Blake Stephenson MP: speeches

Speeches

• 1 May 2025 · Energy Prices: Energy-intensive Industries · Hansard source

  More

  Talking of experts in deindustrialisation, over 1,000 jobs at Luton’s Stellantis plant have been lost, impacting my constituents, because this Government did not respond to concerns about energy policy. If the Minister does not agree with us on net zero, does she agree with the general secretary of the GMB, who says that the Government’s energy policies amount to “exporting jobs and importing virtue”?

• 1 May 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  When the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer recently visited Mid Bedfordshire, they will have experienced at first hand the lack of step-free access at Flitwick station. Does the Leader of the House agree that this has been an issue for too many years across the country, impacting not just disabled passengers but families and those with luggage? Will she join me and my constituents in calling on Network Rail to deliver its step-free access plans much more quickly, and will she allow time for a debate or an update from the Secretary of State on this national issue?

• 1 May 2025 · Trade: US Tariffs · Hansard source

  More

  As the UK’s top export country, the US is a vital partner to many UK businesses, but with Trump now reported to have made the UK a second-order priority to Asia and with the UK possibly on the verge of giving up its Brexit freedoms in favour of EU alignment, how confident is the Secretary of State of achieving a comprehensive free trade deal with the US, in both goods and services?

• 1 May 2025 · Trade: US Tariffs · Hansard source

  More

  12. What recent discussions he has had with his US counterpart on tariffs.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Planning and Development: Bedfordshire · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister confirm whether new towns will contribute to current house building targets or be in addition to them?

• 23 Apr 2025 · Planning and Development: Bedfordshire · Hansard source

  More

  Again, I must declare my interest as a Central Bedfordshire councillor. I learned recently of the sums that are held at Central Beds from section 106 contributions. The council is very good at collecting the sums but not necessarily at spending them, particularly in the right places and on the right things. Residents would be keener on development in their local communities if they knew that section 106 contributions would be spent there, not in some other part of the large unitary authority area. I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s intervention and thank him for it. Worse still, these developers often put in planning applications for big developments, have those fights with the local community, make promises about local infrastructure, secure their planning permission, and then nothing happens. The community sits and waits while more and more other developments get planning permission around them, but the developers do not get on and build the things they have got permission for. Research by the Institute for Public Policy Research found that 1.1 million homes that were given planning permission between 2010 and 2020 were not built by 2024. That is 1.1 million homes that defied the Government’s blockers and got through the planning system but did not get built. So far, this Government seem to have failed to grasp that problem—there is nothing in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill that even acknowledges it. If the Government are determined to block the blockers and back the builders, perhaps they should take some action to stop the blocker builders that are failing to build out planning permissions that they have received, because they are having a real impact. In Central Bedfordshire, planning inspectors have twice concluded that we cannot demonstrate a five-year land supply in recent months. That means that our countryside now stands virtually unprotected against speculative development, yet our communities have taken more than 20,000 new homes in the past 10 years. The Central Bedfordshire local plan sets out locations for thousands more, but despite its passage four years ago, key strategic sites in that plan sit without a single shovel having been put in the ground. This Government must hold the builders to account to get on and build things, and not put the blame for our broken planning system on my constituents’ desire to avoid flooded homes or see a GP. Looking ahead, this Government are asking our communities in Bedfordshire to take tens of thousands of additional new homes. That future housing pressure will put our communities under huge additional strain. We need the Government to work with us to do more to ensure that developers deliver what they promise—and deliver it at the right point in development.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Planning and Development: Bedfordshire · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention—I forget which positions people have had over the years. I absolutely agree. I will discuss new towns later in my speech; it is important that the Government provide clarity, and clarity soon, on where those new towns will be built. In my constituency too, people want the infrastructure to be built at the right time—before people move into houses, not afterwards. Those promises need to be fulfilled much earlier in the development cycle. I mentioned some of those points just now. I would like to see the Government either commit to requiring developers to deliver new infrastructure right at the start of development, or consider a programme of investment whereby the Government provide capital funding up front for councils to deliver the promised infrastructure, which they could then claim back directly from developers’ section 106 contributions. I would like to see the Government go further on flooding, and commit to a ban in all circumstances on development on functional floodplains. New homes mean nothing if they flood. Rivers and valleys have been here longer than we have, and the water that flows through them will not simply get out of the way because of the size of the Government’s mandate. We must ensure that our housing policy keeps houses out of the way and restricts floodplain to amenity and recreational land as part of proper local placemaking strategies. We must also ensure that the sustainable drainage infrastructure that gets installed with housing is effective and properly maintained. Too often, we see and hear of sustainable drainage systems that are nothing more than overgrown and sometimes blocked ditches, which offer no protection when the rain starts falling. We need a proper strategy to manage them, for example with ownership devolved to properly funded internal drainage boards that can provide expert maintenance. We need to embrace nature-based solutions to flooding—an opportunity presented by the Government’s proposed environmental delivery plans if they are strengthened to include a duty to consider such solutions. I would like to see the Government commit to properly funding and empowering planners in urban areas with high housing targets to identify and release appropriate sites for urban densification—a point made by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). For too long, urban authorities have been able to restrict land supply and the duty to co-operate to foist urban sprawl on neighbouring rural communities. Development that builds dormitories on our countryside rather than densification in our towns and cities is development that fails us all. We must end the easy fixes and see a focused strategy to densify our urban areas. In rural Bedfordshire, without such a fix we face a real and significant risk that our villages will be forced under the duty to co-operate to take thousands more homes for Luton in addition to the thousands of homes we took last time. Sticking-plaster planning politics where housing targets mean nothing because they are consistently and repeatedly delivered elsewhere does nothing to resolve the housing crisis and nothing to appease the Government’s blockers, who rightly wonder how it can be fair that they must continue to pay the price for failures in urban areas to deliver targets.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Planning and Development: Bedfordshire · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered planning and development in Bedfordshire. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. Mid Bedfordshire—indeed, all of Bedfordshire —has played its part in delivering new housing. My constituency was once home to the world’s largest brickworks at Stewartby. Our communities bear testament to our brickmaking history, with former clay pits now finding new life as lakes and homes for nature in the Marston Vale forest, and with former industrial sites, including the brickworks at Stewartby and Kempston Hardwick, set to be repurposed as places to deliver the homes and jobs of the future. In the past month we have also had confirmation of the Luton airport expansion, the announcement of the new Universal UK theme park at Kempston Hardwick in my constituency, and the publication of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. That comes on top of the recent announcement of East West Rail, work being done to develop local plans in all three of our council areas— I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a Central Bedfordshire councillor—and the work of the Government’s new towns taskforce. In this debate, I hope to highlight the ways in which the planning system can help shape the future of our communities in Bedfordshire, and some of the things that my constituents need assurance on from Government. I want to be clear at the start: I am not a nimby or a blocker, but if the Government are serious about building houses and critical infrastructure, we need to ensure that we do so in a way that is future-proof and resilient. We need to turn blockers into builders, rather than create a new generation of blockers. In my experience, most of the people whom this Government have labelled as blockers are not ideological obsessives standing in front of the bulldozers of progress; they are people fed up with bad development. They are fed up of developers throwing up housing estates but not building communities, of soulless developments that could be found anywhere, and, most importantly, of developments that worsen quality of life.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Planning and Development: Bedfordshire · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister take this opportunity to talk about building on flood plains? He may be coming on to this matter, but it is close to the hearts of my constituents and, particularly, constituents in North Bedfordshire. It is important that we do not build houses in areas that are going to flood.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Planning and Development: Bedfordshire · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my right hon. Friend—

• 23 Apr 2025 · Planning and Development: Bedfordshire · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. There is a lot of support for brownfield-first development, but also for gently densifying our towns and cities so that we have houses where people want to live within the existing infrastructure. The Government have been elected with a clear mandate to build, build, build, and I accept that. But I hope that they will do the hard yards to plan, plan, plan, and ensure that the 1.5 million houses that they build are the right houses in the right places, as part of the right communities and with the right infrastructure. It is in that spirit that I bring forward this debate, because Bedfordshire is not a place that is standing still. I congratulate the Government on completing the negotiations, begun by the previous Government, to secure the new Universal UK theme park at Kempston Hardwick. That will be a game changer for our local economy, and I will continue to support the Government, Universal and our councils as it progresses through the planning system, but to maximise its potential, it will be important to get the infrastructure right. That means we need to plan for the planes, trains, automobiles and accommodation. Through the planning system, we need to see work done to deliver the right accommodation that will be available in Bedfordshire for people to come and stay, hopefully to enjoy Universal and then stay a while in our towns and villages, spending their time and money enjoying everything that Bedfordshire has to offer. As I noted earlier, I understand that Government have a mandate to “just get on and build”. I have some sympathy for their frustration with Members of Parliament like me who they see as trying to put the brakes on that ambition, but I hope the Minister will recognise that that is not my intention. I believe as fervently as he does that we need to deliver new homes for young people growing up right across Britain, but I believe we must do so in a way that is sensitive to our countryside and our communities, and that delivers the right homes in the right places with the right infrastructure. The current planning system is not working for anyone. Too often, it blocks good development and allows bad development—development that erodes local character, that builds houses but divides communities, and that comes without the right infrastructure, leaving new residents and old alike frustrated and unwilling to accept the further houses the Government want to deliver in their communities. As this Government’s planning reforms progress, I hope they will take time to consider how the planning system can more effectively protect the character of our towns and villages, and how it can seek to disarm those blockers that the Government are concerned about by addressing the things they are concerned about, not by tying their arms behind their backs. That is a harder job, I accept, but is anything that is worth doing in politics easy? In Bedfordshire, I would like to see the Government give us the tools through the planning system to protect everything that makes our communities such special places to live—protections for our historic character and our villages, protections for our beautiful and unique countryside against unending and unplanned urban sprawl, and protections for the great British pub; indeed, I would like to see more of them built as our communities expand. In Mid Bedfordshire, we have always done the right thing and taken our fair share of housing—we have even taken Luton’s surplus housing need. We have done everything we were supposed to do, but our communities suffer the effects of bad development. Still, residents in Maulden see development crawling even further up the slope of the Greensand ridge, as their flood risk steadily worsens. Still, residents in Wixams find themselves fighting for a GP surgery that no one locally seems keen to take ownership of. Still, residents find themselves fighting developers who are keen to pocket the profits of development but less keen to deliver on their promises of well-maintained green spaces, proper flood protections and local amenities.

• 22 Apr 2025 · Hyper-prolific Offending · Hansard source

  More

  In my constituency there is a particular problem of hyper-prolific shoplifting. There are no credible deterrents and it is a scourge on our local communities and shop owners. Can the Justice Secretary rule out any possibility of allowing career criminals to avoid prison, even for short sentences?

• 22 Apr 2025 · Hyper-prolific Offending · Hansard source

  More

  3. What steps she is taking through the criminal justice system to help tackle hyper-prolific offending.

• 3 Apr 2025 · UK-US Trade and Tariffs · Hansard source

  More

  Trump’s tariffs will make everyone poorer and are extremely disappointing, so is it noteworthy that Reform Members have not bothered to turn up to share in our disappointment? Our automative sector is already announcing closures and layoffs, including Stellantis in Luton, which has provided great jobs for my constituents for many years. In his review of the regulatory environment in response to these tariffs, will the Secretary of State ensure that it will be easier, not harder, to create jobs in the UK in future?

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. Since Bedfordshire was flooded in September, Ministers will know that I have been vocal about improving resilience, and the Government can do that in this Bill. New houses mean nothing if residents find themselves ankle-deep in water in their living rooms, as they did across the country last year. I want the measures on nature recovery to be strengthened to include explicit plans to deliver nature-based solutions to flooding. I want schedule 3 to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 to be brought into force to ensure that communities have the right protections from flooding. I want this Bill to give internal drainage boards more powers to take over the maintenance of infrastructure to protect people from flooding. If it does not, local authorities should have the enforcement powers to ensure that sustainable drainage is maintained. I also want to see more robust measures in this Bill ruling out development on floodplains, which goes to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey). The Bill could make a real difference to our resilience to flooding, and I urge the Government not to miss this opportunity. Despite protections in the NPPF, we still see development in functional floodplains. Rivers were here before us; they do not know and they do not care that we are here. As the Dutch have done successfully, we need to make room for our rivers. We must get out of their way, with stronger protections against development in floodplains. I turn briefly to new towns, which are provided for in this legislation through development corporations. It will be important to ensure that those corporations have the power to deliver real places and communities, not just the cookie-cutter dormitory-on-trainline that developers might like to churn out for the highest possible profit margins. New towns should capture the essence and spirit of the communities into which they are sown, and they need to be beautiful, as the Deputy Prime Minister reflected on in her opening remarks. The Government should also address important questions that they are currently dodging on how these new towns will interplay with wider local development strategies. I am disappointed not to see some of that detail ironed out in this Bill. New towns will result in a double whammy of housing development for some communities, but we do not yet know exactly how damaging that might be. The Government are also yet to confirm whether the housing provided by new towns will count towards a five-year land supply, meaning that our communities could be forced to take far more housing than they need, without the right infrastructure, unless this Bill is strengthened. This Government talk about being on the side of the builders, not the blockers, but without improvements, I am afraid that the Bill is almost guaranteed to create a new generation of so-called blockers. Homes are needed so that young people who aspire to own their own home can do so. Most of the blockers, as this Government like to call them, are not standing in the way of progress: they are standing up for their communities against bad development.

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  As a central Bedfordshire councillor, I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. There is much to welcome in this Bill, particularly its ambition to get nationally significant infrastructure built to support our country. While I disagree with the Government’s allocation of housing targets that favour building over our countryside, rather than the densification of our cities, where building homes would alleviate the worst of the acute housing crisis, I recognise the Government’s mandate to build 1.5 million homes and the need for ambitious planning reform. What are the Government doing to ensure that the 1.6 million homes with existing planning approval are built? I see nothing in this Bill. Mid Bedfordshire has done more than its fair share in recent years to accommodate new housing, with the boroughs of central Bedfordshire and Bedford growing by 16% and 18% respectively over 10 years. We are not anti-development, but some development has changed the character of our historical market towns and quiet rural villages forever. Development is increasing the flooding risk in Maulden in my constituency, where compounded up-slope development has exacerbated the impact of pluvial flooding. We have development that has not delivered long-promised infrastructure, such as in Wixams in my constituency—a development where shovels first went into the ground nearly two decades ago but residents are yet to see the delivery of a new GP surgery. It is because of such issues that communities have become hardened to the prospect of yet more building. This Government have a real opportunity, with thought and consideration, to create a planning system that people can have confidence in. Instead, people have been dismissed simply as blockers. The pensioners who fear a flood every time it rains—blockers. The young parents who cannot get to their GP because a surgery has not been built in their town—blockers. People with real, genuine concerns whom we in this House were elected to stand up for are not blockers, and this Bill could do much more for them.

• 20 Mar 2025 · Tourism Industry · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for the tourism industry. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward, and to introduce this debate during English Tourism Week, when people across the country will be celebrating all the fantastic tourism attractions that form part of the fabric of so many of our communities. They range from Land’s End to John O’Groats, from the Needles on the Isle of Wight to the neolithic site of Skara Brae in the Orkney Islands, and from the Titanic museum in Belfast to the Roman ruins of Colchester. Across the length and breadth of the United Kingdom, we are fortunate to have unique and interesting tourism attractions. We have them in, I feel reasonably confident in saying, every constituency and every corner of the country. Tourism is a vast industry. It is worth £145.8 billion to the UK economy, which is equivalent to 6.5% of UK GDP. Tourism supports 3.8 million jobs, and 1.6 million people are directly employed in tourism. Some 328,000 businesses, representing 6.6% of all businesses in the UK, are tourism businesses; 76% of those are microbusinesses. Tourism is the UK’s sixth largest export earner and it feeds into a wide tourism ecosystem, supporting local high streets, hospitality and a wide range of other industries. This Government have an ambition for our country to reach 50 million tourism visitors a year. It is an ambition that I support, and I hope that in this debate we can examine the role that Government and we in this place can play in supporting tourism nationally and backing our tourism economies locally. I am aware that, as the Member of Parliament for Mid Bedfordshire, I might not be the most obvious voice for tourism in this place. Bedfordshire has been rather left behind by the tourism economy. We are one of the last counties in England without an official local visitor economy partnership. That is despite fantastic attractions such as English Heritage’s Wrest Park, Whipsnade Zoo and Woburn Safari Park—I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests following the safari park’s kind hosting of a roundtable and tour of the park for me earlier this year. We also have Center Parcs Woburn Forest, the Wyboston Lakes Resort, Luton Hoo and so much more. Anyone who watched my debate last year on tourism in Bedfordshire—I am glad to be debating with the Minister on tourism again—will have heard me extol the virtues of Bedfordshire as a place to visit. However, despite those fantastic attractions, our county has a domestic tourism economy of just £250 million and an international tourism economy of just £100 million. We are not a remote county; we have a major international airport, a motorway and a direct rail connection. Bedfordshire’s tourism economy has so much potential to be a key part of growing the economy. Where Bedfordshire has lagged, it now can lead. The Government have already thrown their weight behind East West Rail, which has the potential to make a real difference to local tourism, setting our county up as a central piece of an Oxford-to-Cambridge growth corridor that is full of growing businesses and, more importantly for this debate, attractions that embody what it is to be an English county. Like many other colleagues, we have fantastic opportunities in Bedfordshire to deliver new attractions that will boost our tourism economy. The Bedford to Milton Keynes waterway park is one such opportunity, and would be capable of attracting 750,000 visitors, creating 1,000 jobs and bringing in an extra £26 million for our local economy. I will continue to bang the drum to get that delivered as quickly as possible. The other major tourism project in my constituency is the game changer. Looming like a monstrous shark off Amity Island, a prehistoric predator off the coast of Costa Rica or an Italian-American plumber in the Mushroom Kingdom, the Universal Studios theme park at Kempston Hardwick would transform the tourism landscape in Bedfordshire. Universal is a game changer for Bedfordshire, but also for the whole UK tourism economy. Getting it right represents a £50 billion economic boost, 20,000 new jobs and 12 million more visitors every year. This Government talk a good game on growth and on growing tourism, but the proof is in the pudding, and for this Government the pudding would have the words “Universal Studios Bedfordshire” written on it. I sincerely hope that they will get this over the line. With or without Universal, it has become clear that the support available from Government to promote our county is insufficient. Getting Bedfordshire an LVEP would help—indeed, getting an LVEP in all counties that are lagging behind would help enormously—but we must also ensure that tourism is a central consideration of English devolution. We must ensure that there is proper prioritisation in the minds of new mayors and proper funding from local government to allow our regions to shout about all the fantastic reasons to come and stay awhile. If the Government want to get tourism right, they must provide that funding centrally, and resist the urge to consider local tourism taxes as a silver bullet. For Government, local taxes have the allure of a problem handed down to devolved areas to handle, but they will make the UK even more uncompetitive, introducing additional costs and confusion for holidaymakers at home and abroad.

• 20 Mar 2025 · Tourism Industry · Hansard source

  More

  He might.

• 20 Mar 2025 · Tourism Industry · Hansard source

  More

  That is a fantastic idea. I was travelling just yesterday on the Eurostar and thinking to myself how great it would be if the train stopped at Ashford and Ebbsfleet and passengers could get off, having come from the Netherlands, to savour the delights of Kent, a county that I know very well. I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention; it is a fantastic idea. Perhaps the Minister will have an update on what is happening with Eurostar.

• 20 Mar 2025 · Tourism Industry · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister, hon. Members and hon. Friends, who have joined me to debate the Government’s strategy to support the tourism industry. I was delighted to secure this important debate in English Tourism Week. I was even more delighted that Members from across the United Kingdom came and we learned all sorts of things about the United Kingdom —we did not just confine ourselves to England. This week we rightly celebrate the brilliant tourist attractions across our country. It is an opportune time for us as parliamentarians to reflect on the valuable contribution that tourism makes to our local economies. I very much enjoyed the tour we took through the UK this afternoon. I am not sure whether I would prefer to go dolphin spotting and whiskey drinking in Northern Ireland, and neither am I sure which order we are supposed to do those in, or go to the spa in Scotland—alone, perhaps, not with other Members. All of us in this place will have in our constituencies businesses, venues and attractions that benefit from a vibrant tourism economy. That is why I support the Government’s ambitions to achieve 50 million tourism visitors by 2030. I will be eagerly scrutinising the tourism strategy the Government will bring forward later this year and, from what I have heard today, the Minister will reflect on the points made as he brings together the strategy. I hope that that will include a reflection on the role of English devolution, on how the Government can help to increase the UK’s price competitiveness and on how his Department will work across Government to support the industry and ensure that we have the right business support. That particularly applies in the context of the increase to employers’ national insurance contributions and the other overheads that hospitality and leisure businesses are facing. I cannot conclude this debate without repeating my desire to work with Government to grow our tourism economy in Mid Bedfordshire and Bedfordshire as a whole. Universal’s proposed theme park in my constituency would absolutely turbocharge the local economy, and we must make sure the UK as a whole has the right strategy to take full advantage of it.

• 20 Mar 2025 · Tourism Industry · Hansard source

  More

  It is important that local economies are balanced, and I recognise that in some parts of the country it feels like the economy is imbalanced. Perhaps there are communities suffering from too many tourists, and I am sure that hon. Members may talk about that in the context of Cornwall. I thank the hon. Member for his intervention; it is important that we have balanced economies throughout the United Kingdom. However, tourism in the United Kingdom has the potential to grow without the negative consequences that Government Members may wish to talk about. The cost of tourism is already far too high. Evidence from the World Economic Forum puts the UK 113th out of 119 countries on price competitiveness. Our visitor visas are uncompetitive internationally: a 10-year visitor visa costs £962, but the United States charges Chinese visitors just £135 for a visa of the same length. Repeat visa applicants face a bureaucratic process that requires them to resubmit their biometrics, which is often a complex process for visitors from rural areas, who may need to travel significant distances to provide their biometrics. Lower-cost, longer-lasting and simpler visas will help to make the UK much more competitive as a tourism destination. Our international price competitiveness was already low before the Government hiked the price of electronic travel authorisations by 60%—a policy that they admit will cost the UK just over 100,000 visitors every year. That is 100,000 fewer people staying in the accommodation sector, eating and drinking in our pubs and restaurants, and enjoying everything great that Britain has to offer and recommending a visit to their friends back home. The Home Office estimates that that means a cost to the UK economy in the region of up to £734 million over five years—in the same breath as the Government talk about being a Government for growth and growing the tourism economy to 50 million visitors per year. If we are to achieve the Government’s goal of 50 million visitors per year, we need to make the UK more attractive to visitors at home and abroad, and less attractive as a source of revenue for the Treasury or local authorities. The evidence shows that for every 1% decrease in the cost of visiting the UK, the earnings of the UK’s inbound tourism economy increase by 1.3%. For every £74,300 increase in tourism revenue, a new full-time-equivalent job is created in tourism. Tourism is a growth-generating machine that the Government hold the keys to, but it is a machine that needs more careful maintenance than it is currently getting from this Government. Since the general election, businesses in tourism and its supporting industries have faced significant Government-imposed barriers to growth. Most notably, the Government’s decision to tax job creation and business expansion has left many tourism businesses putting their future plans on ice. Tourism businesses were already struggling, with 19% reporting that they are either in survival mode or performing quite badly. Profitability for tourism businesses is down. The decision to increase their employer’s national insurance, taxing them for creating jobs and helping to grow the economy, all while reducing business rates relief, will have a devastating impact on the industry. If our tourism businesses fall, the attractiveness of visiting the UK falls with them, and tourism businesses are already falling. Just this month we have seen a theme park in Wales closed, citing national insurance as a contributing factor. As I mentioned earlier, in Bedfordshire we hope to be in the business of opening theme parks, not seeing them slip away. We know that where tourism thrives, it benefits the whole of the local economy, from accommodation providers and high street shops to pubs, cafés, museums and restaurants. When tourism succeeds and grows, it brings the whole of the local economy with it. When tourism fails, it puts at risk not just the future of UK tourism and the Minister’s growth plan, but the whole ecosystem that it supports. The great British pub is a staple of British culture and a key attraction for visitors to the UK. Pubs like The Bell in Woburn, The Oddfellows Arms in Toddington and the Star and Garter in Silsoe are a key part of what makes Mid Bedfordshire a great place to spend time. One in four pubs believes their future may be untenable, and the Government’s £500 million hit to the cost of our pubs doing business will leave at least some of our destinations without the great British pub, something that is so attractive to visitors. I believe that the Minister is earnest in his desire to see 50 million visitors come to the UK each year, but I hope he will appreciate my concern that we need to do more to ensure that there are thriving businesses here to provide things for those visitors to see and do. I would like the Government to focus more on supporting our best visitor attractions, including the great British pub and the British high street. We must also ensure that the planning system protects and enhances our tourism offer. That means faster approvals for game changers such as Universal, so that we can continue to be a fantastic place for projects and investment, such as that proposed in my constituency. That will mean better transport infrastructure across the whole country.

• 20 Mar 2025 · Tourism Industry · Hansard source

  More

  He also might not. Let us see. Better transport infrastructure across the whole country would help our tourism industry, which would include Luton airport expansion in Bedfordshire—perhaps the Minister has an update on that; or maybe he does not. That will mean finding the right mixture of development in areas like mine to allow for some of the things that we need to take advantage of the opportunities of tourism. In particular, in Bedfordshire we need more accommodation to ensure that people stay awhile in our communities, rather than visiting for a day and going somewhere else for the bulk of their visit. We will also need to protect and enhance some of our beautiful countryside and landscapes, which distinguish our country and our counties from our international competitors. The Greensand Ridge national character area in my constituency of Mid Bedfordshire is characterised by its ancient and modern woodlands, farms and parkland and the historic look and feel of its small settlements, often former estate villages. Many of those settlements are distinctive Bedfordshire “ends” villages—hamlets or small villages built in a line along the road—but development within the national character area is threatening the character of many of those small settlements. We must make sure that delivering new development does not come at the expense of maintaining our communities as places where people from far and wide will be able to feel a sense of unique local character and pride. If our countryside and our towns become identikit places that we could see anywhere, people who want to experience them can go anywhere. We must embrace what makes Britain, and in my case Bedfordshire, a great place to spend time. I hope it has come across in this debate that I wish the Government the very best in their ambition to deliver their national visitor economy strategy later this year and to achieve 50 million visitors per year. In me they will find a constructively critical friend willing to work across the House to deliver on the promise of the tourism industry for my local economy in Mid Bedfordshire and the UK’s economy as a whole. I hope that as the Minister continues to shape his thoughts on his strategy, he will consider my remarks in that spirit. I hope that his strategy will set out how the Government will protect and enhance the attractiveness of the UK offer to visitors from overseas and domestic holidaymakers. That means protecting the things that make Britain great, from the high street, the local pub and the beautiful countryside to the many set-piece tourist attractions that we are known for the world over. I hope that his strategy will also set out a coherent plan to make the UK more price competitive with our major international competitors. The Government cannot simply talk growth into being. It takes real decisions—tough decisions—on competing priorities to make the UK more competitive and bring about growth. I mentioned electronic travel authorisations, but the industry also raised with me things such as tax-free shopping, visa costs and air passenger duty in preparation for this debate. It is clear that more must be done to bring the cost of visiting the UK down to deliver growth in tourism. I hope that the Minister’s strategy will set out, alongside the work his colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government are doing, how the Government’s plans for English devolution will empower local communities like mine to drive our local tourism agendas. In particular, I would like to see the completion of the roll-out of local visitor economy partnerships so that counties like Bedfordshire can take our place at the tourism table and shout more easily about all the fantastic things to come and do in our county. I would also like to see the new mayors and local authorities backed with a framework and real funding from Government to deliver local tourism strategies. I believe that it is desirable to tie all these strands together for the Government to commit to tourism as a priority. Including tourism in the industrial strategy and having a dedicated tourism Minister working cross-departmentally —not, as he currently is, a tourism Minister stretched across multiple portfolios and Departments—would be a positive first step towards that. Finally, the Minister knows that I cannot end my speech without a final expression of hope that we will one day be able to cut the ribbon on a new Universal Studios theme park at Kempston Hardwick in Mid Bedfordshire. I know the Government remain locked in negotiations with Universal, and both parties continue to have my full support to do whatever it takes to secure this fantastic investment in my community. I look forward to hearing ideas from colleagues about how we can best support our tourism industry across the United Kingdom.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  What are this Government doing to crack down on unqualified people representing themselves as solicitors?

• 10 Mar 2025 · Construction Apprenticeships · Hansard source

  More

  Level 7 apprenticeships play a vital role throughout our economy, including in the construction industry, and support social mobility. I recently met young, hard-working apprentices in Mid Bedfordshire who would not be able to achieve their ambitions without level 7, but there are concerns about the future of those apprenticeships. Will the Minister take this opportunity to reassure employers and apprentices that she understands the value of level 7 apprenticeships?

• 3 Mar 2025 · Housing Targets: New Towns Taskforce · Hansard source

  More

  2. Whether the number of houses recommended by the new towns taskforce will be in addition to the housing targets set in the national policy planning framework.