Mr Peter Bedford
MP for Mid Leicestershire · Conservative · United Kingdom
“It did not sound as though the Minister could commit to improving outcomes for pensioners. That is no surprise given this Government’s record: they cut the winter fuel payments, undermined incentives to save into pensions through the salary sacrifice scheme, and dragged pensions into the scope of inheritance tax.”
House of Commons12 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thirdly, before this review began, we were told that spending would not rise beyond existing projections, yet those projections already build in £43 billion of PIP spending by 2030. Does the Minister seriously believe that this amounts to meaningful reform?”
House of Commons9 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government have now had two years, one abandoned Bill and two reviews, but they have not delivered a single lasting reform. The official Opposition’s position is clear. We would restore face-to-face assessments as the default, because decisions of this consequence should not be made down the phone.”
House of Commons9 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for the advance copy of his statement. I put on record my thanks to the 38,000 people and organisations who took part and responded to the call for evidence. Let us be honest about how we got here. This review was not born out of principle; it was born out of panic.”
House of Commons9 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“First, after two years of dither and delay, the Government have finally accepted what we have been saying all along: the welfare system is in urgent need of reform. Ministers boast about consulting nearly 40,000 people, yet they appear to have ignored the most important stakeholder of all—the British taxpayer.”
House of Commons9 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Meanwhile, the welfare bill keeps rising. Spending on PIP alone is forecast to reach £43 billion a year by the end of this decade. Every month of drift is paid for by working people, and every month of uncertainty is endured by nearly 4 million claimants. The Opposition accept that the system needs reforming.”
House of Commons9 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
386 held · 379 searchable for Mr Peter Bedford. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 8.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“We park it away and prioritise more immediate, palatable subjects, but it impacts members of our communities day in, day out— from terminal diagnoses to medical treatment and, ultimately, their final days. This really matters to me. In my maiden speech, I pledged to campaign for people to have greater control in their final days and to afford those with terminal diagnoses the right to end their lives in dignity. This is not an argument against palliative care—some wonderful Macmillan nurses made my nan’s final months as comfortable as possible, and I absolutely agree with the many Members who have raised the issue today that we need to do more to support our palliative care sector—but good palliative care and a dignified end of life are not mutually exclusive. Nor do I seek to control those who have strong religious beliefs.”
House of Commons29 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is a humbling subject to speak about. I put on the record my thanks to the hon. Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) for bringing this important issue before the House. I have witnessed at first hand the cruelty that a terminal diagnosis brings. As the son of a single mother, my grandparents were like second parents to me. Each struggled with their own incurable cancer diagnosis. At Christmas dinner in 2019, my nan, who could no longer eat and was clearly in a great deal of pain, turned to me and said she was “ready to go”. “It’s time now,” she added. That night, I reflected on how, as a society, we shy away from discussing death.”
House of Commons29 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I urge those Members who support the principle of this Bill, but who are concerned about the specifics of the safeguards, to support it on Second Reading. Further debate can be had in Committee, if hon. Members feel that changes are required. This Bill provides the choice to shorten death, which is a right that an empathetic and considerate society should afford its citizens.”
House of Commons29 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am not giving way. These details are vital, but so is our humanity. Being with my nan in the warmth of her home, as she was surrounded by her loving family after months of excruciating pain and no hope, I knew there and then that she should be able to choose her time to say goodbye to her family. Like so many others, she had had enough. An understanding and compassionate society should not stand in the way of her right to choose. Members can see the profound impact this has had on me and my belief in the importance of end of life care and choice. It has enabled me to understand a crucial distinction at the heart of this emotive debate. This is not about shortening life; it is about shortening death.”
House of Commons29 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the hon. Member agree that the issue goes beyond religious freedom into other equality matters such as women’s rights and LGBT rights, which go hand in hand?”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“How can it be fair that borough, district and parish councils are able to democratically pass local plans, but adjacent boroughs can undermine them by allowing development on the edge of their boundaries? I have seen many such examples in Mid Leicestershire. In Markfield, the challenges posed by cross-boundary planning applications have been raised with me many times by Councillors Claire Harris and Deborah Taylor, and local activist Dave Hyde, who lobby me regularly on the frustrations of cross-boundary anomalies.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is clear to me, and to many of my constituents, that some of the councils are purposefully granting applications on the edge of their boundaries, which has a disproportionate impact on the neighbouring council. In essence, they are taking all of the benefits but none of the negatives. I have secured the debate not because I am a nimby, but because I want to see a more collaborative approach from local planning authorities. As a Conservative MP, I fully support the notion of a property-owning democracy, particularly for those from the next generation, who find it increasingly difficult to get on the property ladder. However, the free-for-all approach offered by the current system is harming many of the beautiful villages in my Mid Leicestershire constituency.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, as I am a serving councillor in Leicestershire. I am grateful for this opportunity to raise the challenges posed by cross-boundary planning applications, and I thank Barrie Gannon, a Markfield parish councillor who has campaigned for changes in this area. My constituency is unique in many ways, but most pertinently to this debate, it is unique because it straddles three council boundaries: Blaby district council, Charnwood borough council, and Hinckley and Bosworth borough council. Generally, these councils work constructively alongside each other and with Leicestershire county council. However, one area of tension surrounds development, collaboration on local plans, and housing allocations within each council area.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Another example is in Glenfield village, in my constituency, which sits in Blaby district council, adjacent to Leicester city council. Steve Walters, who heads a local action group, has raised the issue that the city council plans to build several hundred homes on the edge of Glenfield village, but because the village does not sit within the city council boundary, it will see all the detriment of that development but have very little input in the decision-making process. Indeed, Steve has campaigned many times against the urban sprawl of the city affecting villages such as Glenfield. He is working constructively with me and local councillors to try to get progress on the issue.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. I will go on to address some of those points, particularly in relation to the use of infrastructure. Markfield village sits in the local planning area of Hinckley and Bosworth borough council, but under the current framework, Markfield parish council and Hinckley and Bosworth borough council have very little say or influence over such decisions, as they are made in the adjacent Charnwood borough. It is obvious that the new Markfield residents will use services in Hinckley and Bosworth, Markfield and the surrounding areas, but those areas will see very little benefit, because those benefits will go to other villages. Worst of all, such developments are going ahead without constructive or binding input from the local parish council or the adjacent borough council.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I encourage the Government to listen to the debate and consider bringing about the changes and proposals that I have outlined.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“How can spending all those allocations for a development on the edge of Markfield, to the benefit of Loughborough and Barrow, be in the interest of Markfield residents, who sit in a different borough? That undermines local buy-in to the planning process. Instead, there should be a more practical approach whereby section 106 agreements go to the authority where the services are actually being used. Another anomaly of cross-boundary development is the distribution of council tax precepts, with the new residents in Markfield, for example, paying into Charnwood borough council rather than their own. I am not a nimby. I called this debate to raise the issue posed by cross-boundary planning applications. I believe there should be a collaborative, holistic approach, as mentioned by other hon. Members.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No thought is given to that. Section 106 agreements and community infrastructure levy contributions are paid by developers to local authorities to mitigate the impact of specific developments. They are well-intended negotiated agreements that force developers to give something back to the community, whether that be funding for infrastructure, improvements or green spaces. However, they fall short in cross-boundary considerations, as we have seen in the examples I have given from Markfield and Glenfield. Charnwood borough council has made it explicitly clear that the section 106 moneys for the developments along the boundary of Hinckley and Bosworth would go to its own borough.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That can be done by allowing adjacent borough and district councils to have a say in housing development policies through their various local plans, particularly where that will have an impact on the neighbouring authority. There should also be an ability for residents in adjacent boroughs to view and comment on plans in other local planning authority areas. Furthermore, the increased arbitrary housing targets for each borough council area simply do not take into consideration the impact of the adjacent targets. There is surely a better method for developing sustainable housing county-wide, rather than local authorities parking houses next to their own front lawn. Finally, and probably most importantly, under the current regime there is no requirement for financial compensation for local authorities that are adversely impacted.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In truth, the reduction is why the decision to build houses on the edge of Glenfield leaves such a sour taste in the mouths of local residents, particularly in Glenfield and Blaby district. What does it look like in context? The city council has been asked to produce fewer houses, whereas rural areas, such as Blaby and Hinckley and Bosworth, have been asked to dramatically increase their target, by 69% and 59%, respectively. Unfortunately, the planning reforms do not really take into account the cross-boundary implications, so what should we do instead? The Government should foster a co-operative relationship from the top down. Our local authorities should be encouraged to work alongside one another to prevent situations such as those I have described.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That was seen by the Government’s plans to reduce housing targets for cities by an incredible 35% in the NPPF. In the village of Ratby in my constituency, predatory developers such as Lagan Homes are taking advantage of the current situation, forging ahead with proposals to bulldoze over The Burroughs, despite a staggering 900 households in that village writing to the borough council to oppose that ecological vandalism. I am sure Leicester city council was jumping for joy at the news that it would have to build 31% fewer homes by 2030, but that meant rural areas such as mine and my residents’ would have to see additional housing, as it is pushed further and further out.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman. He gives an example in his constituency, but I have seen the same in Leicestershire and, from speaking to other hon. Members, I know there are similar examples in other constituencies. So where are we heading? We have a Government that are steadfast in their plan to concrete over our green and pleasant land, especially in rural constituencies such as mine. In July, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government said that she believed the national planning policy framework “offers extra stability to local authorities.” Is that really the case? The Government’s approach is to alleviate the pressure on housing in UK cities and force additional housing on rural areas, without providing sufficient support to the communities that will impact.”
House of Commons28 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A report published today shows that 60,000 hours are taken up each year investigating non-crime hate incidents. Does the Minister agree that confidence in the police could be restored if they prioritised their time and resources to investigate actual crime rather than hurt feelings?”
House of Commons25 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is no wonder that those bodies are moving away from that type of scheme towards academy-based training in-house, in their own companies and organisations. What should we be doing instead? Much concern has recently been expressed, particularly by Opposition Members, about changes to national insurance contributions. I do not see those changes helping the situation. I believe we should be encouraging employers to take on more employees, including by the apprenticeship route, so that when they finish their apprenticeships they can stay within those organisations. Recently in my constituency, a number of small and medium-sized employers expressed to me concerns about the changes in employers’ national insurance contributions, saying that they would incur thousands of pounds in extra costs.”
House of Commons20 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Indeed, 70% of those young people were placed in occupations after training. I also agree wholeheartedly with our manifesto commitment to create 100,000 extra highly skilled apprentices every year over the next Parliament. However, what has gone wrong? While there have been many achievements, it is disappointing that there has been stagnation in that area over the past few years. The challenges that have been outlined in concerns about the Budget will, sadly, not help the situation. I have had representations from bodies such as EngineeringUK and Multiverse, explaining that the crux of the issue lies with the apprenticeship levy. The standards involved in setting up apprenticeships are far too cumbersome, and the funds from the levy are being redirected from employers to classroom training and assessments.”
House of Commons20 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“How can it be right that we have 900,000 people aged between 16 and 24 not in education, employment or training? We are watching the next generation not pursuing their next step in life, which is to aspire to something better for themselves and their families. The default answer from Governments over the last 20 years has been to funnel young people through higher education. My right hon. Friend the Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) mentioned the arbitrary targets, such as that set by the Blair Government to get 50% of school leavers to go to university. But there is another option: apprenticeships and on-the-job training. I am immensely proud of the success of the Conservative Government, who delivered 5.8 million apprenticeships across the country. Those apprenticeships offered young people opportunities for employment.”
House of Commons20 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. I am immensely proud of my upbringing in a modest town in Northamptonshire. I grew up in a single-parent family with my mother, and she instilled in me the work ethic and morals to learn more, to find out more about the community, and to get a trade or skill—to give me the aspiration to succeed. That is what really interests me in this debate. I believe that apprenticeships, technical training and on-the-job training does instil the aspiration in individuals to better themselves, their community and their families. That is why I am so interested in this debate. From personal experience, working from an early age brings countless benefits. It is a disgrace that Governments have allowed NEETs to increase to the current level.”
House of Commons20 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No; I have limited time. I urge the Government to reconsider the proposals. Finally, I think the tone needs to change from the top. Over many years, there has been a perception, at least, that apprenticeships and technical training have not been on a par with university education or other academic routes. I went through the academic route and my brother went through the apprenticeship, work-based training route. He is now earning far more money than I am. He left school without any qualifications, but he went to night school, trained himself, got an apprenticeship and went through the right route. He learned a skill and is now very successful. In conclusion, I hope the Government take on board the arguments I have put forward.”
House of Commons20 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A lady from Northampton was recently given a 31-month sentence for a tweet, whereas an individual who incited physical violence on the streets of Birmingham as part of a pro-Palestinian protest received a far lesser sentence. Does the Secretary of State agree that such inconsistencies create the perception, at least, that we have a two-tier justice system?”
House of Commons5 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“To conclude, this is not a Budget for aspiration. What is the point in someone setting up their own business? What is the point in saving to pay for their children’s education? What is the point in keeping their family-run farm? Today, we have a Government lacking in any ideas to boost aspiration. Instead, we have the politics of envy at play.”
House of Commons4 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Having recently secured a Westminster Hall debate on the pub and hospitality sector, which was well attended by Members from all parts of the House, I welcome the penny cut to draft beer. However, that reduction is purely academic if people do not have a pub to go to. This Government have failed to extend the 75% rate relief that the last Government put in place for the sector. The residents of Mid Leicestershire are deeply concerned that this Government’s measures will damage the economy, rather than create growth. Finally, VAT on education is perhaps one of the meanest policies that this Government have brought in. It will not only affect those who have the wealth to send their children to public schools, but impact those in the state sector, putting additional burdens on our children’s futures.”
House of Commons4 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The last Conservative Government played a crucial role in reducing unemployment throughout the UK. The Labour Government have torn that up just a few months into office. Let us be clear that having fewer jobs is not in the interests of working people. The left like to portray capital gains tax as a tax that only affects the richest in society. However, that is simply not true. Ordinary working people who save and invest and make a modest profit on small shareholdings, or who maybe have a second home for their pension, will see their taxes rise as a result of this Budget. That is not in the interests of working people. It is the politics of envy unleashed.”
House of Commons4 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Budget we saw last week was the most anti-aspirational Budget of modern times. It is a bad Budget for growth, jobs and working people. First, let us consider its impact on small and medium-sized businesses, many of which are staffed by working people. The £40 billion tax bombshell, combined with the additional regulation in the Employment Rights Bill, will place a massive burden on businesses, and we will only see more of them close over the coming years. Whatever industry people are in, there are now significantly higher taxes and regulatory burdens than we have ever seen. The ludicrous hike in employer national insurance contributions will lead to many businesses no longer employing new people and having to slash jobs. That is not in the interests of working people.”
House of Commons4 November 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q3. Just three months into this Labour Government, we have seen brutal cuts to support for pensioners and the taxing of education, and just this week we have seen £5 billion of additional pressure put on British businesses. Why do this Government have such a problem with aspiration?”
House of Commons23 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The pub and hospitality sector has long been at the heart of the British economy. From the small countryside pub to big inner-city restaurants, the sector provides countless social and economic benefits for the United Kingdom. It is essential that we understand the challenges faced by the industry and do our utmost to support it to flourish. The sector provides countless economic benefits to the UK as a whole. It contributes £140 billion in economic activity and provides £54 billion in tax receipts to the Exchequer. In fact, pubs and breweries contribute a whopping £18 billion in taxes to the UK economy.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move, That this House has considered support for pubs and the hospitality sector. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I apologise for my hoarse voice; I can assure hon. Members that it is not as a result of the overuse of pubs and similar venues in my constituency over the weekend. Over recent months, I have had the privilege of visiting several hospitality venues in my constituency. I think particularly of the Curzon Arms in Woodhouse Eaves, which I reopened over the summer recess; the Forge Inn in Glenfield; the Stamford Arms in Groby; and the Coach and Horses in Markfield, which I have got to know over many years as the local councillor. I thank the many hon. Members who have turned up this morning; the debate is clearly of great interest.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, industry experts recognise the support that the last Conservative Government offered the industry through the eat out to help out scheme, a temporary cut to VAT and furloughing more than 2.1 million jobs, which limited the impact of the pandemic. There have also been significant global challenges. The sector’s resilience has been displayed throughout the ongoing cost of living crisis brought on by world events.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I take the opportunity to celebrate the positive impact that the hospitality sector has in my constituency. In Mid Leicestershire, our 41 pubs cumulatively support more than 2,000 jobs and contribute £19 million to the Treasury. However, as we are all aware, the industry has faced many challenges over recent years. What makes the sector so successful is its incredible resilience. There have been many challenges: the covid-19 pandemic, the conflict in Ukraine and various geopolitical challenges have sent input costs spiralling high. The pandemic saw the hospitality industry suffer the biggest economic decline of all sectors. Economic output in the sector between 2019 and 2020 decreased by 42%, and we lost 10% of hospitality businesses during the pandemic.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The sector also provides many social benefits. Hospitality businesses play a crucial role in encouraging socialising. In a country where many, particularly the elderly, often feel isolated and alone, community pubs often provide a place for people to come and feel part of broader society. I have spoken with local independent brewers in Leicestershire, in particular Everards, and we should also recognise the significant charitable contributions of community pubs. In Leicestershire, 153 independently-run pubs raise more than £1.5 million locally for local charities, which is reinvested in local communities to make them even greater places to live and work. That is invariably why 72% of British adults believe that pubs have a positive impact on the communities that they serve.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If the hon. Gentleman could give me a few moments, I will carry on. The success of UK plc is intrinsically linked to the success of the leisure and hospitality sector. The hospitality sector is a key employer throughout the UK, employing 3.5 million people, many with flexible working arrangements. It is vital for our younger people. As of this year, 51% of 16 to 24-year-olds are employed in the sector, and that plays a crucial role in developing their careers. In my maiden speech, I stated that social mobility, particularly through apprenticeships, is key to creating a fairer and more just society. Many businesses in this sector offer apprenticeship schemes. Is it not great that someone can start as a trainee, a pot washer, and end up running an entire business? I think that should be applauded.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The sector is not immune from the effects of over-regulation, which of course stifles creativity and businesses’ ability to grow. So where are we heading? I will move on to what may happen under the new Government’s plans. With the Budget just around the corner, I implore the Chancellor to do all she can to support, not hinder, the hospitality sector. The sector is clear that it desperately needs a continued reduction in business rates. Many in the sector have stated that they face a cliff edge on 1 April next year if the Government do not extend business rate relief to them. Two pubs shut every day in the UK, and that number will only increase if the relief is not extended.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Lady is absolutely right. That applies to domestic consumers and to businesses that have to manage their cash flow, so I absolutely support her comments on energy providers. The war on Ukraine, which brought about the increase in energy prices, has caused hospitality profit margins to continue to decline. Office for National Statistics data shows that hospitality businesses are more likely to shut their doors for at least two days a week than any other industry. However, once again the industry has expressed its gratitude to the previous Government for their support, particularly through the retail, hospitality and leisure business rates relief scheme, which saved the average hospitality business £12,000 and prevented many small and medium-sized businesses from going bust.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right: minimum unit pricing in Scotland has had adverse consequences and has not benefited his constituents. The Budget could not only include an increase in business rates for the sector; it is looking more and more likely that the Government are reviewing employers’ national insurance contributions. UKHospitality is clear that an increase in national insurance would be particularly damaging for the sector—that tax on jobs could finish off many businesses that are already on the edge. The previous Government supported hospitality businesses by freezing alcohol duty for three years and introducing the Brexit pub guarantee. But with the “nightmare before Halloween” Budget on its way, it looks as though the new Government are looking to increase alcohol duty, and that would not be good news.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Duty on a pint of 5% beer is 54p, compared with 5p in Germany. A pint of beer is four or five times more expensive in a pub than purchased in a supermarket. The brewery industry is the most taxed sector in the UK, at 40% of its turnover. That is a regressive tax and hits people on the lowest incomes the hardest.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The nanny state is causing outright economic harm to the industry, and I implore the Government to rethink their proposals. Finally, I shall mention gambling regulation. There have been reports that taxes on the gambling sector will rise in line with the recommendations of the Institute for Public Policy Research commission on health and prosperity. The increase, worth £46 million, will wipe out the profit of the bingo industry and is likely to cost 8,000 jobs across our local communities. The bingo industry has made it clear that if speculation around the Budget comes to fruition, it will be even more damaging than covid and the energy crisis. What could we do instead? We could look at cutting beer duty or bringing in 20% draught relief. The UK has one of the highest alcohol duties in Europe.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right: we should do all we can to support the industry as it recovers from the pandemic, and I hope the Chancellor takes on board his sensible suggestion. For the hospitality sector, the most concerning part of the Employment Rights Bill, which had its Second Reading yesterday, relates to so-called equality laws, which are being updated to make employers liable for staff being “offended” by third parties. That would in effect turn hospitality managers into banter cops, who will feel duty-bound to step in every time someone makes an off-colour remark or joke. How on earth can we be entering a world in which someone can be deplatformed in their local pub? It is absolute madness. I move on to another piece of Orwellian legislation. The ban on smoking in beer gardens and outdoor spaces is frankly ludicrous.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We could cut national insurance contributions for lower-paid earners and promote apprenticeships more. The potential increase in employer national insurance contributions will have a massive impact on the UK hospitality sector. Industry experts have strongly criticised any move to make such an increase. They believe there should not be an increase—indeed, that there should be a lower level for lower-paid earners. Furthermore, the apprenticeship system is failing around the country. There needs to be a rethink in reforming the apprenticeship levy to incentivise businesses, particularly in this sector, to invest more and be more agile in how they offer apprenticeships. In conclusion, I hope the Government take note of today’s debate and introduce measures that will enable our pub and hospitality sector to thrive and grow for the future.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I agree with the representations made by the British Beer and Pub Association that the relief should be kept until a new business rates framework is introduced. We could also allow reform in the planning and licensing space. UKHospitality has advocated a more mainstream approach to the application of the planning and licensing framework. That would put pubs at the heart of the village and town centre. Kate Nicholls, CEO of UKHospitality, says: “Too many hospitality businesses with ambitions to expand and grow are held back and frustrated by the current system.” I also support the idea that there should be more flexibility for businesses to open later for special occasions, such as the women’s football World cup, to allow punters more time to enjoy the festivities.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my right hon. Friend for his intervention. More specifically to help the hospitality business, the draught relief of 20% that has been mentioned—a campaign led by my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith)— could see an extra 20 million pints sold a year and create 2,500 jobs, with a boost to the economy of more than £70 million. We could protect hospitality businesses from the business rate relief changes. Pubs are taxed in a different way from most businesses—not on rateable value based on their rent, but as a calculation of their expected turnover. The ending of the retail hospitality relief would be deeply damaging for the sector, with businesses seeing a quadrupling of their business rates.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the many hon. Members who contributed to today’s debate. We certainly had lots of recommendations for pubs and hospitality venues across the United Kingdom. Members who have heard the Minister’s response may be a little frustrated that we have not quite got the answers we wanted, particularly in respect of reforms to business rate relief, VAT, the apprenticeship levy, planning and licensing, or a commitment on national insurance and beer duty. I hope the Minister will make representations to the Chancellor and the Treasury to ensure that that vital aspect of support is implemented by the Government. In closing, I ask that the Chancellor, in her upcoming Budget, implements policies that will not hinder the sector, but enable it to flourish and grow. Question put and agreed to.”
House of Commons22 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In Leicestershire, we have a lot of landowners who should be doing more to help alleviate flooding. Unfortunately, local authorities have very limited powers to compel them to act. Does my hon. Friend agree that more needs to be done to bolster the power of local flood authorities, which are invariably upper-tier councils?”
House of Commons16 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Many Leicestershire residents are concerned about the Government’s review of the new hospitals programme, which would have seen two new hospitals, a midwifery-led unit and a multi-storey car park in the city. What representations has the Minister made to the Chancellor to retain this vital investment for the NHS in Leicestershire?”
House of Commons15 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does my hon. Friend agree that the policy disproportionately affects families on lower and middle incomes, which the vast majority of these students come from? Parents I have spoken to in my constituency are really concerned. They have forgone foreign holidays, a new car and a bigger home because they have chosen to invest in their children’s education. Should the Government not encourage people to make those right decisions on behalf of their families, rather than penalising them?”
House of Commons8 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the Minister agree with the head of the GMB union that the Government’s plans to ban new licences for oil and gas will result in exporting jobs and importing virtue?”
House of Commons8 October 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does my hon. Friend agree that this choice sets a dangerous precedent? Free bus passes, prescription charges and, indeed, access to healthcare itself are all now at risk because of the logic being put forward by the Labour party in respect of pensioners’ ability to afford them.”
House of Commons10 September 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗