Wendy Chamberlain MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Sept 2026 · English Whisky: Single Malt Definition · Hansard source

  More

  I declare an interest as chair of the Scotch whisky all-party parliamentary group, and I also hold a Chartered Institute of Brewers and Distillers general certificate in distilling. On Friday evening at 5 pm, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs announced that it had approved the English Whisky Guild’s application for English whisky to receive geographical indication status, despite objections from the Scotch, Welsh and Irish whisky associations. Let me be clear that my objection is not to English whisky obtaining geographical indication status. English whisky has a long and legitimate history in its own right. My concern is specifically about the definition of English single malt whisky that DEFRA has now approved. Under that definition, English single malt whisky requires only distillation at a single distillery, rather than for all the stages of production to take place at a single site. The term “single malt whisky” carries a long-established reputation and meaning for consumers. It risks disadvantaging Scotch producers, who have invested heavily to comply with the traditional single-site production model, including distilleries in my own constituency such as Kingsbarns, Eden Mill, Daftmill and Lindores. Scotch whisky is one of the UK’s most important export industries, supporting jobs, investment, tourism and economic growth across rural communities. Weakening an internationally recognised definition risks damaging consumer confidence and diluting brand value at a time when the Scotch whisky industry is not in the rude health that the Government mistakenly think it is. The new definition could also be misleading for consumers who reasonably understand a single malt whisky to be a product produced entirely at one distillery. I ask the Minister: why was this announcement made after the House had risen on a Friday evening, and why does the appeal period finish before the House returns from recess? I ask the Minister also to explain why a decision that undermines the integrity of the single malt definition—a decision that creates an uneven playing field across the UK and risks disadvantaging distilleries that have invested to uphold long-standing industry standards—was approved. Why did the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury tell the House in March last year that DEFRA would not be watering down the definition of single malt whisky? Because I can assure you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that that is exactly what the Government are doing now. Will the Minister also set out what discussions he has had with the Scotland and Wales Offices and what assessment has been made of the implications of this decision for the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and how those implications were considered?

• 9 Jul 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I associate myself with your remarks, Mr Speaker, and the remarks by the Leader of the House and the shadow Leader of the House of both congratulations and condolences. On the business the Leader of the House has announced, I have to say that I am very disappointed that it means the Deputy Prime Minister’s remarks yesterday to my hon. Friend the Member for St Albans (Daisy Cooper) about the Hillsborough Bill were not accurate. I hope we will see it return after the summer recess. On the world cup, all I will say is that, like fellow Scots, I am probably looking for my Viking helmet at the moment. We all know that the former Member for Clacton’s resignation is nothing but a stunt designed to distract the country from the raft of allegations facing him and, it increasingly appears, his colleagues. Such allegations must be fully investigated, so that voters have all the facts about the candidates they are voting for, whether they be a bin or a politician who sees being a Member of Parliament as a part-time job. Now that the writ has been moved, does the Leader of the House share my regret that the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards investigation into the former Member for Clacton must pause? Does he agree that, in circumstances where the nature of an allegation is sufficiently serious, there is merit to it continuing, even if the Member is no longer an MP? Does he agree that it could and should continue regardless? Obviously, those of us on the Liberal Democrat Benches wish Count Binface well. It was interesting to read overnight that the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) has plans for changing the culture and narrative of the Labour party. I am sure those on the Government Benches are looking forward to that new-found freedom. But for all the talk of collaboration and modernisation, we still do not know anything about the legislation that the new Labour Government are planning to bring to the House. We know more about the right hon. Member’s love of guitar and rugby league than we do about his plans for fixing the problems facing the country. The Liberal Democrats would welcome detail on his plans to fix social care, tackle the special educational needs and disabilities crisis and support the small businesses bearing the brunt of the Government’s jobs taxes. Will the Leader of the House commit to doubling the length of Prime Minister’s questions next week, and give the Prime Minister-in-waiting the opportunity to answer questions and outline his views on the issues that really matter?