Heritage Public Houses Bill
We will hear a great example about custard pies from the hon. Gentleman.
Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,832 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
- Hansard source
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
The hon. Gentleman talks about custard pies—that was a very watery custard intervention. We like full-throated creamy custard here. [Interruption.] He says that I have spoken too long; I have not spoken long enough. You gave me an early Christmas present by calling me first, Madam Deputy Speaker, so I shall use the opportunity provided by you, and by my constituents in sending me here. If the hon. Gentleman sits back and relaxes for a little longer, he will hear a little more about what I think and how we should proceed. Whether we agree may be a different matter, but I am sure he will enjoy it none the less. Our pubs play an important role in our international relations. The hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) is a shadow Foreign Office Minister, so I hope he will listen to this part of my speech with the attention he is known for. On Australia Day 2025, alongside members of Silverdale parish council, I welcomed the then Australian high commissioner, the hon. Stephen Smith, to the Bush Inn in Silverdale. As the House will know—because I suspect that, like the hon. Member for Spelthorne, it pays attention to everything I say in this House—our town was the birthplace of the sixth Prime Minister of Australia, Joseph Cook. When Cook returned to the United Kingdom as Australia’s high commissioner here in the 1920s, he celebrated in the very same pub that we took Mr Smith to. My team and I and many other local people, not least the parish council, have traced Cook’s local story—rather unsurprisingly, he was a miner down the pit—and we raised a toast to his legacy. The only problem with Cook is that he started off in the Labour party and ended up as a Tory, but nobody is beyond redemption. Another much-loved pub is the Gresley Arms on Alsagers Bank, which is known for having the best views in Staffordshire. The fantastic beer garden is an excellent way to spend a summer evening or, as my crew is used to, a final stop after a long day of pounding the pavements, as we get to enjoy one of our heritage public houses. The Albert first opened as a beer house in 1861—I hope this is enough heritage for the hon. Member for Spelthorne. It is run by Emma, and it is a great community pub. In fact, I took another Australian high commissioner to the United Kingdom, the hon. George Brandis, there on his visit to Newcastle-under-Lyme. I look forward to taking you to both pubs when you come to see us, Madam Deputy Speaker. That is just another example of how our pubs play such an important role in all that we do. I should say that the secretary of my constituency Labour party, Alderman Sylvia Butler, is a loyal and devoted champion of the Albert—long may that continue. There are so many pubs that mean so much to our community. I would happily spend all day speaking about all of them, but I do not want to upset the hon. Member for Spelthorne any more. I welcome all my colleagues from all parties to come and join us for a pint back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme—it could also be a soda and lime, or anything else. Whether it is the Archer in Wolstanton or the Westbury Tavern—
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I will happily give way to my west midlands friend.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I am enjoying this, as I think has been said by others before. My hon. Friend makes a very important intervention, and he is right. People can get all manner of refreshments at heritage public houses in all parts of the country. I am not sure what refreshments you would choose if you were having some of the Spelthorne watery custard, Madam Deputy Speaker, but you can certainly get a good, cold pint. You could also get a bitter lemon, which I know was ordered by the former Prime Minister, Mrs Thatcher, when she was at the Rovers Return. My hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) has gone, but we have talked about Emmerdale. I remember a clip of Baroness Thatcher at the Rovers Return in which she ordered a bitter lemon. That is just one example of the things people could drink there. My observation of Mrs Thatcher does not go much further than that—I saw that quizzical look from my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge)—do not worry. There is certainly a range of things. I am surprised that the Conservative party does not want to take a moment to talk about this, because it supposedly believes in choice. The great thing about our heritage pubs is that not only are there so many up and down the country that we can choose to go to, but, when we get there, the choices are infinite. I am not a cider fan myself, but I wish cider drinkers in Halesowen and other parts of the west midlands very well indeed. Let me take us back to the Archer in Wolstanton, the Westbury Tavern, the Swan in Betley, the Boat and Horses, and the Sneyd Arms on Higherland—the list goes on and on, as my speech is doing this morning, unfortunately for the hon. Member for Spelthorne. At the end of the day, our pubs are about so much more than somewhere to have a pint, a cuppa, a Coke, a juice, or the many other options that my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) has allowed me to reference this morning. They provide an opportunity to see familiar faces and catch up. In other words, they make us feel like we are part of something—a neighbourhood, a village—and it is so important to our collective and individual happiness and wellbeing that that is so. We will all have heard stories from our communities of people who notice that someone has not been at the bar or has not been in recently, and that person is often checked up on. Most of the time, it is for a positive reason, but some of the time it is not, and without the connection and sense of community that pubs provide, people would not be able to do that. I would like to say a couple more things about how we can support and protect our heritage pubs. The first is by ensuring that our town centres are safe and secure places to travel, to walk and to be in. Local people in Newcastle-under-Lyme are rightly furious that in recent times, antisocial behaviour and criminality have emerged far too frequently around the sunken roundabout and particular hotspots in town. I hope that all the relevant authorities, from borough and county councils to Staffordshire police, get a grip of this situation and ensure that all measures—including those introduced by this Government—are used and used quickly. Our town is a wonderful place to live, learn and work, and we cannot allow it to be blighted by crime and antisocial behaviour, not now and not ever. I am sick and tired of women in Newcastle-under-Lyme telling me that they do not feel safe going into our town; I do not want any woman in my family, or who I represent, to feel that way. We will not successfully protect and defend our heritage pubs if people are not going to spend their money there because they do not feel safe. I hope the relevant authorities have heard me loud and clear. My second point is about the impact of incompetent decisions taken by local authorities, and what those can mean for celebrating and maintaining the heritage pubs that our towns are home to. Take the current situation on Brook Lane. Our town has essentially come to a standstill at rush hour in recent weeks because Brook Lane has been closed for several weeks, and is scheduled to be closed for several more. I wrote to Staffordshire county council—I suspect that the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire, whose Bill we are debating this morning, shares many of my frustrations with that council. Even if the hon. Member for Spelthorne does not want to hear it, I know that my honourable county colleague will agree with me on this. I wrote to Staffordshire county council on 1 September, and I had to write to it again this week, because no letter has arrived in response to mine. This is important, because Staffordshire county council has announced that it plans to introduce further road closures on surrounding roads. That is going to compound the situation, and will make it even more difficult for people to get to the Bridge Street Ale House I spoke about earlier, or to the Jug pub, not to mention all the other things that people have to do.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
My hon. Friend, with whom I almost always agree, is completely correct to point out the frustration caused to businesses and residents of communities, and the impact on the ability of pubs, shops and businesses generally to trade, survive and thrive, as a result of incompetent decisions made by incompetent people. From Shipley to Staffordshire north and south—if I can speak for the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire—we agree. We cannot support our heritage pubs, nor can we add them to our list of assets, if they no longer operate because of—as my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley has pointed out—stupid decisions resulting from incompetence, or just nonsense from people who should know and do better. Our pubs are places where our communities are formed, and where we share stories of our past and our heritage from generation to generation. If we were to lose them, we would be losing a huge part of our shared history. Our historic public houses each have their own unique character and charm.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
My hon. Friend is determined to make sure that the hon. Member for Spelthorne never speaks to me again, which may be a blessing, so I am grateful. She puts a question to me, and through me to all colleagues who may be thinking about how they can answer it in their contributions, and she is right. There are many places where people find a place to sit, to come together and to make things happen, whether it is to campaign against injustice and inequality or to call out councils for bad decisions. For example, there are the families campaigning on road safety in Newcastle-under-Lyme, particularly after the recent incident where a father was knocked down taking his child to school. An organisation has come together following their frustration and experiences. That is just one example. My hon. Friend can point to many places in her community where that will have happened. I look forward to her, when she catches your eye, Madam Deputy Speaker, being able to share some of the stories from her part of the world, as I know others will, too. The important point about conversation is that pubs are so often home to or locations for that shared, connected thread of history, experience and understanding that goes through from the generations before us to today, as we seek to look to tomorrow. I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention and the chance to spend a minute thinking about the importance of those conversations and what happens behind the doors of our public houses, not least the older ones. If I may, I will return for a moment to the Jug on Bridge Street, which, as I said at the beginning, was my unofficial office during my selection campaign. From a family perspective, it was like going full circle. My mother’s eldest sister, my auntie Carol—sadly late now—married my uncle Colin, who was the lead saxophonist in the Climax Blues Band, who released “Couldn’t Get It Right” and many other brilliant tunes that will have been played in pubs up and down the country, from Spelthorne to Staffordshire. I held on to that sense of connection with someone who had used the pub for years before me. I thought it was quite nice, and it was a source of comfort as I went through membership lists—you will remember this, Madam Deputy Speaker—trying to remember who I had and had not spoken to, what they had or had not said, what they wanted to say, and what I wanted to say back. The power of that connection and story is important. I am grateful to my hon. Friend, even though she is now on her phone—I tease—for giving me the opportunity to spend a minute thinking about that. Our public houses each have their own unique character and charm, and we cannot let the generations to come to miss out on a crucial part of our heritage and our culture. This is the longest I have spoken since I was elected to the House, and I am annoyed that I did not write more, since I have the floor, but I extend my thanks to all those in every way who keep our pub sector alive in Newcastle-under-Lyme. They do so much for the community and our local economy. In many ways, our island nation home would be so different if it were otherwise.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I could point to many excellent examples of that sense of community, but I am conscious that others may want to speak. I could not agree more with my hon. Friend, and he is right to raise that issue. It speaks to the people power of community, and I thank him for his intervention. Our historic pubs are at the heart of our communities, and once we lose them, we rarely get them back. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire for bringing this Bill to the House today, for giving us the opportunity to debate these important issues, and for giving me a chance to speak about the excellent public houses, both old and new, in Newcastle-under-Lyme. I know that colleagues from across the House, and from across our United Kingdom, will do similar shortly. We must keep working to make sure that our pubs are preserved and supported. As I speak in this debate today, I think of all the happy times I have spent with friends, family, loved ones and many a constituent across a pub table—happy times indeed!
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
The hon. Gentleman mentioned that one of his pubs dating back to the 15th century is haunted. Can he tell us what it is haunted by?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I am conscious that I have spoken a lot, but before my hon. Friend was interrupted by the statement she said that she would like to arrange for Members of the House to visit one of her breweries. My hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell) has said that he will happily get the first round, so may I encourage my hon. Friend to get arranging sooner rather than later?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
It is a case of a first time for everything: I do not think I can be accused of not making the case for Newcastle-under-Lyme as often as I can, Madam Deputy Speaker.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
It is. On a point of order, the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp)—in the pink shirt with a constituency in Surrey—intervened on my speech earlier, which led me to mention his constituency in my remarks. The hon. Member must correct the record. He said that I mentioned his constituency more than my own, which is of course nonsense and untrue. I have just checked Hansard and my notes: I made 20 references to Newcastle-under-Lyme, 14 specific references to areas in Staffordshire, six references to individual areas in Newcastle-under-Lyme, and six references to the hon. Member’s constituency. How can the hon. Member correct the record and ensure that an apology is given to me and my constituents?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Oh yes?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way; she is giving me a run for my money in terms of the length of her contribution. Does she agree that the description she has just shared with the House, on the importance of breweries, pubs and so on to her community, extends right across the United Kingdom? On Wednesday, I was in Derry/Londonderry with the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. We went to a brewery there and met the family running it. We saw the blood, sweat and tears that they put into it. As much as we are enjoying Warrington, I wanted her to give thought to breweries and pubs right across the United Kingdom.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I am enjoying listening to my hon. Friend talk about his new town. My town is an old town; it received its charter from King Henry II in 1173. Does he agree that it is not just in new towns where we see examples of the contribution that pubs can make, but in ancient towns like Newcastle-under-Lyme?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I am very interested to hear about that brewery. What would my hon. Friend order if he were there now?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Are you going?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
While my hon. Friend thinks about the contribution he is about to make, the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) and I had the pleasure of visiting my hon. Friend’s constituency not that long ago. The sad thing is, we did not manage to visit a pub. If we had, which one should we have gone to?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I really enjoyed that, but the one thing my hon. Friend did not do was answer the question I put to him before he performed, which was: where should the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes and I have gone when we were in his constituency?
- Hansard source
Drought Conditions: England
2026 will be the hottest year on record, and in all likelihood it will also be the coolest year that we will experience going forward. This is climate change, this is now the norm, and it is clear that our water systems, infrastructure and water companies are failing us. South West Water lost 107 million litres a day last year, which is equivalent to more than 100 litres per customer every day. Since 2013 it has received £40 million a year from central Government, while more than £1.5 billion has been paid out to shareholders in dividends. What have customers and my constituents got? Higher bills and sewage. They are angry, I am angry; they are fed up, I am fed up. The water Bill is a huge opportunity finally to start fixing the problem. Will the Minister support the Liberal Democrat proposal for a new mutual ownership model, and will she please consider my proposal for a national rainwater management strategy?
- Hansard source
Drought Conditions: England
The Liberal Democrats are deeply concerned by the declaration of severe drought across the south-east and south-west. It is a stark warning. We are in the grip of a climate crisis, and our water system lacks the resilience to address the water insecurity that that crisis is substantially causing. The Government and water companies must act now and at speed. Families, schools and businesses deserve to know that their taps will keep running and that the current situation will not become the new normal. The best way to save water is not to waste the water we have. Water companies must act to cut leakage, follow drought plans and invest in resilient infrastructure. Bill payers should not pay for decades of under-investment while nearly 3 billion litres of water escapes through leaking pipes every day. Farmers and food production face enormous pressures. Farmers may already have lost hundreds of millions of pounds to drought this year. The Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit estimates losses of nearly £5 billion across three weather-hit years. As I know the Minister knows, food security is national security. But the family farm tax, DEFRA budget cuts and the mishandling of the sustainable farming incentive are right now putting agriculture in jeopardy. Will the Government change course and back the Liberal Democrat plan for an additional £1 billion for the farming budget? In the long term, we need greater water storage, recycling, transfers and sustainable desalination alongside the fundamental reform of water companies failing to cope with the changing climate. Britain’s farms have enormous untapped potential to store water. Outdated planning rules and inadequate support are holding them back, and the Government’s £15 million reservoir fund does not even scratch the surface. Will the Minister today commit to a national “call to store” programme to identify on-farm storage capacity, remove planning barriers and back farmers, who want to be part of the solution?
- Hansard source
Critical Transport Infrastructure: Surrey Heath
There is very little that gives me more pleasure on a Friday afternoon than to talk about critical transport infrastructure in Surrey Heath. I am grateful to the House for allowing this Adjournment debate, and to the Minister for responding this afternoon. If a person were to look at a map of the United Kingdom, they would perhaps think that Surrey Heath ought to be a well-connected place. We have the M3 on our doorstep—indeed, it runs right through the middle of the constituency. We have London nearby, we have thriving businesses, and we have the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, over which I sometimes argue with the hon. Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow). However, try getting across Lightwater at rush hour, catching a train from Camberley or reaching hospital without a car, and a different picture emerges. At the last census, 56% of Surrey Heath households had two or more cars or vans, compared with 35% across England and Wales. We are in the top 10% most car-dependent constituencies in the country. I would contend that that does not reflect choice; rather, it reflects how little choice people have. Residential housing has dramatically expanded, public services have been rationalised, and the transport connecting them has barely kept up. There are so many issues that I want to raise today, but in the interests of time, I am going to restrict myself to just three. The first is the ongoing daily nightmare that is junction 3 of the M3 and the A322 at the aforementioned Lightwater. Anyone tuning in to a morning traffic report on BBC Radio 2 or LBC will be all too familiar with the name of Lightwater—it features with depressing regularity. For those Members who do not know, the A322 provides a vital link between Bracknell and Guildford. Businesses and commuters depend on it, and when junction 3 seizes up, the costs are felt across the entire corridor. People are late for work, deliveries are delayed and engines idle, polluting the air and wasting fuel. Productive time disappears in queues. The corridor connects two major centres of employment, yet we seem remarkably willing to accept its regular failure as an unavoidable fact of life. Then, there are the consequences for the villages around junction 3. Drivers divert through neighbouring communities, and roads outside people’s homes become rat runs. Residents describe speeding, dangerous manoeuvres and difficulty crossing the road. I know that this is not unique to Surrey Heath, but there have been serious accidents—including fatal ones—and there are continuing concerns about safety. This is an issue that Surrey county council has neglected for years, but on the topic of highways funding, it has long raised a legitimate concern. Surrey carries significant through traffic, much of it originating outside the county, yet road maintenance funding has historically been based on road length and physical assets, rather than how heavily roads are actually used. It is reasonable to ask whether a county carrying such an enormous volume of traffic receives a fair allocation to maintain its roads, and I join Surrey county council in asking that question, but the problems at junction 3 and the A322 go well beyond routine maintenance. Years of inadequate investment have left a problem too large for a local roads authority to resolve from its own resources. The A322 is a strategically important economic corridor that is bound up with one of the busiest parts of our motorway network, so I hope the Minister will resist the temptation to tell me that the A322 is simply a local problem requiring a local solution.
- Hansard source
Critical Transport Infrastructure: Surrey Heath
I see the Minister shaking his head, and I am encouraged by that visual sign. We already know who maintains the A322, but the heart of the problem is the way in which the A322 interacts with the M3. If Surrey county council and National Highways cannot tackle that challenge between themselves, the Government will be required to step in to help broker a solution. In March last year, Ministers confirmed that National Highways had completed an initial study of junction 3 and was progressing further feasibility work on both short-term improvements and larger-scale interventions. That work was intended to shape investment decisions under the now-published third road investment strategy. I would welcome an update on what has happened to that work, and what prospect there is of securing funding for the improvements that are needed. My first request of the Department, though, is to bring National Highways, Surrey county council, the incoming West Surrey council, Bracknell Forest council and any other interested local stakeholder, plus Surrey police, together for an urgent strategic review of the whole corridor. That review must examine the economic costs of congestion, road safety, the consequences for residential communities and the demands of future development. I hope that it will also identify practical improvements that can be delivered quickly, alongside properly costed proposals for larger works. Residents have campaigned for improvements to this junction for decades. Indeed, my predecessor as MP—Michael Gove, who is now a noble Lord—clearly recognised its importance, having spent many years being photographed beside it. However, the people of Lightwater have had enough of photo opportunities, and they have certainly had enough of me standing beside that same junction; instead, they want investment. They deserve to know what can be done, what it will cost and when decisions might be made. I also want to raise the issue of current and future interactions of new housing targets on public infrastructure. That brings me to rail connectivity in Surrey Heath. Camberley, our principal market town, is only 30 miles from central London. It is considered to be at the heart of the home counties commuter belt, yet there are only two direct morning trains to Waterloo, each taking 73 minutes. Every other service requires at least one change. From Farnborough, Waterloo can be reached in only 37 minutes, and from Woking, which is not too far away, it can be reached in just 27 minutes. Even Winchester has trains that reach London in under an hour, despite being double the distance from London Waterloo. It is little wonder that so many residents begin their rail journeys by driving further away from their nearest train station. After two years of pressing South Western Railway, I recently received the Wessex suburban journey time study—it is a thrilling and exciting read, and I recommend it to all present. It suggests potential time savings of just six minutes from Camberley, seven minutes from Bagshot and nine minutes from Frimley, yet passengers would depart later and arrive at Waterloo at precisely the same time under the new plans. We need the study to be developed into costed options for faster, direct services, including the infrastructure investment required to make a meaningful difference. Rail is only one part of the picture; buses are another part. When I asked my local residents about the issues they would like me to raise today, the frequency, reliability and extent of bus services was near the top of their list. They want reliable buses that genuinely serve their communities and connect to other transport nodes, such as local railway stations, but that are timed so that they can fit into the lived reality of the school day, for example, rather than a transport planner’s interpretation of it. When bus services cannot be trusted or simply do not fit into people’s lives, they invariably turn to their cars, adding to congestion and the troubles in our local road network, undermining the economic case for the bus services that remain. That is not a desirable position to be in. Those pressures will only grow if new housing is not matched by better transport. The Government’s revised housing methodology has more than doubled Surrey Heath’s annual housing requirement. I understand why we need to build: young people want to live near their families, and businesses need workers who can afford to live locally. I am not opposed to development at all in principle, but I am concerned by the lack of matching ambition for the infrastructure on which those homes will depend. The ongoing development at Mindenhurst, an extension of the village of Deepcut, is a case in point. Based on the old Army barracks, Mindenhurst is a development of 1,200 properties, with a new school, pubs, sports facilities, a refurbished church, and local shops and amenities. It is genuinely an example of development done well. There is much to commend in its design and the quality of its implementation, but it has invariably had a very significant impact on the transport infrastructure beyond the confines of its own site, adding significant additional traffic to an already challenged and congested road network. There are proposals for another 950 houses in nearby Normandy, which will compound those impacts. At the moment, these schemes are assessed separately in planning terms, but the residents and future residents use the same roads and junctions. Section 106 agreements and community infrastructure levy money from developers have an important part to play in upgrading transport infrastructure, but the money knocks off only the roughest edges of the impact that a single development will have. It is a sticking plaster for an infrastructural patient that increasingly requires major surgery. Even if we added together every section 106 agreement and every pound of CIL money, it still could not address decades of under-investment in transport infrastructure. That requires serious public investment and strategic planning at both regional and national levels. That is also why the Government must be careful when implementing their new housing requirements, because in many places our infrastructure is already years, if not decades, behind where it needs to be now. Yet we are planning substantial new development, including in areas with limited public transport where many additional journeys will inevitably be made by car. That will create significant pressures. I worry about what that means for public confidence in development itself. Residents see another planning application and ask a simple question: how will the roads, schools and buses cope? Even those who recognise the need for new homes can become frustrated when the supporting infrastructure always seems to be promised for tomorrow rather than delivered today. I hear that repeatedly in Surrey Heath, and I suspect that many Members across the House hear the same. Buses and housing growth must be planned together. We need to be more ambitious and co-ordinated in planning for growth. At a time when Surrey is undergoing local government reorganisation, we lack both a local plan and the broader spatial strategy that opens our communities up to speculative development. West Surrey council will begin operating next April. That creates an opportunity to plan across a wider area. However, it will inherit a significant debt and cannot reasonably be expected to shoulder the investment burden alone. My second request is therefore for the Minister to work with the incoming council, National Highways, rail and bus operators, and schools to develop a shared infrastructure delivery plan. Above all, residents deserve clarity. They should be able to see who is responsible, where the funding will come from and when improvements may be delivered. Where strategic infrastructure lies beyond the means of local authorities, there must be a meaningful role for central Government in funding and helping to co-ordinate it. Turning to Frimley Park hospital—an issue I have raised in the Chamber before, not always with the utmost of success—I strongly support a new modern hospital to replace buildings affected by reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete. However, I have serious reservations about the hospital trust’s preferred site at Frimley Fuel Allotments, particularly about access for patients, staff and ambulances. That concern is shared by local residents, the South East Coast ambulance service, the blood transfusion service and even clinicians at the hospital itself. The surrounding roads already serve six schools, and residents and school leaders have jointly raised concerns about the proposal. The area is constrained by single-lane bridges, difficult access routes and limited public transport. When we add ambulance movements, shift changes, out-patient appointments and years of construction traffic, it is entirely reasonable to ask whether the local road network can cope. Before a final decision is made on the site selection, we need clear and convincing evidence that access can be maintained safely and reliably, particularly at the busiest times of day when pupils are in schools. Last year, health officials advised me that the necessary transport works had not been either fully costed or budgeted for and might in fact end up depending on the new hospital programme’s contingency fund to receive the funding they need. I find that deeply troubling, because we know what contingency funds are for: unforeseen consequences that happen during the building process, not things that can be entirely foreseen at the start of it. Surely the cost and the practicality of getting people to a hospital are fundamental considerations in deciding where to build it. My third request to the Minister, which I recognise may stray beyond his brief in the Department for Transport, is to work with health colleagues to secure a fully costed and funded hospital access plan before any planning permission is submitted or, potentially, questioned. That must cover ambulance access, public transport, parking, the effects on schools and residential roads, and construction traffic. I also want to know what happens if satisfactory access cannot be delivered. In that case, the proposed location of the hospital must surely be reconsidered. The trust’s public engagement exercise for the new hospital recently closed, leaving many residents with the impression that the most important question of all—the hospital’s location—had effectively been decided before they were even consulted. I do not think we should end up in that position. In Whitehall, the issues I have raised today—a motorway junction, railway timetables, buses, new housing and a hospital—may look like separate matters, but for people in Surrey Heath they are part of the same working week and the same struggle to get around. The Government want more homes and a more productive economy, and so do I, but we need to get much better at co-ordinating the investment that makes both possible. I hope the Minister will respond to my three requests: an urgent strategic review of junction 3 and the A322 corridor with National Highways fully involved, a shared infrastructure delivery plan for West Surrey backed by proper Government funding and Government co-ordination, and a fully costed and funded hospital access plan before any planning application. For each, I would welcome a clear indication of who will take responsibility, what happens next and where we can expect progress. As I said right at the start, Surrey Heath looks well connected on a map. My constituents ought to be able to feel that connection when they leave their front doors in the morning and when they return at the end of a hard working day.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I thank the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood) for bringing forward this valuable private Member’s Bill on historic British pubs. I have some wonderful examples in my constituency, including, among others in Melksham, the King’s Arms, which has been named by Historic England as a grade II listed building; the Bear, which was used as a coaching inn in the 18th century; and the Market Tavern. In Devizes, there is another Bear in the hotel on the Market Place; the Lamb Inn, which dates back to the 15th century; the White Bear Inn, which is grade II listed and reputed to be the oldest pub in Devizes, dating back to 1567, and which is allegedly haunted; and the Black Swan Inn. In Urchfont, there is the Lamb Inn, a thatched pub dating back to the 15th century. In Potterne, there is the George & Dragon, which, again, dates back to the 15th century and is recognised on the national heritage list. In Market Lavington, there is the Green Dragon, which dates back to the 17th century. In Sells Green, near Seend, there is the Three Magpies, another grade II listed pub, which has links to the canal. In Bradford on Avon, there is the Barge Inn, the Three Horseshoes and the Swan, which sadly closed in September 2023.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
I will not go into the ins and outs of hauntings, although they may be of great interest to the hon. Member. In Box, there is the Northey Arms, a historic inn close to the Great Western Railway, and the Queens Head, which is famous locally for its music. In Colerne, there is the Fox & Hounds, a grade II listed pub, and the Six Bells, which dates from the 18th century. In Winsley, there is the Seven Stars. Some pubs in my constituency have closed and then reopened with community support—the Hop Pole in Limpley Stoke is a worthy example—and others are in the midst of this struggle, such as the Ivy in Heddington, which has closed. The Somerset Arms in Semington has received support from none other than His Royal Highness Prince William, the Prince of Wales. Historic pubs need our support. Moreover, all pubs and communities need an economic shift from the supermarket to the pub, and I hope that the Chancellor is listening as he writes his Budget speech. The people need the pub, and the future of our country needs these pubs.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Bannerman’s bar in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency is well frequented, especially during the Edinburgh fringe. We have heard the most wonderful arguments and expositions about pubs from Members from right across the House, but I wonder if the hon. Member is convinced that the Bill should pass?
- Hansard source
Drought Conditions: England
The Minister is doing her best in very difficult circumstances. Does she agree that one of the problems is that over recent years the Government have given insufficient subsidy and support for adaptation measures and been obsessed with subsidising windmills and solar panels, which will not do anything to deal with the real problems on the ground that we are experiencing?
- Hansard source
Business without Debate
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. My point of order arises from the written statement issued by the Government today about the covid-19 inquiry module 4 report. That report was issued exactly six months ago, so the Government have presented their response on the very last day when that could be done. But instead of being a specific answer to the recommendations in the report, the response merely says that the Government want more time. I am particularly concerned about Baroness Hallett’s recommendations for specific changes that she thought should be made to the vaccine damage payments scheme. Today the Government are saying that they note those and recognise “the trauma and distress caused to families facing long waits for the processing of their claims. We take these concerns very seriously and will look further at what needs to be done”—
- Hansard source
Drought Conditions: England
I thank the Minister for advance sight of her statement. Today’s update reinforces what farmers, rural communities and households have known for months: England is in the grip of a drought, and the Government have been slow to react. Eleven areas are now in drought, with Yorkshire the latest to be declared. Ten water companies have hosepipe bans in force. Drought-related environmental incidents have already overtaken the totals of 2022 and 2025. This is the third drought in five years. It should not have caught the Government off guard, but here we are on a sitting Friday, listening to the Water Minister roll out an emergency statement, effectively saying she has been busy having meetings. On 31 July, two and a half months ago, the shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins), wrote to the Environment Agency setting out six practical steps. Ministers have since said that they will adopt some of them, which is welcome, but it is highly surprising that in this statement from a Minister in the Department that represents food policy, there was not one mention of the impact the drought is having on our farmers and our growers. Why was that? The key questions remain. The Government talk a big game about their new water Bill and taking back public control, yet the primary action announced today is instructing water companies to conduct daily monitoring. Does that mean they have not been doing that to date? If the national drought group has been meeting regularly since August, why are water companies only now being told to step up their drought planning? Why is the Minister willing to relax strict environmental regulations for water companies when they have failed to protect customer supplies through not undertaking significant investment in dealing with leakage and enhancing water storage? What does this say to the many households that are facing increased water bills? The Minister highlights upgrades in investment and promises to build nine new major reservoirs, but she has also admitted that this is a decade-long journey. Our communities, our farmers and our businesses are facing severe challenges today. When exactly will the first reservoir be built, and will she release a timeframe for each? Some on-farm reservoirs are reporting being a fifth full or less heading into winter, yet farmers are still waiting for the reopened water management grant, and planning and licensing hurdles to building water storage remain far too high. The Government announced a £65 million drought package, but what has happened to it? It was money already sitting unallocated in the farming budget. Most of it was poured into the sustainable farming incentive, and look what happened to that. Will the Minister update us on how she is making it easier for farmers to have on-farm reservoirs? The Opposition will work constructively with anyone serious about protecting our food and water security, but we will hold this Government to account when they fall short, and right now they are falling short—significantly short—of what farmers, rural communities and our households expect.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
It is a privilege to be able to speak in the debate that my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood) has secured on the important topic of heritage public houses. I am very privileged to have 64 pubs in my constituency—there are a couple of Conservative clubs included in that number, which is worth mentioning. That is quite a few compared with some Members, who I know only have a handful. In particular, the more urban constituencies are not always fortunate enough to have as many pubs as constituencies that, like mine, are a nice mix of urban and rural. Given the nature of my constituency, which in large part is made up of historic villages that have either merged into the city of Plymouth or have remained as very sweet South Hams or Dartmoor villages, we have a large number of historic pubs. They would have been stopping points for travellers, potentially travelling up from Cornwall through Devon and on to London, and a key part of the community, including in fishing and rural communities. Villages such as Noss Mayo and Newton Ferrers have four or five pubs between them. They are very small, and people would be shocked at how many there are, but I can reassure Members that they maintain a healthy trade. The Mussel Inn in Down Thomas is another key country pub that serves excellent food. Plympton and Plymstock were villages before they were absorbed into the city of Plymouth. They have some very historic pubs, and I will touch on a couple of them shortly, but it is worth mentioning the village of Turnchapel. We proudly still refer to it as a village, but it is now an important part of the city of Plymouth. Turnchapel has both the Boringdon Arms and the Clovelly Bay, which are key parts of the community. Fortunately, they are being kept going by the marine autonomy work that is happening at a former Royal Marine base next door. There is the historic Drake Manor in Buckland Monachorum—hopefully, Sir Francis Drake would have been pleased to be its namesake. Milton Combe has the Who’d Have Thought It, a classic thatched pub at the bottom of a hill in a tiny little village, which serves the most wonderful food. I always make sure to go there with friends just before Christmas. We have a fantastic community-led pub in Cornwood that was recently shortlisted for one of the Countryside Alliance’s rural prizes and came all the way to the House of Commons. Although it was not a winner that day, we are very proud that it was nominated. The Old Smithy, which is not named after me, is a very good pub in Ivybridge. Those are just a few of my pubs. Like others in the Chamber this morning, I will not name all of them, but I think it is was worth putting those ones on the record. It is also worth mentioning the names of such pubs. We have heard of Woolsacks and all sorts of historic names, and we know that even the bars in Parliament are named for specific historic reasons. I particularly want to mention the Skylark in the little village of Clearbrook. If anybody is ever on Dartmoor, they will hear the skylark tweeting away across the moors. What is so wonderful about historic pubs is that their names reflect something that is either historic or specifically tied to the culture of the local community. Such names draw young people into connecting with the history. I want to make special mention of the community groups all over the country that help pubs to survive by sending people on walking routes around them, or by highlighting them through competitions. There is a thriving Facebook page called Plymouth on Tap, which runs a comprehensive competition for pubs in different communities and chooses winners. It is worth mentioning the volunteers behind such Facebook pages and websites, who do so much. Plymouth on Tap says that it is about: “Mapping Plymouth’s pub history & fighting for the ones we’ve still got.” I pay particular tribute to the organisers of that group this morning. That leads me to the value of Members of Parliament running competitions. Like many others, I have run a pub of the year competition. I am delighted that the winner over the last two years has been a historic heritage pub in my constituency, the London Inn in Plympton St Maurice, which is an old village. It is a 16th-century grade II listed building, but can still muster enough votes to have won for two years in a row. I am adding some extra categories for the year ahead to make sure that other pubs can win, but Simon, the landlord, knows that I am doing that. Hopefully, he will push for the best pub in Plympton award, and maybe—who knows?—he will win overall best pub as well. I come back to my point about the importance of heritage pubs and the stories they tell. As I have alluded to, the village of St Maurice was along a major route to London. Who would have thought that little old Plympton St Maurice was a stopping point on the way? It has an incredible history that I will not go into fully, but perhaps I should apply for an Adjournment debate on it at some point. Plympton St Maurice was the home of many fine 17th and 18th-century artists, so if anybody is waiting to speak and wishes to look up the history of Charles Eastlake or Joshua Reynolds, they will see that the London Inn may well have been frequented by them, as they were schoolboys at Plympton grammar school and then went on to be leading figures at the Royal Academy and the National Gallery. If anyone is bored this morning, they can have a look while they are listening. The London Inn sits below a ninth-century castle. Such pubs are historic not just for the buildings themselves, but for their heritage, because of the communities that they sit in. The fact that a pub is so old usually means that the community around it has been there for that long as well. That leads me to another heritage pub, the Union Inn, which is also in Plympton—as the House can tell, Plympton is a very old part of my constituency. What I love is that these buildings do not get hindered by the listings that they might have, and the fact that they are not allowed to make changes to their interiors. In the Union Inn’s case, it creatively uses its garden space, which is now the home of the Plympton Royal British Legion branch. I have attended several ceremonies with the RBL in the garden of that historic pub. Although the rooms are small and it is incredibly cosy inside, it does have land around it. I was privileged to attend a D-Day event and a VE Day commemoration event, and I know the pub will appreciate that mention this morning. Those are two clear examples of the strong community roles that these heritage buildings—by nature often constricted because of their physicality—can play in their neighbourhoods. It is worth just touching on why these heritage pubs need saving in the first place and why we need to look at this legislation today. Given the nature of their fabric, it can be harder to bring in the numbers or to diversify into serving a carvery or a particularly complicated food menu. For these heritage buildings with tiny little rooms and steps everywhere, serving food in the way that a lot of modern, purpose-built pubs do will be particularly difficult. We know that pubs are facing considerable challenges, given the economic climate and the tax increases that the Government have levelled on them, whether it is the increases in national insurance, the minimum wage for young people or business rates. Government Members will say, “We’ve done some work on business rates for pubs,” but the damage has already been done in many cases. That is yet another reason why we must protect these heritage pubs by enabling them to maintain their roles within the community and by ensuring that they cannot be turned into houses. I recently met a constituent who is starting on the journey towards securing a community asset certification for a local pub that has been sold. Ultimately, the hoops that have to be jumped through are incredibly difficult. I will not name the pub, because I do not want to ruin what my constituent plans to do and the work going on in that community to do things properly, but it has highlighted the concern in communities where these pubs exist that they could lose their public house designation and see a change of use. What my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood) is doing through this legislation, which builds on what is already there, is important. The hon. Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier) has highlighted the legislation that exists already. Ultimately, nobody wants to see what is often a large building in a village turned into flats or the equivalent. I grew up in the city centre in Plymouth in a community called Greenbank, which is not in my constituency, but is just outside. It is historic. It was once fields, and it has seen a lot of building over the years. I am not sure we could say it was famous for this, but on pretty much every corner was a pub. If I walked to school, I would walk past probably four or five small neighbourhood community pubs in among the terraced houses. One reason for that was that the neighbouring communities were owned by Brethren family, who would not allow any pubs in their area. That meant that Greenbank, where I grew up, made up for it in numbers, and there were plenty of pubs for anybody who lived in St Judes, Hyde Park or Mannamead in the constituency of the hon. Member for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard). However, because those pubs were not assets of community value, but were just neighbourhood pubs, they have, pretty much without exception, been turned into student accommodation—I think the Providence Inn, around the corner from where I grew up, is effectively somebody’s living room. There is nothing worse than seeing historic pubs that were part of a Victorian neighbourhood turned into student accommodation. Indeed, the one at the end of the road that I grew up on—it would have been built as an inn on the corner of a crescent—is now student accommodation. What was once a lounge bar and a place where people could play darts or pool, or pop in and have a drink with community—people used to have friends in these pubs that they would go and see—have all been turned into properties that people are now living in. Students are great, but they do not live there the whole year, and instead we have lost that community asset. That is why this legislation for heritage public houses would be so helpful. It would ensure some control over the changes within a community that might affect the very fabric of what is going on in that area. I am not going to speak for much longer. My hon. Friend the Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire is well known for his love of a good ale and is a big supporter of the APPG for ale—is it ale? I am not an ale drinker, so I never quite know the name. I drink the odd beer, but I am not a big warm ale fan. I would rather be in a nice country pub drinking a glass of wine.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
My brother’s Labrador is yellow, so I did not quite get the joke, but I like the value of it. I believe that my hon. Friend has raised some valuable points, and his Bill offers some smart safeguards. This is an important debate, because one of the things that makes the United Kingdom so special is the culture we have of community and historic pubs. We know that they were the coaching inns of the past—places of refuge and safety that people could stop at if they were travelling on long journeys—and they are a particularly British institution. I am very grateful to have been able to contribute to this debate. For those Members who have not yet clocked it, I obviously love a bit of history, so it has been wonderful to be able to talk this morning.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Order. Just to remind Mr Jopp: there are many more colleagues in the Chamber than Mr Adam Jogee.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Is it to do with this debate?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Mr Jogee, I am not sure that that is a good use of a point of order, but you have indeed corrected the record yourself. We will not continue this in the overall debate, so there is no need for a point of order from Mr Jopp.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Order. It is an intervention, not a speech.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Order. Do you need your phone and your papers?
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
As long as it is on topic, Dr Peter Prinsley.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Order. Before you get to your feet, Dr Prinsley, I remind you that you are speaking through the Chair. I must not be staring at your back.
- Hansard source
Heritage Public Houses Bill
Order. Before Dr Prinsley gets to his feet, I remind Members that there should be no “you” or “yours”, because they are speaking through the Chair.
- Hansard source
Business without Debate
Order. Sir Christopher, this is not a matter for the Chair, who is not responsible for the content of statements put out by the Government. You have most definitely made your point; no doubt Treasury Benchers have been making a note of it. Either the Government will respond or you can take further advice from the Clerks about how you can pursue your point further.