Controlling or Coercive Behaviour: Sentencing
It seems that the Minister has moved on from responding to my questions, one of which was whether coercive and controlling behaviour is excluded from the early release programme.
12,832 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them
- Hansard source
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
Will the Secretary of State consider extending the remit of the commission to include September 1998, and thus the Omagh bombing? He will know that the Irish agencies, and the Irish Government specifically, will have quite a lot to say on the subject, given the events of September 1998, but as things stand, there will be no way for victims and families to get the answers that he has mentioned in his preamble.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
The Secretary of State is characteristically generous in giving way. Clauses 4 and 5 govern the appointment of members of the commission and directors of investigations, and mandate that some of those should be drawn from people with experience outside Northern Ireland. Can he explain why that is, who these people will be and of which countries he believes they will have experience? I assume that means the Republic of Ireland.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
We have heard some extraordinarily powerful speeches this afternoon. They have all been first rate, up to this point. I will start by laying out what I am. I am the Member of Parliament for a part of Wiltshire that has, I suspect, as many servicemen and ex-servicemen as any other part of the south of England—probably rather more so. I am proud to represent them. It is important I say that, because my perspective is probably very different from that of the hon. Member for Foyle (Colum Eastwood), given the people he talks to and the people I talk to, and we will differ. But that in no way takes anything away from my respect for the hon. Gentleman and the thoughts and sympathies that he has expressed.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
I accept that point and I appreciate the way in which the Secretary of State framed Mrs Jones, and it is perfectly reasonable that he does so. My point is that we do ourselves and Mrs Jones a great disservice if we suggest that this process will bring answers, when answers there may very well come none—because of the passage of time, because of fading memories, because of people who have passed away, or because of evidence that has degraded or been deliberately or unwittingly destroyed.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
That is not what I am saying at all, and the hon. Gentleman knows it. What I am saying is that with the passage of time, undoubtedly, memories fade, material is not available, and people, unfortunately, decease. Trying to recreate reality 50 years on is extremely difficult. When you do so, you need to ensure you have a margin of error. You have to admit that what you have come up with may not actually have more than a fleeting reality with what actually happened at the time. That is all I am saying.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his intervention. Indeed, the phrase “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” is reasonable. I would say the 2023 Act was perhaps imperfect in the eyes of the lawyers and the ECHR, but I regret very much that it was set to be repealed by the incoming Government, since it was the basis of a measure that would bring solace and would also protect those who might otherwise find their collar felt—well represented today here and in other places. I think that was a mistake, if I may say. It was a mistake, but we move on. Our purpose today is to make this Bill a better Bill. I hope very much that in the other place they will pick up on many of the comments that have been made today and be able to improve it. The right hon. Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson) bemoaned the fact that Committees of the whole House are basically a re-run of Second Reading debates—I think that was the essence of what he was saying—and rarely deal with the specifics, so I will touch on one or two specific amendments. But before I do so, may I make a brief comment about immunity? The Government appear to be allergic, in bringing forward the remedial order, to the issue of immunity. Really, it is not a new concept. The Good Friday agreement itself was pretty much founded on establishing immunity. I remember it very well—I was intimately involved with the events in Northern Ireland at the time. It was through gritted teeth. It was extremely difficult for people on both sides of this great divide, but the idea of immunity was very much at the heart of the 1998 Belfast/Good Friday agreement. Since then, we had Peter Hain with his 2005 Northern Ireland (Offences) Bill, which tried to establish immunity for one side of the divide—not for soldiers and not for police. I am very pleased that at that time the Opposition, with others, knocked that back and it was withdrawn. In contrast, immunity in the 2023 Act was highly conditional on information being handed over that might help to deal with some of the concerns of people like Mrs Jones. It was important that that immunity was conditional. I think that is where the difference is—in the idea that we cannot give immunity. The right hon. Member for Leeds South (Hilary Benn) has said before that his concern was that he did not want to have immunity. I understand that; it is a noble concept. However, the fact of the matter is that 1998 was built on immunity, Peter Hain tried it in 2005 and in 2023 the immunity that was being talked about was highly conditional.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
I thank my right hon. Friend for that intervention. When I intervened on the Secretary of State, he said that the commissioners and directors of investigation who are not from Northern Ireland and are not used to investigating matters in Northern Ireland will probably be taken from the rest of the United Kingdom.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
The question is how we can best recover the information—how we can extract it—even at this late date, so that we can give some solace and comfort to those who have been wrapped up in these terrible events, from whatever side of the divide they hail. In the spirit of the comments of the right hon. Member for Belfast East, I would like to address one or two specifics on clauses 4 and 5, relating to the appointment of the commissioners and the directors of investigations. Clause 4(2) states specifically: “In exercising the power under subsection (1), the Secretary of State must so far as practicable ensure that one or more of the Commissioners have experience gained outside the United Kingdom”. That was not what the Secretary of State told me. He is quite right that, under clause 5, one director of investigations should have “experience of conducting criminal investigations outside Northern Ireland”, so it is perfectly reasonable to infer that they may be drawn from people operating in the rest of the United Kingdom, but that appears not to be the case in relation to the commissioners. I would be very grateful if the Secretary of State, when he makes his winding-up remarks, was able to clarify that for me—or now, if he wants to.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
I do not expect the Secretary of State to comment on special forces, but I do suggest that he look at special forces specifically, which is what I was talking about earlier. If he wants to heap laurels on me, as a former Minister for defence people, since these things take a very long time, I am perfectly happy to take some of the credit. I am grateful to him for that, but I do not think that it was the intent of his remarks. My question to him was about clause 4(2). He satisfied me in relation to the directors of investigations, but it is the commissioners about whom I am concerned. I think that, unwittingly, he may have conflated the two, and I should be grateful if he could clarify that for me at some point. Government amendment 259 and new clause 34 concern, respectively, commissioners and members of the victims and survivors advisory group. There is a mandate that commissioners cannot have been convicted of an offence “anywhere in the world”. That needs a bit of further thought, because in some parts of our benighted world today, people are convicted by jurisdictions for which I do not think we would have a great deal of respect. When I was a Minister in the Foreign Office, I dealt with Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, who was convicted and imprisoned falsely—but convicted nevertheless—in such a jurisdiction. I feel that we may need to revise the wording, either here or in the other place, to be clear about the Government’s intent. Neither is there any mention of the rehabilitation of offenders. New clause 34 does at least place a limit of three months on a custodial sentence for members of the advisory group, but I think that this part of the Bill needs a bit of redrafting so that it makes more sense. Government amendment 162 touches on the provision of information via a remote link, which is a positive, but it also provides a get-out for inquisitors in the form of an impracticability test. What I am not sure about, and what I seek clarification on, is what circumstances would make it “impracticable” for a person to provide information through live audio or video links. Comments have been made about the part that the Irish Government play in all this through the framework agreement. There is a lingering suspicion that Dublin has had an undue influence on the Bill, and we have heard—particularly in relation to Omagh—why that should be. I entirely accept the Secretary of State’s assertion that the Irish Government have not been involved in the drafting of the Bill, and, indeed, had not seen the amendments before their publication, which is reassuring. However, it would be useful to know when the Secretary of State expects the Irish Government to implement, through their legislative channels, the reciprocal arrangements that are necessary to provide some chance of recovering information that may be sequestered in the Republic. As the hon. and gallant Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns) has pointed out, that repository is likely to be vast. Up to this point it has been untapped, and until it is tapped, questions will be asked about the candour of Dublin in trying to provide answers to many of the problems about which we have heard today. The hon. Member for Foyle (Colum Eastwood) was right to say that this is all about victims. It is also about veterans, many of whom I have the honour and privilege to represent. There must be a way through this that will satisfy both parties, even through the prism of so many years. There is a wall of misery associated with the troubles, and it is our job to do what we can to remedy that, difficult and imperfect though the process may be. I appreciate the Secretary of State’s endeavours—he approaches this matter in good faith, as did his predecessor —but I fear that what we have at the moment simply will not do.
- Hansard source
Glasgow School of Art: Mackintosh Building
Would the hon. Member agree that the SNP Government need to play a role in this? So far, they have been silent on the subject.
- Hansard source
High North: British Interests
I was pleased to see the Defence Readiness and Industry Minister welcoming HMS Protector home to Devonport, although judging by the three tugboats, I suspect she was rather less enthusiastic about the reunion than he was. With growing Russian activity in the High North and renewed chest beating from Argentina over the Falklands, Britain’s only naval ice patrol ship faces an uncertain future. How can a single replacement sustain a credible presence at both poles, while allowing for maintenance and refits, and how will the Minister prevent a gap in capability?
- Hansard source
Glasgow School of Art: Mackintosh Building
I very much commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing this issue forward, because Glasgow School of Art is a national institution and Charles Rennie Mackintosh was a national figure across the United Kingdom. That is why, when I was in the Scotland Office, I argued that the UK Government should intervene after the first fire, which they did. I had the opportunity to see some of the renovations that took place after 2014, which were so tragically lost in the fire of 2018. I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman that, given the national significance of the Glasgow School of Art, the UK Government have a role to play in its renovation.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
Our exchanges on fondness will get the Secretary of State into trouble. He talks about balance; who has that balance or who governs that balance is important. Will he tell the Committee how many of the substantive amendments were either shown to or discussed with the Irish Government before they were brought to the Committee?
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
The Secretary of State, with every good intention, talks about preventing “rinse and repeat”, yet the moment we introduce this situation into a coroner’s inquest, the opportunity for judicial review arises—multiple stages of judicial review. As we have already seen with inquests, “rinse and repeat” cannot be stopped, so a soldier may be going through three or four judicial processes, all of them painful, whatever the Government say.
- Hansard source
Procurement: Dudley
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Boxer is vital to defence procurement across the west midlands, including for those constituents in Dudley who work at Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land. The MOD has now confirmed that earlier this year it cut nearly £2 billion from the £7 billion allocated to the mechanised infantry programme—a cut that included three new variants for the Army, including the critical repair and recovery variant. What will the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers light aid detachments be equipped with, given that there is no longer a plan to procure those vehicles, and how will the Army repair and recover damaged Boxer vehicles without a repair and recovery variant?
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill
The Secretary of State talks about protections for those who served our country. One key achievement of the legacy Act was stopping new inquests that could threaten to expose those who served our country to vexatious claims, particularly in the case of Loughgall, which is one of the best known cases. Do his amendments definitively stop any such vexatious claims coming forward again?
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Programme) (No.2)
I promise not to detain the House for more than a few minutes, but I think it is important to put on record the Opposition’s unhappiness with how Committee stage is being handled. Although we of course welcome a Committee of the whole House, which allows hon. Members from Northern Irish parties to contribute, the amount of time set aside is wholly inadequate for the task. This is one of the most complex and controversial pieces of legislation that the House will debate during this Parliament. It is a 98-clause Bill to which over 300 amendments—including, I think, 144 Government amendments—have been tabled, and the amendment paper is now longer than the legislation itself. The consequence of the scheduling is that this House will have very little time to spend on detailed scrutiny, or indeed on detailed discussion of the amendments tabled. Most concerningly, the programme motion makes it clear that we will have only about an hour for Report, and that hour will almost certainly be entirely ridden over by overrun.
- Hansard source
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Programme) (No.2)
I entirely agree with the right hon. Member. It looks as though we will get no Report stage at all. The idea that there is not time available to the House to debate this Bill properly is laughable. On Wednesday the House is confining itself to the Church Appointments (Repeal of Discriminatory Provision) Bill. On Thursday we have a general debate. This House will not get to vote on any of the Government’s 144 amendments directly, or on any of the Government’s 98 clauses individually. The new Administration have done one good thing here, for which they should take credit: they have rolled the remedial order into this legislation. We strongly support that. It is something that those on the Conservative Benches have been calling for throughout the progress of the Bill, but we think that, as the right hon. Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson) said during the carry-over debate, it would have been far better for the Government to have adopted their own amendments and created a new Bill, and brought that to Second Reading. It would have presented a far more coherent picture of what the Government are now up to. The extremely messy way in which this legislation has evolved means that that would have presented the House with a clearer picture of what was going on, and there could have been greater time to consider the new Bill in its entirety. As it is, and as the right hon. Member for Belfast East has pointed out, the main scrutiny will have to be done by the upper House. Although their lordships excel at such work, this practice is becoming far too common.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
When people think about pubs, they often think first about beer, but while great beer certainly matters, pubs have always been about much more than what is poured into a glass. They are meeting places, employers, community hubs, cultural institutions and, in many cases, living pieces of local history, as we have heard a lot about today. In Warrington South, we are fortunate to have a rich pub culture, a growing independent hospitality sector and local breweries that continue a tradition stretching back generations. From Stockton Heath and Grappenhall to Latchford and Appleton, and across the wider constituency, pubs remain places where friendships are formed, local fundraising takes place, sports teams celebrate victories, families gather for meals, and communities come together in times of joy and challenge. Because pubs matter, we have a responsibility to approach legislation affecting them with care, precision and a proper understanding of the law as it already exists. The question before the House is not whether historic pubs deserve protection—of course they do. The question is whether the measures proposed in this Bill are necessary, proportionate and effective alongside the protections already available, and whether they will genuinely help pubs to survive as living businesses, rather than simply preserving bricks and mortar. That distinction is particularly important in Warrington South. Warrington has a remarkable brewing history. For generations, Greenall’s was one of the names most closely associated with our town, connecting brewing with local employment, industry and the network of public houses through which beer reached our communities. Many local people also remember the famous Tetley Walker brewery on Dallam Lane.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
We do indeed. We have the famous Sankey Canal, which is one of the oldest, if not the first, canal in this country. We also have the Manchester ship canal, which I am sure everybody here has heard about. For decades, the Greenall’s brewery helped to define the character and economy of Warrington. The distinctive smell of hops became part of daily life for generations of residents, and the brewery was an important local employer. Although that era has passed, brewing remains very much alive in our town. One example is the 4T’s brewery, based in Latchford and founded by John Wilkinson, who previously worked at the historic Tetley Walker brewery. Having started in a garage, 4T’s has developed from a small operation into an established independent brewery producing cask, craft, bottled and canned beers, and it is exceptional. That continuity matters. It demonstrates that heritage need not be frozen in time; it can be carried forward by people who possess the skills, knowledge and determination to adapt an old industry to new circumstances. Local breweries do far more than produce beer; they support employment, buy goods and services, supply pubs, attract visitors and strengthen Warrington’s identity. When residents choose a locally brewed pint, more of that spending remains within the local economy. Independent breweries and pubs form part of a wider network of businesses that support one another. Across Warrington, CAMRA recognises venues that champion quality beer and community spirit, including the Lower Angel, the Tavern and the Hop Emporium, among many others. Such establishments remind us that a pub’s value is not measured solely by the age of the building. It is also measured by the landlord who knows the regulars by name, the community group that meets in the back room, the local team that celebrate a victory there, and the family that has gathered around the same table for decades. A historic building may retain architectural interest after it ceases to operate as a pub, but a historic pub that continues to serve its community combines architectural, cultural and social value, and our policy should recognise all three. I am concerned that debates about heritage can sometimes become too focused on labels: we discuss whether a building is listed, whether it appears on a register or whether it meets a particular statutory definition. Those questions matter, because legal protection often depends on them, but a community’s attachment to a pub does not begin on the day a local authority adds it to a list, and neither does a pub’s cultural significance disappear because it falls just outside a definition drawn up in Westminster. Warrington has some wonderful examples of historic public houses. The Barley Mow, whose origins date back to 1561, is a remarkable timber-framed building where the ancient beams and historic panelling connect us with earlier generations. The Ferry Tavern, which was first licensed in 1762, occupies a distinctive setting between the Mersey and the Sankey and alongside the trans-Pennine trail. There are many, many more—too many to mention. These are not simply commercial premises; they are part of the character and story of our area. Once a historic building has been demolished, no subsequent register can bring it back. That is why early identification, good information, effective enforcement and timely decisions are so important. However, the lesson should not simply be that every pub requires another statutory designation. Local authorities need the knowledge, resources and confidence to use the powers that they already possess, and communities need meaningful opportunities to influence decisions before it is too late. Pubs are already protected by the planning system. Proposals to demolish a pub or change its use require a planning application, because pubs are deliberately excluded from the relevant permitted development rights, so an owner cannot simply assume that a pub can be demolished or converted without scrutiny. The local planning authority has an opportunity to consider the proposal, assess its impact and apply the relevant planning policy.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I absolutely agree. I think we need to focus on ensuring that the current legislation is more robust and is enforced, rather than adding extra layers, as my hon. Friend says. The current policies already act as an important safeguard, so creating another legal requirement will not necessarily produce a better practical outcome. Local planning authorities already have powers to issue enforcement notices where there has been a breach of planning control, and non-compliance with an enforcement notice can result in an unlimited fine on conviction. That is a substantial sanction. The challenge is ensuring that breaches are identified, investigated and dealt with promptly. There is an important difference between a lack of legal power and a failure to use existing powers effectively. Local planning authorities can also create local lists of buildings of historic architectural interest, including heritage pubs. These non-designated heritage assets receive consideration through the national planning policy framework when relevant planning decisions are made. That matters, because heritage is not restricted to nationally famous landmarks. A pub can be central to the identity of a neighbourhood without meeting the criteria for a statutory listing. There is also a building preservation notice; where a local planning authority considers that a building of special architectural or historic interest is at risk of demolition or harmful alteration, it can serve a notice and apply for the building to be considered for listing. These are already meaningful tools. The practical question for Warrington South is whether our council has the information and the resources it needs to identify vulnerable historic pubs and make effective use of those powers. The importance of a pub is often best understood by the people who use it. The assets of community value scheme, introduced through the Localism Act 2011, allows communities in England to nominate buildings or land that further the social wellbeing or social interests of their community. The local authority considers whether the nomination meets the statutory definition and decides whether the asset should be listed, giving residents a formal way of saying, “This place matters to us, and its importance should be recognised.” Residents are often best placed to explain why a particular pub matters. It might provide a meeting place for older people or host organisations and all the other great things that have been identified before, but an asset of community value listing is not an absolute guarantee that a building will remain open as a pub. The existing scheme provides a process for community involvement when a listed asset is put up for sale, but it does not generally compel the owner to sell to a community group or to accept its offer. That distinction matters.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Absolutely, and I will move on to the community right to buy, which is incredibly significant here. The English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026 is intended to give communities the first opportunity to purchase an asset of community value. As a Labour and Co-operative MP, I am incredibly passionate about giving power to communities to run things, as they know how they would serve and fit in their areas. That is incredibly powerful, and I would love to see more of that.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Absolutely, and I am a big advocate for communities taking over things like leisure centres. In Warrington South, the community is taking over sports pitches as well, because they are better able to access the funding they need, and they know what the demands are in the area and are best placed to support and reinvest in those things. I encourage all local authorities to get behind this incredibly powerful provision. As we have said, the Bill could represent a substantial change in the opportunities available to communities seeking to acquire their local pub. The purpose of the legislation should be to make it easier for residents to save a valued pub, not leave them navigating an unnecessarily complicated set of rules. For Warrington South, that means listening to residents, community groups, publicans and local businesses about what would genuinely help them.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
It is an incredibly valued and unusual pub, which is very much loved in the community. I would welcome anyone coming along to see it. If we want to understand why pubs and brewing matters to Warrington, we have to look beyond buildings and planning applications to the events that bring people together. One example of that is Warrington Oktoberfest. Last week, I sponsored a barrel at this year’s event.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Yes, and it was excellent. Many people know Oktoberfest as a chance to enjoy great beer, live music and time with friends, but Warrington Oktoberfest is much more than that. At its heart, it is a community-led charity event that has brought people together for nearly three decades while raising money for good causes locally and internationally. The festival, held at the local Parr Hall, began with a relatively small gathering of real ale enthusiasts 30 years ago. The idea came from Cliff Houghton, a member of Warrington rotary club who was also a master brewer at a local brewery. Through the commitment of volunteers, that modest initiative grew into a major fixture in Warrington’s calendar, offering a wide range of beers, ciders and entertainment, and opportunities for people to come together. Since the festival’s inception, it has raised more than £350,000 for charity.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I echo those comments. Our event has been supporting incredible charities in our town such as St Rocco’s hospice and the homelessness charity Room at the Inn, as well as many international charitable projects.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Yes, that is a wonderful thing. It is also a great way for the local community to see what is on offer locally that they might not otherwise know about. Our event is organised and hosted by rotary members and volunteers; there is no large paid workforce behind the scenes. Its success depends on people giving their time and energy to support their community. That is something worth celebrating. Warrington rotary will soon mark its centenary, reflecting a century of service to the people of Warrington and beyond. Oktoberfest is a powerful example of that spirit of service in action. The festival illustrates that beer and hospitality are not simply about what is served across the counter; they are about volunteering, local identity, charitable fundraising, entertainment and friendship. It also demonstrates the connection between brewing and the wider community. A brewery supports suppliers, distributors, retailers and pubs. A pub provides a place where those relationships become part of everyday life, and events such as Oktoberfest bring people together and demonstrate how hospitality can support wider charitable and economic activity. The festival also highlights the important distinction that heritage needs to be sustained, not just celebrated. Its success depends on organisers, volunteers, sponsors, customers and a programme that people actually want to attend. A historic pub faces the same basic reality. If we want pubs to remain part of our communities, we must consider how heritage protection fits alongside measures that help businesses trade successfully. The objective should be a living heritage: buildings that are cared for, businesses that can operate, and communities that continue to use and value their local spaces. All that matters because a pub’s survival can depend on the relationship between its rent, turnover and operating costs. If a business faces a period of weaker trading, an inflexible rent review mechanism can make an already difficult situation harder to manage.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
That is incredibly important. Such measures will make a big difference to businesses, and any little bit of help would be fantastic at this time. I speak a lot to publicans in my constituency about the issue. The fundamental question at the heart of this debate is what exactly we are trying to preserve. If the answer is an architectural asset, the planning and listed buildings systems provide important tools. If the answer is a building with historical significance for its community, local heritage lists and assets of community value provide routes for recognition. If the answer is the opportunity for a community to take ownership of a pub when it is sold, the community right to buy is directly relevant. If the answer is a business that needs to operate on sustainable commercial terms, tenancy rules and wider economic conditions also matter. The answer is often all those things at once, but different problems may require different solutions. A pub can retain its exterior while losing its historic interior; it can retain its architectural character while ceasing to function as a pub; and it can be purchased by a community group and still struggle to cover its costs. Equally, a pub that is not nationally listed may remain a thriving centre of community life for generations. The challenge is to design legislation that recognises those differences, rather than treating every heritage pub as if it faces identical risks. The question is not whether heritage matters—it plainly does; it is how Parliament can best protect it. I want to bring this debate back to the people and places of Warrington South. When we speak about the borough’s brewing heritage, we are discussing a history of work, enterprise and community. When we speak about 4T’s Brewery, we are discussing the continuation of brewing traditions and the entrepreneurial spirit that keeps them alive. When we speak about historic pubs, from the Barlow Mow to the Ferry Tavern, we are discussing buildings that connect us to earlier generations. When we speak about Warrington Oktoberfest, we are discussing volunteers, charities and residents coming together to turn community spirit into practical support for others. Those things deserve attention from Parliament. But the best way to protect them is not necessarily to create the largest possible number of new legal requirements; it is to identify the risks accurately, use existing powers effectively and ensure that any new powers address a genuine gap. It is to support independent brewing and the hospitality businesses that give local products a market and to consider a building’s heritage alongside the economic circumstances that determine whether a business can continue to operate. Warrington has a proud brewing history and its pubs are part of the social and architectural story of our town.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I suppose I can do that, but Warrington is superior—we know that. [Laughter.] Our heritage deserves to be protected, understood and passed on to each generation. For Warrington South, the stakes are not theoretical. They concern the preservation of our industrial history, the future of our independent brewing and the places where our communities continue to meet. The ultimate measure of success will not be how many pubs we place on a register, but how effectively we protect the heritage that matters, how many communities are given a genuine opportunity to save the places they value, and whether those places can continue to play a living part in our towns and villages.
- Hansard source
Drought Conditions: England
I thank the Minister for her statement. Despite what the shadow Minister said, this situation is unprecedented: the first time a severe drought has ever been declared in the UK. This is incredibly shocking for what has historically and famously been our wet island. Drought has just been declared in Yorkshire. Consumers in my constituency often raise the issue of leaks with me. How can we ensure that water companies address leaks before asking consumers to reduce their usage?
- Hansard source
Drought Conditions: England
I thank the Minister for her statement and the actions she is taking. It seems clear that climate change is playing its role, but, in her assessment, what else is contributing to this problem and what long-term steps are the Government taking to ensure that we are building up resilience to deal with the consequences of climate change for all of us?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
It is an honour to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Penrith and Solway (Markus Campbell-Savours) in this important debate. Watford and the surrounding area have a fine history of pubs and brewing. Indeed, the town has been associated with the production of beer, sold widely in the town’s hostelries, for many years. Benskins was the pre-eminent brewery in Watford, and Hertfordshire’s biggest brewer until its acquisition by Ind Coope in 1957. There were many tied houses, and many bore the Benskins name well into the 1990s. In fact, the part of Watford in which I reside has a close association with the Benskins brewery, in terms of housing provision for workers and managers at the brewer’s facilities. For many years, Watford football club, the town’s professional team, were known as the Brewers, and Benskins brewery sponsored the purchase of the club’s Vicarage Road ground, where they have played ever since—earning them the nickname the Brewers. It was subsequently changed to the Hornets, which I suspect had a sting in the tail for the Brewers—perhaps we will never know. The ground was leased to the club at peppercorn rent, and in 2001, the club purchased the ground from Punch Taverns, which had inherited the freehold as part of its acquisition of the Allied Domecq estate. In 2006, the club also purchased the freehold of the Red Lion pub opposite the ground, which remains a favourite watering hole for home fans, with away fans being accommodated at the nearby rebranded Oddfellows—formerly the Oddfellows Arms. In the interests of research and the pursuit of knowledge, I have attended both of those venues and can report that they are convivial, if tightly packed, venues that do the town proud as examples of heritage pubs. Other pubs further away accommodate a mixed fanbase, which generally works well. Although the M1 derby, with local rivals that cannot be named in here—my hon. Friend the Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) is no longer present, or else she could testify to this—can sometimes present a challenge. Returning to Benskins, the old offices, which are a three-story redbrick house in the Georgian neoclassical style, fronted the brewery itself. It was the former home of the Dyson family, built around 1775, with extensions added to the side in 1807. The house was bought in 1867 by Joseph Benskin, and the whole site continued to operate as their brewery until it was acquired by Ind Coope in 1957. Brewing continued in Watford until 1972, with the iconic chimney being demolished in 1977—the year of our late Queen’s jubilee. As a child, I spent that day on a balcony in the borders, ironically, although not deliberately, being sick—something that any novice attendee of our national heritage public houses may too have experienced. In the 1970s, the football club’s matchday programme would always contain an advert for Ind Coope, listing all its pubs and giving the names of mine host as “Mr and Mrs” with their initials and a surname. That is how it was done in those days. In the end, the grade II listed property became the Watford Museum, opened by the Watford-born actor Terry Scott. Thanks to Government funding, the museum is presently being moved to a newer, more modern venue. One of Watford’s multitudinous pubs was eventually named after Joseph Benskin. It was on the corner of Market Street, and these days it is a Gail’s. Less modern, however, is a small window set in the wall dating back around 300 years. It is documented as a surviving part of the original building. Many of the old pubs remain, while some more recently constructed ones have vanished. Watford’s council housing estates generally came equipped with at least one pub. Woodside had the Hammer in Hand and the Hare near Leveret Close, which is now a care home. Meriden still has the Badger. Holywell had the Highwayman, which is now Turpin Court, and in Courtlands Drive was the Beaver, which sadly has not been reintroduced there. I must relay an anecdote where I met the former Member for West Bromwich East in one of these heritage pubs. I was much impressed by the speed with which he was able to consume a pint of the dark brew of the Irish isle while within the Badger. Checking through “The Book of Watford”, compiled and edited by local historian Bob Nunn in 1987, it lists 90 Watford pubs that existed since 1900. Many are now long gone. He dedicates much of the tome to them. The distinctive Oxhey village has retained two pubs in the neat rows of Victorian terraces: the Rifle Volunteer and the nearby Villiers Arms. Sadly, the Haydon Arms—a bit more out of the way—was lost, and the Prince of Wales closed in 1955. Watford’s pubs are and remain social hubs. The Horns at the top of the town is famous for and still offers live music. I have enjoyed the music there many times, and it would be inappropriate of me not to mention a former Broadcasting, Entertainment, Communications and Theatre union mentor, Paul Evans, who I was lucky enough to witness playing at the venue with his band while I nervously awaited a very different impending recall for the birth of my second child. There are many countryside pubs within a short drive or walk of Watford, and in some instances a bus service remains to get people there and back. The Clarendon Arms at Chandlers Cross was a regular pit stop for walkers, and the Cart and Horses at Commonwood, Bucks Hill, was the terminus for many years of London Country’s double deckers on the 318A route, where the conductor would see the driver reverse back to the stop to lay over before the return journey to Watford. I can testify to the delights of the Clarendon Arms. My partner and I, freshly arrived in Hertfordshire’s finest town of Watford, strode our way through Whippendell wood to said hostelry and partook of its thirst-quenching delights. Perhaps less impressively, the return path was far from direct, and the sun was bidding a provocative farewell as we made our way through the snagging snicker of the woods vaguely in the right direction. It was more reminiscent of “An American Werewolf in London” than “The Railway Children”. The Sir Robert Peel was a popular pub in Watford in its own right up until 2006. CAMRA advises that the explanation for its name was its former use as the town’s police station. The Wheatsheaf does not appear to have been a particularly fortunate name for pubs locally. The one in Watford at Bushey Arches became a car showroom. Sarratt, a few miles out of town and still with a bus service, saw its pub of the same name close. There was also a Wheatsheaf in Bovingdon High Street, which has closed. It is important in this debate to namecheck a couple of my constituency’s hostelries. To that end, I mention the One Crown in Watford, which is believed to be one of the oldest pubs. In 1756, Jeremiah Friend was listed as the landlord of the venue, which suggests that is a fact. It is clearly challenging to be able to identify all these examples. I also mention the Swan, which apparently had 17th-century heritage, too. There is also the O’Neill’s, as it is now known, but to most of us it is the Flag.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Yes, the legacy of pub names should be celebrated. It is sometimes disappointing to see the generic nature of venues in high streets. We can but hope that the interiors of those pubs continue to be sites of convivial and lively memory that can live on beyond the names. I mentioned that O’Neill’s was formerly known as the Flag. It was originally a hotel to service Watford Junction station, and I must confess to have occasionally made use of its facilities, including once when it provided much-needed sustenance to a delegation from a previous abode of mine in Hammersmith and Fulham. They, too, were delighted to avail themselves of its excellent food and drink. The Railway Arms in Bushey, which has close associations with the railway and those commuters who use it, once provided me with an opportunity to be sounded out about electoral issues in the run-up to the 2015 general election, in which I stood. In that election, I was able to relegate the Liberal Democrat mayor of Watford to third place, as Labour began its ascent back up the polls—a task that I fully intend to better at the next election. The Moon Under Water on the high street is a peculiarity as a heritage public house in that it was opened in 1995, but it has an awareness of its history that far transcends expectations. Many informative items decorate the pub, revealing the history of the town. The pub is run by Wetherspoons and is named after George Orwell’s fantasy pub. Wetherspoons’ website reveals: “In 1536, Richard Morison, the future owner of Cassiobury estate returned to England from his studies in Italy to work for the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Thomas Cromwell.” Richard was granted the manor of Cashio in 1546. His wife, Bridget, founded the Bedford almshouses in 1580 to house poor women from Watford, Langley and Chenies. They remain standing to this day, and I was able to enjoy hospitality at them on one of my visits there. Heritage comes in many forms, and it would be negligent not to mention the town’s famous nightclub, Pryzm, which closed a couple of years ago. The club has known many forms, and indeed names, and rather like which Doctor Who one grew up with, it dates residents of the town to an era—for me, it was Paradise Lost. Many patrons would emerge from that nightclub in the early hours of the morning, blinking in the artificial lamppost light, seeking either a kebab or a cab—an act that has now sadly past into history. I have also been able to attend a beer festival in St John’s church, an unlikely but enjoyable setting for the consumption of fine ales. As other hon. Members have said, it is important to remember that even as we pass on, heritage is still being built today. The Mad Squirrel, where I was delighted to take a delegation of SPD members from Watford’s twin town of Mainz in Germany, was a particular favourite. I will close by reflecting that last Saturday I was in the Estcourt Tavern in Watford, which is now run by Steven and Mel, formerly of the Southern Cross, to drown my sorrows following Watford football club’s lamentable defeat. One of the town’s long-established pubs, the refurbishment has been amazing, and I wish them every success with it. That venue was the site of another political interrogation, when I was quizzed about which Miliband I had supported in the Labour party leadership election of 2010—and so began a trajectory that delivered my election to this place.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Of course, I would be happy to give an answer: the right one. Figures I have seen show that in 2015 there were over 55,000 pubs, but by 2024 there were a staggering 10,000 fewer, which is sobering thought and a reminder to us all that pub closures did not begin in 2024. Pubs are the focal point for a community—public houses serving the public. I am pleased that the Government have recognised their loss over many years and that this needs to be tackled and addressed.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
My hon. Friend mentions the new town status of his constituency. I wonder if he shares my thought that it presents a model for how new towns may be able to be rolled out elsewhere in the country.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Having been an attendee at that concert in 1996, I wish to ask my hon. Friend whether he is aware that Liam Gallagher also frequented pubs in the neighbourhood where I grew up, and his favourite pint was a Guinness.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
My hon. Friend mentions that his father, too, was a physician. I wonder whether their opinions differ on whether more healthy benefits are to be derived from lager or bitter, based on their experience?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I congratulate the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood) on bringing forward the Bill, and I bow to his superior knowledge of pubs both heritage and modern. I do not doubt how thorough his research methods have been. This is an issue of enormous importance, particularly for rural constituencies such as Penrith and Solway, where the village pub is often much more than simply a business. The Bill would establish local authority registers of heritage public houses, introduce restrictions on their sale, and create additional protections in the planning system. In many of our villages, the pub sits at the heart of community life. It is where neighbours meet, local groups gather, funds are raised for worthy causes, and people maintain the social bonds that hold communities together. The loss of a village pub can be devastating. It can fundamentally change the character of an area and leave a void that is never truly filled. I therefore understand entirely the motivation behind the Bill, and the desire to ensure that valued pubs are not unnecessarily lost. However, I wish to focus my remarks on provisions in the Bill that contain similar principles to the asset of community value framework, particularly the restrictions on sale and the opportunity for community acquisition. As I understand it, under the Bill owners of a registered heritage public house could be subject to a process including a full moratorium period of up to 12 months before a sale can proceed in certain circumstances. My question is a practical one: what happens when a community wishes to buy a pub, has local support and a business plan, but needs time and financial support to complete the purchase?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s intervention. My criticisms of the Bill may go beyond this Bill and into some of the existing provisions. The success of these protections will ultimately depend not only on the rights that Parliament creates, but on whether communities can realistically exercise those rights. That brings me to a case in my constituency—hon. Members may be relieved to hear that it is the only pub I will mention in my speech. In the village of Ireby, local residents have spent years attempting to secure the future of Emily’s Black Lion, the last remaining pub serving a rural area of around 15,000 hectares with a population of only a few hundred. The importance of the Black Lion cannot be overstated. Public transport has been withdrawn from the village, there are few remaining public amenities, and the pub supports community events, fundraising for local institutions and the neighbouring, community-owned Globe Hall. For many residents, it is the principal social and community hub.