Showing every spoken contribution, including 5,578 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

1. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Sir Christopher Chope

   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
2. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Robbie Moore

   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 <span id="671" class="column-number" data-column-number="671"></span>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
3. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Rebecca Smith

   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 <span id="681" class="column-number" data-column-number="681"></span>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.<span id="682" class="column-number" data-column-number="682"></span> 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 &amp; 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 <span id="683" class="column-number" data-column-number="683"></span>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 <span id="684" class="column-number" data-column-number="684"></span>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
4. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Rebecca Smith

   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
5. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

   Heritage Public Houses Bill

   Order. Just to remind Mr Jopp: there are many more colleagues in the Chamber than Mr Adam Jogee.

   Hansard source
6. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

   Heritage Public Houses Bill

   Is it to do with this debate?

   Hansard source
7. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

   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
8. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

   Heritage Public Houses Bill

   Order. It is an intervention, not a speech.

   Hansard source
9. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

   Heritage Public Houses Bill

   Order. Do you need your phone and your papers?

   Hansard source
10. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    As long as it is on topic, Dr Peter Prinsley.

    Hansard source
11. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    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
12. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    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
13. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    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.

    Hansard source
14. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mims Davies

    Drought Conditions: England

    I had a delightful soggy drive in this morning, so hallelujah: it has rained a small amount in my constituency. However, as the Minister knows, we are now in severe drought because of the low rainfall, record-breaking temperatures this summer and the impact of El Niño. It has now been announced that we are likely to get standpipes. Constituents with water-dependent businesses are already very worried and at their wits’ end. The fixing of leaks has been too slow. Under the Secretary of State’s guidance, there is the possibility of emergency pipes between Weir Wood and Ardingly reservoir, which is now under 20% full, but that is not a long-term answer. I know the Minister is doing a huge amount of work and having meetings on this, but can she help to arrange aligning infrastructure investment plans between Southern Water and South East Water to deliver effective change and real peace of mind for my constituents, for whom the situation is of deep worry?

    Hansard source
15. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time. It is a pleasure to be the promoter of this Bill, on a subject that not only matters deeply to my constituency, but is dear to my own heart. I know that for many colleagues, escaping Westminster to head back to their constituencies is usually the highlight of the week, so to see hon. Members forgo a Friday in their home patches to be here is deeply encouraging, and I thank all those who have taken the time to attend today. As we have seen over the past few months, private Members’ Bills can come in all shapes and sizes—some extremely contentious, and others narrow and technical. When I was fortunate enough to come third in the private Member’s Bill ballot earlier this year, I was very briefly more popular than I can remember being in some time. I received all manner of helpful advice; some suggested that I take on grand, sweeping constitutional reform, while others suggested fixing something rather closer to home and entirely uncontentious, like dog grooming standards. I decided, however, that I wanted a Bill that could bring people together, and I think there is little that can bring people together more than the importance of our historic pubs. As a past chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on beer, I confess that I have spent a little time inside our nation’s public houses over the years, conducting what I can only describe as exhaustive, selfless and entirely public-spirited research, if not a constitutional duty. But while I take my beer seriously, I take the future of our historic pubs even more seriously. Behind the warmth, conviviality and the familiar clinking of glasses lies a sobering reality. Today’s debate is not about party politics, because there is far more that unites us than divides us about this subject. It is about whether this Parliament is willing to step in and stop the wanton destruction of our shared history. For centuries, the British pub has been the beating heart of our communities. Pubs are the social glue that binds our villages, towns, cities and suburbs together. They are places where friendships are forged, birthdays are toasted, wakes are held and where older, perhaps isolated, residents may have their only regular conversation of the week. Yet all too often the planning system treats these irreplaceable institutions as nothing more than convenient plots of land waiting to be cleared for speculative development. We cannot pretend that this is an abstract, theoretical debate. We know the brutal reality because we saw it happen before our very eyes in Himley, which I now have the honour of representing in Parliament. Just over three years ago, an unbelievable act of destruction shocked the community, and the wider Black Country and Staffordshire, to its core. On the evening of 5 August 2023, flames engulfed the Crooked House. Built in 1765 as a farmhouse before becoming a pub, it had stood for over 250 years, rather longer than the present Palace of Westminster in which we are having this debate today.<span id="649" class="column-number" data-column-number="649"></span> Thanks to intense 19th-century coal-mining subsidence, the building settled at a bonkers 15° tilt—three times the lean of the leaning tower of Pisa. It was world famous as “Britain’s wonkiest pub”. A coin could be rolled uphill across the bar counter. Bottles appeared to defy gravity. First-time visitors would take one step inside and swear that the beer had gone straight to their heads. It was an extraordinary monument to the Black Country’s industrial heritage. The fire was devastating enough, but what followed was an absolute outrage. Barely 48 hours later, before the ashes were cold and before investigators could properly inspect the scene, heavy diggers rolled on to the site. In a matter of hours, more than two-and-a-half centuries of history were flattened into a pile of crushed rubble without planning permission. The perpetrators thought that they could crush a building, fence off the land and wait for the world to move on, but they underestimated the local community. More than 40,000 people signed petitions that demanded that the Crooked House be rebuilt. South Staffordshire council moved swiftly to serve a binding enforcement notice, ordering the owners to rebuild it brick by brick. That enforcement notice is currently being appealed. Staffordshire police completed an exhaustive criminal investigation and the file now sits with the Crown Prosecution Service, so the appeal against the enforcement notice cannot be heard until the criminal proceedings have been concluded one way or another.

    Hansard source
16. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    As I said, it all depends on how long the Crown Prosecution Service takes to decide whether there is evidence to proceed. The last update I had was about six weeks ago when it said that it was still working on the file and was unable to provide a timeframe. Of course, the community is impatient, and the longer that this drags on the more cynical and frustrated people will be. While clearly the investigation cannot be rushed, we also cannot have any unnecessary delays. I say today, as I said on day one, that the local community is not going to let that go. The enforcement notice that the hon. Gentleman spoke of is legally binding, and the Crooked House must and will rise again from the ashes. Yet as we pursue justice through the courts, we must ask ourselves the fundamental question: how on earth did the system allow this to happen in the first place? Fighting drawn-out legal battles after the wrecking ball has done its worst is nowhere near good enough. When an irreplaceable 18th-century landmark is destroyed, no amount of enforcement notices can properly recreate the original historic fabric of a building that has grown organically. We have a duty to fix the law so that no other community is robbed of its heritage in that appalling manner.<span id="650" class="column-number" data-column-number="650"></span> That is why I have introduced the Bill, which is backed by the Campaign for Real Ale and its 145,000 members as well as the Countryside Alliance and the “Save the Crooked House” campaign. Every single clause of the Bill is designed to close some of the legal loopholes so blatantly exposed in Himley. Had the Bill been on the statute book in 2023, the Crooked House may still be standing today. It would have made a difference in four specific and possibly decisive ways. First, the Bill would put an end to secret sales. In 2023, the local community had no idea that Marston’s had put the Crooked House on the market until contracts had already been exchanged. It was sold off to buyers who clearly had no intention of running it as a pub. By the time the community found out and tried to do something about it, it was already too late. Clauses 1 to 4 would place a statutory duty on each local planning authority in England to compile and maintain a register of heritage public houses, covering venues that are at least 150 years old or which possess recognised local heritage significance, including heritage interiors.

    Hansard source
17. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    That provision is helpful but insufficient, partly because it relies on proactive actions by local authorities, which, as in the case of registering assets of community value, are often taken only once there is a clear threat, by which time it may be too late. Those local listings also do not offer the full protection that heritage pubs need. In particular, they offer little to no protection for heritage interiors. We are finding that some pub interiors—particularly those from the interwar period and immediately after the second world war—are becoming rarer and rarer. Many of the things that people identify as typical of British pubs are being replaced by, shall we say, more generic dining layouts? It is really important to preserve those features of local heritage, but local listing does not typically help with that, nor does it offer the criminal penalties for unlawful demolition that I think are appropriate. Clause 9 would provide that at the moment an owner intends to sell a registered pub, they must formally notify the council, which must in turn notify local Members of Parliament, ward councillors and the public so that secret backroom deals behind closed doors would become impossible. Secondly, the Bill would introduce a genuine community right to buy, extending the positive changes the Government have introduced through the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026. Because the sale of the Crooked House was shrouded in secrecy, neither the community nor responsible pub operators had any real opportunity to put together a viable bid to keep it trading before it was sold. Under the powers of clauses 9 and 10, during the first 12 months on the market a <span id="651" class="column-number" data-column-number="651"></span>registered heritage pub could be sold only if the buyer were to enter into a legally binding covenant guaranteeing that it would operate as a pub, or if it were sold to a community group. Community buyers would be granted up to 18 months to complete the purchase.

    Hansard source
18. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    Local representatives have an important role. Obviously, there are established methods for communicating public notices, but I do not think that anything will replace a good, well organised local campaign by the local Member of Parliament or the local councillors engaging their local communities. Crucially, adopting the framework of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026, if a community group cannot reach an agreement on price with the seller because the seller is demanding an unrealistic, exorbitant price, the price will be determined by an independent valuer. That means that rogue owners would no longer be able to price out local people with inflated asking prices designed purely to force a dereliction narrative. Thirdly, the Bill establishes immediate interim protection against demolition. When local residents discovered that Crooked House had been sold, local councillor Victoria Wilson moved with great speed to submit an application for statutory listing—but the pub was torched and bulldozed before that application could even be considered. Clauses 5 to 7 resolve such situations by adopting a proven system that has operated successfully in Wales for years; I understand that the Welsh Labour Government introduced it 20 years ago. Under this Bill, the moment an application to list a registered heritage pub is submitted, it automatically receives interim listed building status. Overnight, it is treated in planning law as a listed building, stopping bulldozers in their tracks and stopping the interiors from being ripped out, while the experts do their work.

    Hansard source
19. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    The Bill is very much designed to complement and work alongside the measures in the Localism Act 2011. I am proud that the then coalition Government introduced the system of assets of community value in the Act; this Government then extended some of those provisions in their English devolution Act. The Bill will not replace or supplant any of those measures, but it will recognise that communities have that power—they have generally gone through what is still not an easy process to navigate only when they have been aware of a <span id="652" class="column-number" data-column-number="652"></span>clear and direct threat, by which time, as we saw with the Crooked House, it can be far too late for that to matter. The Bill therefore extends some of the provisions to cover all the heritage pubs on the heritage pub register. Clause 8 includes a fair compensation mechanism for owners if listing is ultimately refused, ensuring proper balance and property safeguards—again, copying the system introduced in Wales. Finally, clause 11 would kill speculative development at source. It creates a strict presumption against planning permission for change of use of any registered pub. Clearly, the national planning policy framework has raised the bar for change of use for heritage buildings and many pubs, but having the protection in primary legislation—clearly in an Act of Parliament—will be more effective. We have all seen cases in which our own local councils and planning authorities have looked at some of the provisions of the NPPF that we thought were safeguards against inappropriate development and decided that those were not as strong as we had imagined or as we had thought they were intended to be when introduced. The Bill overcomes that by putting the presumption into primary legislation so that permission cannot be granted unless the owner can prove that the property has been marketed at an independent and fair price and no pub operator or community bid has emerged. If the buyers of the Crooked House had known that they could never convert the site into an alternative development or waste depot, I do not think they would have touched it, and it would have remained in hands dedicated to pulling pints.

    Hansard source
20. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    For a third time!

    Hansard source
21. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    That is not directly part of the Bill, but it is an issue that affects a large number of tenanted pubs across the country, whether heritage or more modern, and is certainly something the Pubs Code Adjudicator needs to look at. The Government may wish to consider whether that needs to change at the next review of the pubs code. The hon. Gentleman may have been optimistic in suggesting that I was drawing to a close. Turning to the Treasury Bench and the Minister, let me say that I know how the machinery of Government works. I know that somewhere in the departmental briefcase today is a neatly typed briefing folder with the word “resist” stamped across the top. Civil servants and officials are famously ingenious at finding 27 procedural reasons why a sensible idea cannot possibly be enacted on a Friday from a private Member’s Bill that they did not think of. They <span id="653" class="column-number" data-column-number="653"></span>will agonise over definitions and claim that existing powers are entirely sufficient, even when the rubble of our heritage proves that they are not. I say in all sincerity to the Minister, who I know cares deeply about this issue, that she does not need to resist the Bill. This issue should be above narrow party divides. I do not want to panic our Liberal Democrat colleagues, but I make an open, unreserved—one may even call it comprehensive—offer to the Government and colleagues on all sides of the House to support the Bill on Second Reading today and let us work collaboratively ahead of Committee stage. If hon. Members across the House agree on the central premise that our historic pubs are precious, that there are gaps in the current protections and that we should act to close those gaps before even more valued heritage pubs are lost forever, then the right and proper course today is to grant the Bill its Second Reading and work with me to make it the best Bill it can be. The Second Reading debate is when we discuss the principle of the Bill; the detailed scrutiny belongs in Committee. Let us be entirely realistic about the parliamentary arithmetic: under the Standing Orders, the Government will have a clear, 11 to six majority on the Public Bill Committee. They will have complete control. If Ministers feel that certain definitions in clause 12 need refinement, that the timelines in clause 9 need tweaking or that the council duties in clause 1 need streamlining, the Government have the votes to agree those amendments with ease. I stand ready to work with the Minister, line by line, clause by clause, to agree amendments that give the Government the comfort they need while giving our heritage pubs the protection the public demands. What we cannot do, and what our constituents will not forgive us for doing, is to walk away, hide behind procedural excuses and leave the door wide open for the next historic pub to be bulldozed on a Sunday night. Nothing we do today can undo the heartbreak felt across my constituency and the wider region when the Crooked House fell, but by passing this Bill we can ensure that its enduring legacy is a legal shield that protects every beloved historic pub across England for generations to come.

    Hansard source
22. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    I thank the hon. Lady for the point she is making. She will see in clause 12 that one of the criteria given for what makes up a heritage pub is it having been around for 150 years, but the other part of the definition is if “the local planning authority deems its building or interior to have a degree of heritage significance”. It has been well established that “heritage significance” includes links to events and famous people in the past, so it will cover the type of event she was speaking about earlier. If she thinks that that definition needs to be broadened, will she work with me to find the right amendment in Committee to improve the Bill, so that it does what she and I want it to do?

    Hansard source
23. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    The whole point is that it really is not different—large parts of it are copied directly from what the Government introduced for assets of community value. As I said in my opening speech, though, in most cases community groups do not go through the quite complex process of getting the building facility registered as an asset of community value until there is a direct threat that they know about, as we saw with the Crooked House and as we may yet see with pubs such as the Macbeth in the hon. Lady’s constituency, which I do not think is currently an asset of community value. If those pubs came under threat, it would almost certainly be too late for the community to respond and get the community right to buy. This Bill would make sure that that right is available from day one for these really important historic pubs in the hon. Lady’s constituency and in mine.

    Hansard source
24. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    With a Labrador. <em>[</em><em>Laughter</em><em>.</em><em>]</em>

    Hansard source
25. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    The hon. Lady is talking about some outstanding pubs in her constituency, but does she recognise that, because the Hurt Arms is neither listed as an asset of community value nor a registered listed building with statutory protection, it would have next to no protections without the provisions in the Bill, even after the improvements in the framework? Will she think again and support the Bill, so that pubs in her constituency such as the Hurt Arms can benefit from the community right to buy that she has spoken of?

    Hansard source
26. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    The hon. Lady is speaking about the local heritage listing, but does she recognise that it does not protect the interior of pubs? It does not stop anyone from going into any of those pubs tomorrow and ripping out historic beams, fittings or anything that is not physically part of the bricks and mortar of the building.

    Hansard source
27. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    The hon. Gentleman asks a reasonable question. The answer is that the procedure and timelines in the Bill are exactly the same as those the Government introduced for assets of community value in the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026. Community groups will have eight weeks to register an expression of interest, and then up to 18 months to get the bid together and complete the negotiations. As I said, if they are not able to agree the price because of an unreasonable demand from the seller, then—just as with assets of community value—the independent valuer can set the price.

    Hansard source
28. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    The hon. Lady spoke about the Ferry Tavern in her constituency—an 18th century pub, like the Crooked House was—which is not an asset of community value. Does she think that is because her residents do not care about it, or is it because of a failure on the part of the council or a gap in the system?

    Hansard source
29. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    The hon. Gentleman has referred to a number of important and valuable pubs in his constituency, but none of them seems to be an asset of community value. That system has been in place for 15 years. If it is an effective protection, why does he think so few communities have registered their important pubs as assets of community value? What has prevented them from doing so?

    Hansard source
30. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    <em>c</em><em>laimed to move the closure (Standing Order No. 36).</em> <em>Question put forthwith, </em>That the Question be now put.

    Hansard source
31. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Lincoln Jopp

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    On the subject of custard pies, will the hon. Gentleman give way?

    Hansard source
32. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Lincoln Jopp

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    The hon. Member is making a very long speech, which is ranging widely, and I have slightly lost the thread. If this private Member’s Bill went to a vote, would he vote for it, against it or abstain?

    Hansard source
33. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Lincoln Jopp

    Drought Conditions: England

    I thank the Minister for her statement. Can I be helpful? I have half of London’s drinking water in my constituency. While some benefits of floating solar are well known—they are twice as efficient as land-based systems and have none of the opportunity costs of putting solar panels on agricultural land—one of the less well-known benefits is that it reduces evaporation by 70%. I did not notice the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero in the list of ministries in her taskforce. Will she work further across Government to encourage water companies to install floating solar? Some farmers are doing that where they have planning permission for reservoirs.

    Hansard source
34. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Lincoln Jopp

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    On my way home last night, I popped in at the Three Horseshoes in Shepperton—because it is on the way. This morning, when I was driving into work with my wife, she said, “What are you doing in Parliament today?” I said, “I am supporting the British pub industry.” She said, deadpan, “Trust me, you’re doing your bit already.” The debate today has been quite long, and I would like to draw attention to the comments by the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee). I would be very happy to take an intervention from him, because the official figures are in and, having checked <em>Hansard</em>, it seems that he mentioned Spelthorne in his speech more frequently than he mentioned his own constituency. If he wants to stand up and intervene on me so he can say the name of his constituency a few more times to even up the scores, I will of course take that intervention.

    Hansard source
35. 16 Oct 2026·Parliament·Lincoln Jopp

    Heritage Public Houses Bill

    Madam Deputy Speaker, you may or may not be aware that there is a rumour at large in Parliament and alive in the Tea Room that hon. Members only have to mention the name of a pub in their constituency, then send to that pub the hard copy of <em>Hansard</em> where the name is mentioned, and the next time they go in there, they get a free pint! That is, of course, completely untrue—a point I have had to make to the landlords of the Happy Landing in Stanwell, the King’s Fairway in Ashford, the White Horse in Sunbury and the Wheatsheaf &amp; Pigeon on the Staines-Laleham road, a pub where I will be going tomorrow to lodge my “Save Kempton Park” banner for a week as it tours my Spelthorne constituency. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood) on bringing this debate. The hon. Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier) is not in her place anymore, but there was a genuine exchange of ideas there on whether the protections envisaged in this private Member’s Bill are required. The story of the Crooked House is a salutary one. I have in my constituency a number of very historic pubs, including <span id="691" class="column-number" data-column-number="691"></span>the Admiral Hawke, an 18th century pub named after the former First Sea Lord and Member of Parliament for Portsmouth, and the Bells in Staines. Imagine if they were to burn down under suspicious circumstances—they are not listed and nor are they listed as assets of community value. They would be further protected under this private Member’s Bill, so I think it has merit. The hon. Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch said that her sort of “so what?” was: “Well, we should all therefore be encouraging our communities to get together if they do value their pubs and to have them registered as assets of community value.” That clearly is not happening as much as the legislation envisaged, hence this private Member’s Bill. I want to make one observation: normally, when we call pubs “Assets of Community Value”, we do so to try to protect them when they are in trouble. Let us take away the capital letters and just say that those pubs are assets of community value, encouraging all our people to invest in them by going to them. Tragically, the British Beer and Pub Association reports that this year we are on track to lose a pub a day in Britain. Some 300 have closed in the first nine months of this year. We have not had much of a sense of the challenges that they face. I will not go too political on this, but the landlords I speak to are very aware of the additional challenges: business rates, the minimum wage and employers’ national insurance. The onus is on all of us. It is tragic that, when a pub closes, everyone is up in arms, but when I ask people how often they had been there, they might say, “Oh, I went there last year.” Pubs really need our help. If the Bill were to come to a vote, I would support it but I am delighted that we have had an opportunity raise some of the issues of the British pub industry, its challenges and the protections that it needs.

    Hansard source
36. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Wendy Morton

    Sustainable Farming Incentive

    At a time when the Government really should be supporting the producers of our food and the guardians of our countryside, they saw fit to open the new SFI scheme offer and then close it down after just six hours. Will the Minister acknowledge that his Government got this wrong, provide a road map—a forward look for the farmers—detailing what the next scheme will be, give them more notice and assure both farmers and this House that they will have more time next time round?

    Hansard source
37. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Wendy Morton

    Business of the House

    Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on the democratic deficit created by the new scheme of delegation in planning? By restricting councillors’ ability to call in applications, these changes will deny communities a meaningful voice in planning decisions. We urgently need more clarity and to understand how the Government reconcile that with their commitment to devolve power. Will they reconsider these changes to protect local democratic accountability?

    Hansard source
38. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Sustainable Farming Incentive

    Kent was once rightly regarded as the garden of England, but faced with intolerable pressures on their finances, many of the small farmers in Kent—having looked to the sustainability scheme for help and having been denied it—are now having to sell their land for housing and other development, further denying us national sustainability in food. Can the Minister tell the House how many farmers in Kent are benefiting from the scheme?

    Hansard source
39. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Sir Roger Gale

    Business of the House

    I associate myself with the remarks that have already been made about the murder of Sir David Amess five years ago to the day. David was a dear personal friend. He came into the House on the same day as myself and the Father of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), in 1983. I think I am right in saying that had David lived, as he should have done, it would have been he who was Father of the House today.<span id="557" class="column-number" data-column-number="557"></span> David was a passionate supporter of animal welfare. Earlier this week, my friend the hon. Member for Newport West and Islwyn (Ruth Jones) introduced a ten-minute rule Bill to create a close season for the killing of hares. I lent my name to that Bill, and I know David would have done so had he been here. That Bill is due to have its Second Reading on 19 March 2027. As a ten-minute rule Bill, ordinarily it would not go very far, but will the Leader of the House see whether he can find his way to ensuring that it has Government support?

    Hansard source
40. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Sir Julian Smith

    Hospitality Sector Support

    <Question HRSContentId="{E0CB7556-DD99-47E1-8F87-A806DBC5DEE8}">15. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{0D933263-520F-4FAD-A8E6-9EACAD9E57C9}">What steps he is taking to support businesses in the hospitality sector. </QuestionText></Question>

    Hansard source