate against the effects of this cruel tax.”
“The NFU estimates that 75% of commercial family farms will exceed the £1 million cap, which of course can rise to £3 million under certain conditions. Petitioners and local farmers regularly remind me that not every farmer is married or lives in a farmhouse in their own name. By contrast, the Treasury projects that around only 500 estates will be affected each year, based on historical claims. The IFS and the CLA both independently acknowledged in discussions with me that it is hard to project revenue or impact because behavioural changes are extremely hard to account for. It is clear, however, that the behavioural changes required by farmers will be enormous.”
“The most recent data shows that the top 7% of inheritance tax relief claims accounts for 40% of the total cost of agricultural property relief—that is a value of £219 million. The top 2%—just 37 claims—accounted for 22% of the total cost of the relief and was worth £119 million. This is factual data, and in this context the Government’s ambition for implementing this policy is sound: to end the system by which the very wealthiest in this country can avoid huge sums of inheritance tax by buying up land. The petitioners argue that the proposed policy changes will not achieve that ambition because not just the wealthiest landowners will be impacted. The CLA estimates that capping agricultural property relief at £1 million could impact 70,000 UK farms.”
“This debate has created a space in which we can talk about other issues that affect farms. The hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson) and I had an amazing debate on biosecurity in the UK, and there was cross-party consensus on many issues. There are also the issues with the sustainable farming initiative, payments through the basic payment schemes and the future of the environmental land management schemes. There is so much we need to do, including through trade deals. I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. I have touched on some of our farmers’ concerns, but facts and figures are also important. I apologise in advance, but the next bit of my speech may be a bit dry.”
“It should be acknowledged that all individuals across the UK are subject to rules that encourage gifting in advance of death. Farmers look likely to enter this world. It is true that farmers have held on to assets for longer than the average person because of APR, and the habit is unlikely to continue.”
“I will continue for a little while. There is a deep uncertainty among farmers about what the changes will mean for them. Uncertainty is bad for business and it is bad for farmers’ mental health, so I encourage the Government to offer as much proactive engagement and clarity to farmers as possible, including in their response to this debate. Another primary reason why farmers are so concerned is that they already face a challenge in keeping their businesses profitable. The CLA modelled a typical 350-acre arable farm. They told me that even if they spread the cost over 10 years, the farmer would be paying 100% of their annual profits for each of those 10 years to cover the proposed inheritance tax bill. That is a decade without profit.”
“One such alternative is a shortened taper rate for older farmers. Under that proposal, a farmer aged 70, for example, would be given two to three years to hand over their property with a 33% or 50% taper rate after one year. Farmers in my constituency would welcome the Minister’s thoughts on that proposal, as it was raised with me at a recent meeting I had with the NFU eastern team. There are, of course, various ways of tweaking such approach by age or taper time but, according to farmers, movement on that front would give those who have worked the longest under the existing APR rules the ability to arrange their affairs more quickly.”
“I am sorry but I have taken a lot of interventions and want to move on to the next part of my speech. I will now touch on solutions. The petition is clear that it seeks the scrapping of the policy. I will leave it for the Minister to respond with the official position; suffice it to say that all Members in this debate can agree that land banking for inheritance tax purposes is wrong, and that land values are prohibitively expensive for many farms to be able to expand and, even more so, for new farmers looking to enter the industry. Many farmers would like to see those things change over the coming years. Farmers have told me that if the policy is not scrapped altogether, alternatives could be considered to give the sector more stability at the same time as helping the Government to achieve their ambition of a thriving rural economy.”
“To reply to the right hon. Gentleman, I said at the start of my speech that the problem is that the issue has been turned into a political football, and that undermines our ability to speak in clear-minded ways about options and opportunities. It is really sad that across from me is a shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Epping Forest, who has worked very hard on this issue, and with whom I have worked cross-party, but the shadow Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins), does not want to work in a manner that could get the best outcome for our farmers.”
“I hope I have set out the options on the table in respect of which those outside the Chamber would like to hear a response from the Government about what action will be taken.”
“There is one other option that it is important to consider before I finish. Mr Neidle, a tax specialist, recently said that the Government should consider a clawback system, potentially raising the threshold and looking at repayment. My job today has been to represent the views of the 150,000 people who signed the petition and, by pulling together the various options that people would like to see, I believe I have done so. I thank friends from all political parties around the Chamber for engaging and showing interest in this issue. It is important that we all stand up for our communities, and I thank everyone for doing that. I thank the Minister for listening to my contribution and hope he takes it in the spirit of friendship with which it was meant.”
“Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart) may regard my style as vanilla, I say to him in jest that vanilla is the favourite flavour of ice cream in the United Kingdom, so I will take that as a win. Question put, That this House has considered e-petition 700138 relating to Inheritance Tax relief for working farms. The Chair’s opinion as to the decision of the Question was challenged. Question not decided (Standing Order No. 10(13)).”
“Time is short. The tradition is that I would normally thank every individual who has spoken, but there is not enough time for that. I thank everyone for the wide engagement across all political parties in Parliament, and I thank everyone for trying to take this debate forward in a better sense, with honesty, openness and transparency. I also thank colleagues in the NFU. Today, I hosted an event in Parliament, and I know they have been sitting patiently not only at the back of the Chamber but outside, listening to the words that we say, because the words that we say in this Chamber carry a huge amount of weight. Going forward, these conversations will continue in the back rooms and in the corridors, to make sure that our farmers’ voices are heard and that we do not use events like this for grandstanding. As much as the right hon.”
“And the petitioners remain, etc.” Following is the full text of the petition: [ The petition of residents of the constituency of South Norfolk , Declares that the potential for a future gravel pit near Crab Apple Lane in Haddiscoe is a serious concern to residents, that an application for a gravel pit in the same location has previously been rejected due to concerns about harm to Grade 1 listed buildings and the impact of increased noise, dust and traffic, and that these concerns remain . The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to ensure that planning and mineral strategies consider issues such as air pollution and local opinion . And the petitioners remain, etc. ] [P003033]”