Gideon Amos MP: speeches

Speeches

• 4 Mar 2025 · Plan for Neighbourhoods · Hansard source

  More

  The Liberal Democrats welcome this plan to work with communities to improve local amenities and engagement in the process. We also welcome the move away from local council areas bidding against each other, and towards a more objective approach, based, for example, on indices of multiple deprivation. In our opinion and my opinion, the previous system divisively pitted one area against another in a way that did damage to more areas than it helped. The Liberal Democrats are committed to allowing communities to take action to improve their area. Given sufficient powers and resources, local authorities can play a major role in responding to climate and nature emergencies, whether through the insulation of homes, enhancing green spaces or improving air quality. However, the Conservative Government forced councils to do more and more with less and less, plunging many into financial crisis. As a result, councils have gone bankrupt around the country, and many are feeling the strain of cuts to public services and a lack of investment in community assets. No community can flourish without proper powers and resources, so we welcome the plan’s commitment to ensuring that new neighbourhood boards work with local authorities to implement new funding. However, we urge the Government to confirm that local authorities will be funded and resourced substantially to take on this additional workload. The financial burden on councils has forced many to make impossible choices on funding. In my council of Somerset, for example, nearly 70% of council tax receipts go on care for vulnerable adults and children, which many believe should be a national responsibility. Until we have a national solution to the care crisis, councils will continue to be held back from reaching their full potential. We welcome the Government’s commitment to investing in community-led improvement. We also welcome the new neighbourhood boards, which should provide community engagement throughout the process. We urge the Government to reconsider their decision to remove district council-level scrutiny from the planning process. Where Whitehall takes power and decisions out of the hands of local councillors, it also takes decisions out of the hands of local people. That is undemocratic and will ultimately slow up the process of getting the homes that we need. We also call on the Government to confirm that nature and climate specialists will be included on the neighbourhood boards. Finally, can I ask the Minister—

• 4 Mar 2025 · Market Towns: Cultural Heritage · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for Southend East and Rochford (Mr Alaba) on securing this debate. Market towns are essential to our national heritage. Taunton and Wellington have been markets since 904—not 9.04 am—and 1215, when they got their respective charters, and a market structure for Colchester has been traced back to the first century. Outside bigger cities, market towns are the basic unit of local community—the natural centre to which every local area looks—and have provided the seats of district councils for hundreds of years. However, the withdrawal of essential services in recent years has had challenging consequences for residents, particularly older people, those without digital access and small businesses. The Government are currently imposing council reorganisation, which too often exacerbates those problems by taking local decision making from our proud market towns and the jobs and resources that go with it. Ancient cities such as Colchester and Winchester will have their councils cancelled, as district councils are effectively being abolished. The Liberal Democrats reject the taking of power away from our towns. Councils should reflect natural communities, and local communities should sit at the top of decision making, not at the bottom. It is therefore time for the Government to support market towns better and the markets they provide. Promoting local markets increases footfall in our town centres, creates community spirit in our all-too-often online world and provides an outlet for local produce, which travels fewer food miles to get there. For the shops, pubs and other venues in market towns, we were disappointed that the Government did not go further to reform business rates in the Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill, and we were disappointed with the reduction in discounts available to retail, hospitality and leisure businesses. The Bill will not scrap business rates or deliver the fundamental reform to business rates that the Liberal Democrats have called for to benefit small businesses and those in our cultural sector. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy and the heart of local communities, and they create the jobs that we all rely on. The Liberal Democrats are fighting for small businesses, starting with a call for more support for their energy costs and a complete overhaul of the unfair business rates system. Business rates are harmful to the economy because they directly tax capital investment in structures and equipment, rather than the profits or the fixed stock of land. To benefit small businesses, we would therefore abolish business rates and replace them with a commercial landowner levy so that investment in shops and buildings is no longer disincentivised, as it is now. That leads to far too many remaining empty on our high streets, as business rates are one of the biggest obstacles to letting commercial premises. As a result, the most deprived areas will see the biggest fall in amounts paid in business rates, whereas some big shops in high-value areas will see increases. The change to national insurance contributions will be completely counterproductive for businesses in market towns, and particularly small businesses. Businesses in Taunton and Wellington town centres, including our theatres and museums, as elsewhere, face a triple whammy of increasing business rates, increasing wage bills and higher national insurance costs for every person they employ. That comes after years of trying to survive the pandemic and some of the highest rates of inflation and interest that have ever been seen in this country under the previous Conservative Government. It is no wonder, as the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development has shown, that this new jobs tax means that firms are planning to reduce their headcount through redundancies or by recruiting fewer workers. Every market town has its care homes and private care providers. For older people, the cultural heritage of market towns and town centres often make them great places to live. Last week, I was delighted to host Somerset’s Registered Care Providers Association and Linden House here in Parliament. They are struggling with the increased cost of care due to the increase in national insurance contributions. We therefore urge the Government to accept the amendment passed in the House of Lords, proposed by my noble Friend Baroness Barker, to exempt care providers from those increases, because it will be vulnerable people and their loved ones who have to pay. The Government claim that the national insurance hike will result in additional revenue of £25 billion, but the Office for Budget Responsibility clearly states that after employers in the public sector are compensated and other employers change their employment habits by reducing headcount or pay, the Treasury will be left with revenue closer to only £10 billion a year. The Government could have raised that amount through a number of other fairer tax changes, such as those we put in our manifesto. Reversing the Conservative tax cuts handed to the big banks would generate an extra £4.2 billion every year, and increasing the digital services tax to 6% would generate another £2 billion a year. They could have introduced a fair reform to capital gains tax so that the 0.1% of ultra-wealthy individuals pay their fair share, while keeping things the same or even cutting tax for other capital gains tax payers to generate another £5.2 billion per year. The OBR makes it clear that, precisely because this tax rise will be passed on to people’s salaries, it will have a negative effect on living conditions. This comes after five years under the Conservative party that saw living standards fall year on year. The last thing people need now is a reduction in their incomes. We recognise the new Government have been left to make difficult choices, but they must not allow the burden of fixing the Conservatives’ mess to fall on working people and small businesses in market towns and elsewhere. We also need to support market towns with better public transport. The increase in the fare cap to £3 is a bus tax that will hit working people, rural communities and people on low incomes most especially. Delaying station projects such as the new stations proposed to serve the market towns of Wellington in my constituency and Cullompton in that of my hon. Friend the Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) is also a mistake for the economic growth and new housing the Government want to see. Those decisions will both make congestion worse and travel by public transport more expensive. Of course, for rural communities, it does not matter if the bus fare cap is £2 or £3 if they do not have a bus service in the first place. Market towns need proper rail and bus services if they are to thrive and survive. At the very least, the bus fare hike should be scrapped. Other initiatives are needed to boost our market towns, to properly fund local councils, especially when it comes to social care, so they can focus on other things to support market towns and businesses, to support more planning and conservation officers, which the hon. Member for Southend East and Rochford spoke eloquently about, to introduce free parking periods to enable town centres to compete with out-of-town and online retailers, to grant permitted development rights under planning controls for outdoor markets, and, with the ending of the rural services delivery grant, to provide rural councils with a funding settlement that properly reflects the impact of rurality and sparsity on the areas they serve through the application of a fair funding formula. But fundamentally our market towns and the businesses that sustain them need three things: an end to business rates that punish our town centres and high streets; good public transport; and an end to loading taxes on small businesses, which we need to provide the seeds of recovery in our great economy. The Liberal Democrats will do all three.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Phase 2 Report · Hansard source

  More

  Liberal Democrats stand firmly with the many bereaved family members, as well as the immediate community, friends and neighbours, as they mourn the 72 people, including children, who tragically lost their lives in 2017. Any steps regarding changes to the building will be a deeply personal matter for that community, and I know that the Secretary of State will approach any decisions about the future of the building with due respect for the local community, survivors and victims. We therefore welcome the Government’s decision to work with the Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission to design a memorial, and we urge the Government to approach the discussion with respect and sympathy for those who suffered, as I am sure the Secretary of State will do. As we approach eight years since the Grenfell fire, Liberal Democrats are concerned that there are still thousands of people in the UK living in buildings with dangerous cladding. The Grenfell inquiry provided a detailed look at the facts leading up to the night of 14 June 2017, including looking at the underlying causes of the fire, where mistakes were made, the condition of the tower and the responses of the public and the emergency services. On the recommendations to the architectural profession, I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests—I am a member of the Royal Institute of British Architects. There are lessons to be learned by ever authority in the land. We recognise that the previous Government provided funding to start the process of dealing with cladding, which is slowly being allocated, but it is now time to accelerate that vital work to make all buildings safe. We are concerned that too many developers and building owners are passing the cost of remediation work on to tenants and leaseholders, which puts many at serious financial risk. Liberal Democrats endorse all 57 recommendations of the Grenfell inquiry phase 2 report by Sir Martin Moore-Bick, including the creation of legally enforceable orders to remediate premises so they are safe, on pain of criminal sanction. However, we need to take further steps to guard against commercial interests overriding safety, as they did in both the testing of materials and the enforcement of building regulations. We would like to see more done to ensure that commerciality will not, shockingly and disgracefully, override interests of safety ever again. It is time to invest in our housing stock so that the cladding is dealt with. It is time for justice for the victims and for all those living in unsafe housing. Lib Dems stand ready to work across parties to do achieve that.

• 26 Feb 2025 · High Street Rental Auctions · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for Bournemouth West (Jessica Toale) on bringing this key issue for our town centres to Westminster Hall. I was elected on a platform that focused in part on bringing inward investment to Taunton and Wellington, and that passion is close to my heart. Taunton and Wellington town centres are already attractive and vibrant places to visit, to shop and for leisure. Occupancy rates in Taunton town centre have increased from 85% to 90%; more new businesses are moving in. Somerset County Gazette reports seven new businesses in the town centre in the past 12 months: Cornish Bakery, Koottaan, Desparia, Somerset Bakehouse, Toys “R” Us, Drippy Bear and Islands Caribbean restaurant—not a vape shop among them, which is good to see for our town centre. In Wellington, street food and food festivals bring people in from far and wide, and a new banking hub has opened. My only objection to the new banking hub, which is great news for Wellington, is that it is run by the Post Office, with a sign above the door saying “Post Office”, but there is no post office inside. Wellington still needs a post office, and we hope that the Government will see the light and decide that buildings with “Post Office” on the outside should contain a post office. We will continue working on that as hard as we can. On Sundays, Taunton has a fantastic new independent market, which brings people in from far and wide. However, one building is a particular issue for our town centre. It was built as a W & A Chapman department store in 1938, and was substantially remodelled in the ’60s, just after Debenhams took it over in 1959. It is a large, handsome building, and a real landmark in the centre of our town—one of the biggest buildings in the heart of our town centre, if not the largest. However, it has stood empty, sadly, for around four years now. I welcome the high street auction provisions in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, which could be extremely useful. However, the powers to allow councils to carry out high street rental auctions are subject to a number of restrictions. Auctions apply to commercial premises that have been vacant for at least one year out of the past two, which is a reasonable requirement—so far, so good. They must also meet a suitability requirement—this is getting a bit doubtful. Then there are process and landlord obligations: local authorities can issue a final letting notice compelling a landlord to rent the property via auction, which is obviously a good move. The property must also be offered at a fair market rent, which is reasonable. Then there is an appeal mechanism, so there are more catches. One potential challenge is that the auction’s success depends on tenant demand. Who will define tenant demand? If we do not attempt an auction, how will we discover what tenant demand is? The appeal process provides a number of areas for challenge by the landowner. Whether or not high street rental auctions are suitable for that particular Debenhams building, I am concerned about the number of exceptions from the powers. The guidance says: “High Street Rental Auctions will not be suitable for all high street premises; for instance, large former department stores may be subject to long-term, complex redevelopment plans which may be negatively impacted by being subject to inclusion.” Presumably, any owner of a former department store could say, “My department store is subject to complex, long-term redevelopment plans, which could be negatively impacted by a high street auction.” A whole class of town centre buildings—some of the biggest we have—therefore seem to be excluded from high street rental auctions, which is a real drawback and a real shame. The guidance also says that auctions will not be appropriate “should the local authority consider that there is not likely to be a sufficient tenant base and demand for the premises”. As I said, how do we know what the demand for the premises is if we have not attempted to market them through high street auctions? I urge the Government to look at the guidance and the powers, and to see whether they could be applied to some of the biggest, most iconic buildings in our town centres, which are of course empty department stores. Even in a healthy town centre such as Taunton’s, the presence of one large building that remains empty can be a real problem. Whether or not it is suitable for a high street auction, the building in question in Taunton really needs attention; it needs to be dealt with, because it has been empty since 2021. Planning permission was sought in 2020 to demolish it and build apartments. That application was withdrawn, but it could have been refused. The Twentieth Century Society praised the building’s architecture and made it subject to a listing application, although it did not quite make the grade. It has an important place in the hearts of people in Taunton. It has 7,000 square metres of floor space, so it is a big building. Many believe that it could be saved and reused. It occupies a fantastic location, with the River Tone on one side, one of the key town centre streets on the frontage, and our fantastic Taunton castle on a third side, which has been the historic seat of government in the county of Somerset for hundreds of years. One reason why the building might be suitable for refurbishment is that demolishing it would bring a requirement to carry out archaeological investigations. During the previous application, Historic England produced one of the lengthiest representations I have ever seen, which suggested that investigations would be required. If the building is not demolished, that work would not be needed, which would potentially be a much cheaper operation for the owners. We have tried to engage with the owners of the building, but it has been challenging. The town council and groups of architects have brought forward schemes for the building, but they have been unable to get floor plans or really engage with the owners. I reached out and wrote to the owners via recorded delivery, email and all the other methods I could think of, and I was pleased that Ropemaker Properties recently came back to me. I am grateful to the company for offering to meet me and Taunton town council to discuss how this important building can be brought back into use, and for putting that meeting in the diary. Finally, I urge the Government to think about the extent of these powers and whether big department stores should be completely excluded from them.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Future Skills Programmes: Universities · Hansard source

  More

  Where a major international investor is coming into the country—such as Tata, where 4,000 new employees will be needed—does the DFE support colleges and universities to set up the new apprenticeship and training programmes that they need in preparation for that massive international investment?

• 26 Feb 2025 · Future Skills Programmes: Universities · Hansard source

  More

  Does my right hon. Friend agree that if the UK is to get the growth it needs from the new Tata Agratas gigafactory in Somerset, the University Centre Somerset in my constituency needs support from the Government to prepare the 4,000 new workers with the skills they need before they arrive?

• 25 Feb 2025 · Draft Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications, Deemed Applications, Requests and Site Visits) (England) (Amendment and Transitional Provision) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  The Liberal Democrats are concerned that without planning officers in place we simply will not deliver the homes that we need. Homes are less likely to be the genuinely affordable, nature-positive and zero carbon ones that we all want to see. As has been referred to, there is a £362 million shortfall for planning authorities after the fee is taken into account. The Royal Town Planning Institute has pointed out that there is a lack of robust data on how many officers there are per region, per local area. That is a concern in itself; without that data we cannot have a realistic picture of how the service can be improved. The Home Builders Federation, through a freedom of information request, pointed out that 80% of local planning authorities are operating below capacity, which is not where we need to be if we are to address the housing crisis. We want to see authorities given more flexibility to set their own fees, determined locally by those communities. We would like to see minimum ringfenced funding for local planning authorities. In a previous debate, the Minister referred to guidance on ringfencing. I would be grateful if he could say more about how funding and budgets within hard-pressed local authorities can be ringfenced for a planning service that is important to people and their local economies. We welcome the 300 additional planning officers announced by the Government, but fewer than one graduate per council area will not have a massive impact. We need to see more than that in our planning departments. Taken together, those measures would help to address the need for better services for our local communities and our councils. Planning officers and councils are not blockers; they are the problem-solvers. If we are to have housing that is genuinely affordable and net zero, delivering biodiversity net gain, we need planning officers in place and councils to be supported. That is especially so at a time when the social care crisis is putting pressure on local councils. Funding is rightly being diverted for frontline care operations. The previous Government took nearly £1 billion out of funding earmarked to reform social care. Unless local government funding is properly reformed, and social care as a key part of that is delivered, councils will continue to struggle and lean on other departments for cuts and savings. Planning departments will continue to suffer, however many statutory instruments are passed. Until those issues are addressed, we suggest that the proposals do not go far enough. However, they are welcome, and we will support them as a small step in the right direction.

• 10 Feb 2025 · Inheritance Tax Relief: Farms · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Murrison. I rise to speak up for the 337 signatories to this petition from my Taunton and Wellington constituency. One thing that we should have learned—surely, I hope, the Treasury must have done—is that farms are asset-rich but cash-poor, and that especially applies to smaller family farms. The Treasury’s figure that only 27% of farms will be affected is therefore an underestimate. As the NFU has pointed out, it is more like 75%, because Government figures often leave out the fact that changes are being made to both business property relief and agricultural property relief. That means that more farms will experience an impact, since the maximum allowance applies to both combined. More importantly, this measure fundamentally misunderstands that the value of a farm is wrapped up in the land and is about not just pounds and pence, but the integrity of that farm. If one starts selling off chunks of that farm piecemeal, time after time, one eliminates the value of that farm as a whole. The Government need to accept the damage that this family farm tax could do. The Minister might say, “The money can be borrowed—why do they not just borrow the money and pay it off over time?” Ed Hawkins from Cutsey farm in Trull came to see me and explained that if he annualised that payment over a number of years, it would wipe out the very small margin that he depends on to live. We have heard the same thing from other Members. It is not realistic. Robbie Vile from Higher Lillesdon farm in North Curry came to see me with his son, Charlie, who is hoping to go into farming. However, looking at how farming has been treated recently—the delays in the SFI payments, the underspend of a full £358 million of the agricultural budget over the last three years, massive advantage given to Australia and New Zealand, cheap imports after Brexit and now inheritance tax—they ask: why would any young person be encouraged to go into farming in those circumstances?

• 10 Feb 2025 · Inheritance Tax Relief: Farms · Hansard source

  More

  I agree; that would be a very useful statistic. If the Minister is not willing to look it up, I hope he might ask the House of Commons Library to do so, because it would certainly reveal the vast number of farms that would be affected by the scale of the tax that is proposed for them. In short, I have no objection to the taxing of super-large landowners who use farms as a loophole to avoid inheritance tax—in fact, I would support it. But the irony of this policy is that it will drive more land into the hands of those super-large landowners, because every time farmers have to sell off some of their land, it will go to one of those bigger companies. Seeing that land being sold piecemeal time after time will only damage British farming as a whole. Drawing this tax down to some of the smallest family farms in Taunton and Wellington, and across the country, is unjust. It will not raise the money that the Government say it will. It will mean piecemeal disposal of farms up and down the country. The Government really must raise the threshold for this policy or extend the transitional relief. If they do not do that, the policy needs to go and it needs to go now. That is what the Liberal Democrats would do.

• 5 Feb 2025 · High Street Retailers · Hansard source

  More

  Would the hon. Gentleman agree that the Government “high street rental auctions” approach, in which councils can auction the retail rights of an empty shop, is valuable, but that the guidance needs to be changed? Will he invite the Minister to change the guidance so that it can apply to department stores as well as other places?

• 5 Feb 2025 · High Street Retailers · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 4 Feb 2025 · Apprenticeships · Hansard source

  More

  Another key development site, similar to the projects my hon. Friend has mentioned, is Tata’s Agratas gigafactory near Taunton. It is important that colleges can set up apprenticeships and skills training in advance of the factory being built. Does my hon. Friend support a request to the Minister to facilitate that?

• 3 Feb 2025 · Pension Credit Take-up · Hansard source

  More

  Those on the guaranteed element of pension credit receive the warm home discount, but many do not. Following the changes made a couple of years ago, linking the warm home discount to the age and size of a property, have the Government made any assessment of how many people have been affected the double whammy of losing the warm home discount and the winter fuel payment?

• 30 Jan 2025 · Local Post Offices · Hansard source

  More

  I have learned today from the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) that Postman Pat is the model to follow, and just like Postman Pat himself, post office services may change, but they must not wither. We have also heard how much of a trusted institution our post offices are. The word “trust” came through several times from the hon. Members for Glasgow North East (Maureen Burke) and for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice). We should never forget that it is the staff in those post offices and, of course, the sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses who were so horrendously treated by the Horizon scandal who make post offices what they are and why they are so important to our communities. My hon. Friends and hon. Members across House are clearly great champions of their local post offices. My hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) mentioned his post office’s lost cats service, which I was interested to hear about, and my hon. Friend the Member for Thornbury and Yate (Claire Young) mentioned the outreach service. To paraphrase my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael), in Wellington in my constituency the postal service was fixed so many times it was definitely broken, and now we no longer have one at all for a town of 15,000 people. Many other hon. Members highlighted the importance of post offices as hubs for their communities, including the hon. Members for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith), for South West Hertfordshire (Mr Mohindra) and for Stockton West (Matt Vickers). I completely agree with the hon. Member for Chelsea and Fulham (Ben Coleman) that the King’s Road without a post office seems unimaginable. I wish him well in his campaign. I was somewhat disappointed that the Minister did not comment on the fact that banking hubs, which are being created around the country, are not providing post office services despite having “Post Office” written on the outside of the building. I would very much like to follow that up with the Minister on another occasion; it seems an obvious solution. As the hon. Member for South West Hertfordshire said, securing the next agreement for banking hubs is incredibly important, and we certainly support the Government in achieving that. Finally, I congratulate the hon. Members for North Durham (Luke Akehurst), for Bournemouth West (Jessica Toale), for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards) and for Bermondsey and Old Southwark (Neil Coyle) on their petitions. The hon. Member for Bermondsey and Old Southwark is also continuing his excellent house-sitting services by sitting in the House this afternoon and making sure that the debate went on as needed. I will leave the House with a couple of quotations from my petition about the post office in Wellington. One petitioner said: “I feel so sorry for those people without a car—particularly the frail and elderly. They have to trek in all winds and weather” to the next village several miles away. They continued: “You see so many villages with their own post office, yet a growing town like Wellington doesn’t—it’s bizarre.” Mary said: “Why was it not considered at the same time as the banking hub, as it’s run by the post office?” The first citizen of Wellington, our mayor, said that “since 2019 when the…Post Office closed, at least two business owners” tried to operate postal services but found that the funding given did not make it a viable option. That is why we desperately need a main post office for the town of Wellington and its 15,000 people. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the future of local Post Office services.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Local Post Offices · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady makes a very good point, and I am extremely grateful to her for helping us to secure this debate. Post offices act as hubs for a whole range of services, and they could arrange for a range of other public services, and often do, which is why a secure, proper post office is so important. As I say, the nearest post office to Wellington is some miles away and very difficult to access. As hon. Members can imagine, there was great relief when Wellington residents were told that they would be getting a new hub opened by an organisation called the Post Office, staffed by staff working for the Post Office, and that there was to be a logo outside the building with “Post Office” written on it, but they were disappointed to find, when they went inside the building, that it was a banking hub that does not provide any post office services. Frankly, people feel misled and let down. Will the Minister instruct the Post Office to review the case for granting Wellington post office the status of main post office? I am convinced from discussions with franchise holders that that would be enough to secure one for Wellington. As we can all see, in this case, there is an obvious and straightforward solution: we should allow banking hubs to offer postal services. There is no fundamental reason why they cannot. They already have post office tills and post office systems. They are run by postmasters and postmistresses, and staffed by post office staff. The one in Wellington even has two banking desks and space for a third desk, presumably awaiting a post office counter. That would be a very good use of the remaining space in a building with “Post Office” written above the door. Perhaps most importantly, having spoken to post office staff, I know that they would be very keen to offer such services in banking hubs. The issue lies simply in such arrangements not having been included in the agreement on banking hubs between the banks, which fund them, and the Post Office, which provides those services. It is not a hugely complex problem. With a bit of effort and ingenuity, which I am sure the Minister and the Government have, this could be overcome, and the system could be made hugely more efficient. There are 76 banking hubs in the UK, and in this way we could significantly increase the provision of post offices at very little cost. Will the Minister ask his Department to develop incentives for banking hubs to offer postal services, especially given that they all have the “Post Office” logo outside the door, even when they do not provide any postal services. To conclude, post offices are vital hubs in communities throughout the country, particularly for those in need and at risk of exclusion. The loss of the post office in Wellington, such a significant market town, has really hit the town centre badly. I know hon. Members will have their own examples of the importance of their local post offices to their communities. I look forward to hearing their speeches, and maybe to intervening on them. It is vital to ensure that substantive towns and communities such as Wellington do not lose their post offices altogether. In short, post offices are too important to be left to uncertainty. The Government must act now to safeguard these vital institutions, ensuring that towns, such as Wellington and so many more, do not remain without essential services. I urge the Minister to take tangible steps to secure the future of post offices before more communities are left without them.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Local Post Offices · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is absolutely right, and I will emphasise that point later, because the destiny of banking hubs is wrapped up with that of post offices. Post offices are the nucleus of a town centre, and once they are gone, it undermines the town centre.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Local Post Offices · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with the right hon. Gentleman. There is a risk that the statistics are somewhat skewed by the fact that a parcel drop-off point or a van that visits occasionally may be considered post offices.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Local Post Offices · Hansard source

  More

  I agree. I am sure that the Government will say in due course that, whatever its exact business model, a viable post office is what matters, and there would be some truth in that, but a secure post office, established for the long term, is what really matters. The worries we hear from across the House and the country are not without foundation. We have seen worrying closures across the country. Notably, as has been mentioned, there was a recent consultation on the closure of 150 post offices. The loss of branches means that fewer communities can access vital services. House of Commons data shows that the number of post offices is rising overall, but in the south-west, which has lost more post offices than any other region in England, it is falling. Wellington in my constituency lost its post office in 2019, and we can see the damage caused by that loss. Wellington is not a small town; it has 15,000 residents and is growing fast. Its population has grown by a third over the past two decades according to census data, and around 1,500 new homes have been built there in recent years. It also has a proud history as the home of Fox Brothers & Co, which has been manufacturing the finest flannels and fabrics for over 250 years and also owned its own bank—the Fox bank on Fore Street was the last bank in the country to issue its own banknotes. It is unacceptable for such a town to have no main post office. Losing the post office in 2019 has been a real blow. One constituent told me that he finds it “totally baffling why Wellington Post Office was ever closed”. It is particularly difficult for those without access to a car to visit the nearest alternative at Rockwell Green, a village several miles away. If they do, residents often find that the sub-post office is oversubscribed, with queues out the door. As a small village post office, it was only intended to provide for small numbers, and when it is open, parking has become a bit of a nightmare.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Local Post Offices · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Member is quite right. I know Billericay and its post office, and I certainly support his remarks. Post offices are simply too important to be lost, and we have to ensure that they are not lost in towns like Wellington and Taunton, and elsewhere across the country. Too often, there are deep concerns about the future of local post offices. Today’s announcement about changes to the Royal Mail universal service obligation adds to that uncertainty, creating further pressure on an already fragile network. It is disappointing to see that obligation weakened, with potential knock-on effects on the viability of post offices. That makes it even more important that post offices continue to play a role all throughout the week, in selling stamps and providing postal services, even if deliveries are being cut back.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Local Post Offices · Hansard source

  More

  Indeed. I think the hon. Member had read the next sentence of my speech, which was about the post office branch housed in WHSmith on Fore Street in Taunton. That business is potentially up for sale, which poses risks. The loss of such post offices would leave a huge gap across the country, particularly in county towns like Taunton. In the course of his work, will the Minister get concrete assurances from WHSmith that post offices in its stores will be retained following the sale? It is important that the Government get assurances from WHSmith on that point.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Local Post Offices · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the future of local Post Office services. I am grateful to everyone for attending this debate on a Thursday afternoon on post offices and their vital role in all our communities across the country. Post offices have long been at the heart of our communities. They provide essential services, support local businesses and serve as vital socioeconomic lifelines, but in too many areas across the country, including my constituency, we face uncertainty over the future of those post offices and are already seeing the erosion of far too many. Post offices contribute an estimated £4.7 billion annually to the UK economy. According to the Post Office, their presence generates an additional £3 billion in spending for the businesses that surround them. In a town like Wellington in my constituency, a post office could add around £1 million to the local economy. Small businesses across the country rely on post offices for banking, cash deposits and parcel services. Nearly a third of small and medium-sized businesses use the post office at least once a week. Of course, the benefits of post offices are not just economic; they remain a lifeline for many, particularly older and more vulnerable people, who rely on post office services to access their pension, send mail and parcels, pay bills, and stay connected. I hear from many of my constituents how much they value our local post offices, and that those post offices provide far more than just postal services.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Local Post Offices · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with my hon. Friend. I will comment on that aspect of banking later. I pay tribute to the friendly and hard-working staff in my local post offices on Station Road and in Staplegrove, and in other post offices throughout the constituency. The North Curry post office, with its amazing postmistress, contributes every year to the “Christmas in the Square” event for the village charity and has raised £1,500. These are real community institutions. Their being in our villages and communities, where they offer a warm, friendly welcome and act as a community hub, is important to many people and must not be undervalued.

• 28 Jan 2025 · Water (Special Measures) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that one kind of support that such community groups need is water restoration grants? Those are vital and will flow from the water restoration fund, which is the subject of one of his amendments. Those funds are vital to cleaning up bathing waters across the country.

• 27 Jan 2025 · Creative Industries · Hansard source

  More

  I know my hon. Friend has been to the cultural mecca of Taunton in Somerset, so will she credit the town council? She talks about long-term funding, and Taunton town council is putting £300,000 of funding into the arts over three years, including for the amazing Gaumont project to restore the Mecca bingo hall as a theatre.

• 24 Jan 2025 · Climate and Nature Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Some have queried the urgency or indeed the need to reduce emissions from fossil fuels, but does my hon. Friend not agree that, with 250 people in Somerset alone estimated to die early from air pollution according to Public Health England, there are other reasons why we urgently need to reduce carbon emissions?