Charlie Maynard MP: speeches

Speeches

• 11 Nov 2025 · Alcohol Duty: UK Wine Sector · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 11 Nov 2025 · Alcohol Duty: UK Wine Sector · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford) for bringing us this very important debate; it is much appreciated. The overall logic of more alcohol resulting in more tax makes sense, and the taxation of wine needs to be stable, fair and workable. That principle has to work in practice, and we are completely failing on that in the current system. We really need to fix that as soon as possible. To recap, before August 2023, in line with EU regulations, wine duty was predominantly charged according to volume, rather than how much alcohol the product contained. In August 2023, through the Finance (No. 2) Act 2023, a new duty system was introduced that required duty to be paid on all products according to strength. On 31 January 2025, wines between 11.5% ABV and 14.5% ABV were taxed as if their strength were 12.5%, but that measure was withdrawn on 1 February 2025. Therefore, 85% of all wine sold in the UK is subject to the same rate of duty. Under the new system, that has been replaced by 30 different rates based on ABV at 0.1% increments. That is extraordinary. It would make sense if we were talking about vodka, which is distilled, or beer, which is brewed, as the producer is able to perfectly and precisely determine how much alcohol is in those products. It makes absolutely no sense for an agricultural product like wine; a bottle of wine may have more or less alcohol in it from one season to the next. Dealing with the microscopic increments puts domestic and foreign producers and retailers in this country in real trouble, because every single one of those bottles needs to be measured and calibrated, and priced and taxed accordingly. The administrative burden of that is absolutely horrendous. I hear that from Oli Gauntlett, the head of Eynsham Cellars and a loyal constituent, and from the Oxford Wine Company, which is a wonderful wine company that serves Oxfordshire. It has had enormous admin trouble dealing with this issue. I also hear it from Majestic Wine, which has a shop in Witney. The single best reason to change this is, as so many people have said already, that it is not working: we have £300 million less excise duty as a result. I cannot think of a better argument to tickle the Treasury into a sensible decision.

• 5 Nov 2025 · Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories · Hansard source

  More

  Yes; I fully agree with the right hon. Gentleman. Direct legislation should be a last resort, but it is necessary and we need to move quickly. SAMLA came into force in 2018, and we are now nearly in 2026. This is just playing for time, which is bad. Since 2022, the UK’s register of overseas entities regime has required that the details of all corporate trustees in the chain of an overseas entity’s ownership structure are registered and that the ultimate beneficial owners of real estate are identified. Information on the overseas entity and the beneficial owners should be accessible to all, online and for free. I will review those top three overseas territories. Bermuda and the Cayman Islands now have registers of beneficial interest that are up and running. The BVI is getting there slowly, with existing companies having been given until the end of this year to file their information. However, and importantly, none of these three territories has a publicly open and accessible register. Instead, there is all sorts of obfuscation. I will give some examples. Some of these registers require inquiries to have “legitimate interest”, whatever that may be. Access is possible only “at the Commission’s Secretariat’s office by appointment, with no copying or scanning allowed, on written request, payment of a fee, and some limitations, during working hours”. That is not complying with the spirit of the law—indeed, it is really unhelpful—and we have it in our power as a country to stop it. It leaves a strong impression that all three are doing their damnedest to withhold information on such a scale as to make the existence of the registers completely pointless. Online, fully accessible and public access for all is not in place in any of the three jurisdictions, so I have two requests. First, can our Government set a deadline beyond which they will not tolerate a failure to provide an open, transparent register? They must use all their powers and leverage to work with these democratically governed British overseas territories to find a way to bring them quickly into line with UK standards of transparency and accessibility regarding these registers. My second request is about the Crown dependencies—Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man. I understand that the Minister is here under the auspices of the FCDO, and they fall under the Ministry of Justice, but I hope that the Labour Government will very quickly look hard at applying the same UK standards to those Crown dependencies.

• 5 Nov 2025 · Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) for securing this debate. I also thank the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) for all his work on this issue and for his good speech today. Indeed, I have enjoyed the contributions from all hon. Members so far. The common theme has been explaining that what goes on in the overseas territories impoverishes people in the UK and takes money out of their pockets, which we all want to see stopped. The Government have an opportunity to improve financial transparency by working with the overseas territories so that they adopt the same standards as the UK. The deliberate masking of corporate ownership is used to dodge tax, accountability and responsibility. It inhibits law enforcement and prevents citizens, workers and journalists from holding the powerful to account for their corporate actions. If Labour wants bad actors to be brought to heel and to stand up for people in our country and globally, this is its chance; it has the power to act. The world’s top three corporate tax havens—the British Virgin Islands, which have been much discussed, the Cayman Islands and Bermuda—are all British overseas territories. Tax Justice Network estimates that, in total, profit-shifting through the UK and its Crown dependencies and overseas territories accounts for nearly a quarter of all lost tax revenues globally—over £80 billion annually. The continued lack of transparency in the overseas tax havens, or overseas territories, including the absence of truly publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership, poses a real threat to the UK’s reputation and standing in the world.

• 5 Nov 2025 · Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I did not know that, so I thank my hon. Friend for informing me. How can we ask others to get their own house in order when we enable these entities on UK sovereign territory to beggar their neighbour on a global scale? The UK Government bear responsibility for this lack of transparency, as British overseas territories are subject to UK law in certain respects. The Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018, or SAMLA, requires the UK to support these territories in implementing public registers of company ownership, which are a crucial tool for combating tax evasion and financial crime. More specifically, section 51 of SAMLA allows the UK Government to make regulations requiring overseas territories to establish publicly accessible registers of the beneficial ownership of companies, and if they do not do so voluntarily, we have the power to enforce them to do so.

• 5 Nov 2025 · Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Sudan: Protection of Civilians · Hansard source

  More

  Given that it has been widely reported in the press that the UAE is arming the RSF, does the Minister have a view on the following two points? First, if any party is exporting weapons to the RSF, we would be in breach of our export licence criteria if we are exporting weapons to that party. Secondly, it is irrelevant whether or not our weapons are being exported and end up in Sudan if that party is exporting weapons to the RSF.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Stamp Duty Land Tax · Hansard source

  More

  Under the Conservatives’ watch, the national debt grew by nearly £1 trillion. They drove our economy through a hard Brexit into the ground, and yet they masquerade as the party of good sense in the economy. I do not understand how that makes sense. Will the hon. Member explain?

• 28 Oct 2025 · Stamp Duty Land Tax · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 28 Oct 2025 · Stamp Duty Land Tax · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Member give way?

• 28 Oct 2025 · Sudan · Hansard source

  More

  My apologies, Mr Speaker. Will the UK cease all arms shipments to the UAE until it is proven that the UAE is not arming the RSF?

• 28 Oct 2025 · Sudan · Hansard source

  More

  It has been widely reported in the press that the United Arab Emirates is arming the RSF in Sudan. The RSF is one of the two warring factions in Sudan, and it was found by the UN to be responsible for crimes against humanity including murder, torture, enslavement, rape and sexual violence. As per UK Government export data, the UK exported nearly £750 million-worth of arms to the UAE via standard individual export licences between 2019 and 2023. If the UAE is indeed arming the RSF, the UK is breaching its arms export licensing criteria, specifically criteria 1f, 2, 4, 6 and 7. Importantly, those criteria look beyond considering whether UK-exported weapons ultimately reached Sudan, and they instead consider the UK’s international obligations. Given this, what steps have the UK Government taken to verify whether the UAE is arming the RSF—

• 28 Oct 2025 · Sudan · Hansard source

  More

  1. What recent discussions she has had with her counterpart in the United Arab Emirates on the situation in Sudan.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source

  More

  On the point about upskilling teachers, the Mulberry Bush school in my constituency does a fantastic job with outreach from specialist schools to regular schools. Does my hon. Friend agree that upskilling teachers and using skills inside the SEND schools to teach teachers in the broader environment would be a great thing?

• 10 Sept 2025 · Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  There is a lot to welcome in the Bill, and I support the overarching aim. However, there are several important details that very much concern small operators and community transport providers in my Witney constituency, and I shall speak on their behalf. They include West Oxfordshire Community Transport, including Andrew Coles, Andrew Lyon and their team, and David Miles and Amanda, who have done so much to get the First & Last Mile moving. My fear is that the franchising frameworks and new training requirements stipulated in the Bill will squeeze out community operators and that the social and economic cost will be severe, particularly in rural areas where mainstream operators have withdrawn. Section 22 community bus permit holders, who provide transport on a not-for-profit basis without the need for a full public service vehicle operator licence, ensure a service in communities that would otherwise be completely unserved. The Bill currently does not recognise this category at all. That raises a couple of worries. One particular worry is that the new driver safeguarding and training requirements could become unworkable for small fleets. The Bill’s provisions do not clearly differentiate between private hire vehicles—dedicated school buses—and public service buses which may sometimes carry schoolchildren as part of the general route. In practice, that means that every driver would need full safeguarding training, regardless of the service they normally operate.

• 10 Sept 2025 · Qatar: Israeli Strike · Hansard source

  More

  Given that Israel continues to act with impunity, what new levers will our Government use to take actions that are within its powers, such as restrictions on travel and trade, air and sea delivery of aid—given that land delivery is so appalling—and in relation to the F-35? We are breaching international humanitarian laws; can we please stop doing so?

• 10 Sept 2025 · Qatar: Israeli Strike · Hansard source

  More

  And sea?

• 10 Sept 2025 · Russian Drones: Violation of Polish Airspace · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister outline what the Government are doing to highlight and explain to the citizens of our country what our obligations are to Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and all our NATO allies under article 5, and the role played by the joint expeditionary force, with the Baltic three, the Nordic five, the Netherlands and the UK?

• 17 Jul 2025 · Arms Exports: Israel · Hansard source

  More

  4. If he will suspend the export of UK-produced F-35 components to Israel.

• 17 Jul 2025 · Arms Exports: Israel · Hansard source

  More

  Our strategic export licensing criteria state specifically that licences should not be granted where there is “a clear risk that the items might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law.” Given that the courts have sent this question back to Parliament, does the Minister accept that Israel is committing breaches of international humanitarian law; does he accept that the export of F-35 components is aiding in the commission of these wrongful acts; and if he maintains that we are not in breach of our own arms export laws, will he explain on the Floor of this House the basis for how he thinks we are compliant with our own laws?