Bobby Dean MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Jul 2025 · Beer Duty · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr Forster) for securing the debate. Given all the Liberal Democrat interventions, it seems that we are firmly the party of beer and pubs.

• 15 Jul 2025 · Beer Duty · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friends all made their contributions and they are all on the record; there is no disputing that we have won today—one-nil to us. Pubs are central to communities, as we have heard from others, and Carshalton and Wallington is no different. One of my favourite things about living in the Carshalton area is that we have some great pubs. I tried to list them all on the Floor of the House one time, but I was two short; I will not repeat that mistake here today. People make artwork about our pubs and there is a defined pub crawl that people come to our area to do. People come from all over the region because for six out of the past 12 years one pub, The Hope, has been CAMRA’s Greater London pub of the year. Pubs are super-important to where I live. In a world with declining physical spaces, pubs are some of the last refuges for interaction with others. We have less footfall on the high street, fewer people going into offices and, let us be honest, it is getting quite pricey to go out for a meal. The pub is one of the last places we have to get together with our mates, or maybe even turn up on our own to be around other people, so it is important that we protect the industry. The industry is under threat, and hon. Members have spoken about the number of pub closures in recent years. It is getting tough for the hospitality industry in general. People talk to me about a staffing crisis and say that they are struggling to make ends meet. A number of smaller pubs, which used to be at the heart of communities, have been bought up by bigger pub chains, losing their sense of community. That is also an issue. Whenever policy looks as if it is going to have an impact, we should not look at pubs as we do other businesses, but as an important part of the community to protect. The EPR has had an impact on the cost of selling beer. It has been acknowledged that that was an unintended consequence that needs to be fixed, and campaigners are putting forward suggestions about how we can fix that. They posit that this would be a Treasury winner, although we might hear differently from the Minister. Will the Minister model the figures, so that we can see what the numbers look like and what the net outcome of such a change would be, taking into account the expected increase in sales? If those figures do not show a net income for the Treasury and instead show only a marginal loss, will the Minister consider the wider benefits to the community, as well as the possible multiplier effect? That could boost the industry more generally. My point is that a policy was introduced with good intentions but is perhaps having unintended consequences, and the centrality of pubs to our communities means that we ought to be addressing all asks by campaigners and making sure that we get this right.

• 8 Jul 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  Would the shadow Minister mind telling the House what these fashionable causes that football clubs should not speak about are?

• 8 Jul 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak in favour of the amendments tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson), specifically new clauses 3 and 4. I will start by outlining why these fan-centric measures are important to this particular fan and why football is important to me. Football has been the most constant thing in my life. When I was a young boy, my uncle called me Statto because I used to study Teletext for every bit of football information I could get—the league tables, the top scorers, all the transfer news—and relay it to my family until I annoyed the hell out of all of them. Football was also the central bond with my grandparent, or Pops, as I used to know him—so much so that when he passed, I took his ashes down the Tottenham High Road and laid them in the foundations of the new Tottenham Hotspur stadium. Football is probably the most frequent conversation I have with my dad and the thing that glues all my friendship networks together. I have to confess that being a politician was not my first career choice. Just like every young boy, I thought I could be a footballer. Despite hours of effort after school every day, I was never going to be good enough. But I never gave up; I played football throughout my university years and formed many friendships that way. After that, we did not want to stop, so we set up an alumni football club together and carried on. Eventually, I joined Carshalton football club, whose club tie I am wearing today, and I still play on a Saturday, except for the weekends when I am injured. Those moments in Beddington park playing for Carshalton football club are some of the only moments when I get to switch off from all this—my teammates would probably say that I also switch off too much on a Saturday when the winger runs past me! Then there is the watching of football—the lunacy of me continuing to watch. Let me tell you, Madam Deputy Speaker: the journey from Carshalton to Tottenham and back on a rainy Tuesday night is brutal, particularly when we lose the number of games that Tottenham lost this year. Yet in the same season when I have had all that misery, I had one night in Bilbao last month that was probably one of the best nights of my life. Isn’t that just football—misery and sublime nights like that all in one go? The centrality of football to people’s lives is what makes this Bill so important. People have felt in recent years that the game has drifted away from them, and some people’s reaction is to say, “That’s the way it is.” I am glad that, through the Bill, the Government are saying that we will not be resigned to that fact—we are going to fight, stop that drift and bring it closer to fans again. That brings me to new clause 4, which is about the golden share. This is particularly important because it would lock in the fans’ voice via democratically elected organisations. That would mean that clubs would not be able to simply pay lip service to the element of consultation with fans; there would be real power for the fans, with their presence inside the clubs. Of course, this does not go anywhere near as far as other countries, like Germany with the Bundesliga, but it is an important protection. We spoke at length earlier about new clause 3 and the free-to-air element. I understand why there is a bit of controversy around that and why the Secretary of State will say that the current listings system works well. But who do it work well for? It certainly works well for the premier league, but I am not sure whether it works well for all fans. The new clause would not go as far as la liga, which broadcasts a game every single week. Let us not kid ourselves: we are talking about 10 games out of 760 available—that would be 1% of games. I do not think that would destroy the premier league’s product, but it would make games so much more accessible to the next generation of fans. The premier league is a global attraction, but it is also England’s product, and English fans should be able to watch those games. There are other elements of the Bill that I could go on to support, but I am short on time, so I will just express my support for new clause 1, which is important. I end with this quote from a famous Tottenham manager, Bill Nicholson: “We must always consider our supporters, for without them there would be no professional football. It would be better to have more fans watching football the way they like it played, rather than have a few fans watching football the way we would like it played.” Those are important words that we should all reflect on when voting today.

• 7 Jul 2025 · Government Performance against Fiscal Rules · Hansard source

  More

  The Government committed to one fiscal event a year in the name of economic stability, but by having an OBR forecast and these constraints, they had only one lever to pull: spending cuts. This time, disabled people paid the price, and the Government have since had to row back. Does the Government regret placing those restraints on themselves over tax measures when OBR forecasts are published?