Shrewsbury Flower Show cancelled due to rising costs
The Shrewsbury Flower Show, which was due to take place on 8-9 August, has been cancelled.Organisers cited "changes to National Insurance (NI) and the minimum wage", alongside the cost-of-living crisis as the reason behind the decision.The chairman of Shropshire Horticultural Society Maelor Owen said the team had "struggled to put on a show that was financially viable for several years".He added that the 2024 show saw organisers spend more than £150,000 on security and barriers.
Employers now have to pay NI at 15% on salaries above £5,000, and minimum wage has also risen from £11.44 to £12.21 for those aged 21 and older.The government has previously said the changes would eventually raise £25bn a year and the money would be spent on public services like the NHS.
The event, which has been happening since 1875, takes place in The Quarry in Shrewsbury. The 2024 show featured more than 35 floral exhibitors and 175 traders - but the expensive extra security measures were added after a security threat at the 2023 event. Mr Owen said "strenuous efforts" had been made to "reduce costs and boost attendance"."Regrettably, the loss incurred by the society in staging the 2024 show was significantly greater than we had anticipated."
Mr Owen added that the Shropshire Horticultural Society was "looking very carefully at the long-term viability of the Shrewsbury Flower Show.""All options will be considered over the coming months and we anticipate making a further announcement later in the year," he added.
Follow BBC Shropshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Rachel Reeves pumps cash into NHS with 4m more tests and procedures to cut waits
The NHS and defence were big winners from the Chancellor's Spending Review as Rachel Reeves set out the Government's spending plans for the rest of the decade Rachel Reeves turned on the spending taps today with a £300billion package to renew Britain. The Chancellor said "destructive" Tory austerity had inflicted misery on ordinary Brits and damaged the economy, and vowed: "My choices are different". The NHS and defence were big winners from the Spending Review as Ms Reeves set out the Government's spending plans for the rest of the decade. The NHS was handed an extra £29billion-a-year, a 3% increase for day-to-day running costs over the next three years. Tonight, the Chancellor promised up to 4 million additional NHS tests and procedures would be delivered over the next five years to help slash waiting lists. New scanners, more community diagnostic centres, ambulances and Urgent Treatment Centres will be put in place, with increased capacity in community care to reduce pressure on hospitals. The Chancellor pumped an additional £190billion into day-to-day spending, with Government budgets set to grow by 2.3% per year across the period 2023/24 to 2028/29. And she announced £113billion for infrastructure projects, including £39billion for affordable homes over the next decade, £15.6billion for transport networks outside of London and £16.7billion for nuclear power. Some £30 billion will also be invested over the next five years in maintenance and repair of the crumbling NHS estate, with more than £5 billion dedicated to the most critical repairs. Keir Starmer told the Cabinet that it marked "the end of the first phase of this government, as we move to a new phase that delivers on the promise of change for working people". In a statement to MPs, Ms Reeves said her plans were a far cry from Tory austerity, where public spending was cut by 2.9% per year in 2010. She said: "Let's be clear, austerity was a destructive choice for the fabric of our society. And it was a destructive choice for our economy too, choking off investment and demand, creating a lost decade for growth, wages and living standards." She added: "My choices are different. My choices are Labour choices. The choices in this spending review are possible only because of my commitment to economic stability and the decisions that this Government has made." Ms Reeves said Labour was "renewing Britain", adding: 'I know that too many people in too many parts of our country are yet to feel it. This Government's task, my task as chancellor, and the purpose of this spending review is to change that, to ensure that renewal is felt in people's everyday lives, in their jobs and on their high streets." Defence spending will hit 2.6% of GDP by 2027 - including cash for intelligence - made up by a raid on the foreign aid budget. But no details were given on when the Prime Minister will meet his ambition of hiking it to 3%. A massive £86billion will be spent on the science and technology sector by the end of this Parliament, including funding research into drug treatments. The Chancellor also promised to set out plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR), a scheme to improve rail services between Liverpool and Leeds. There was also £3.5 billion more funding for the TransPennine Route Upgrade between York and Manchester, as well as £445million for rail in Wales over the next 10 years, and funding for a new line between Oxford and Cambridge. Schools will see their budgets swell by £2 billion, with per pupil funding to grow by 1.1% a year. Some £2.3 billion per year will go to fixing "crumbling classrooms" and £2.4 billion per year to rebuild 500 schools. But the Institute for Fiscal Studies warned that paying for an expansion of free school meals to another 500,000 children whose families claim Universal Credit next year means a real terms freeze to school funding. Labour will stop housing asylum seekers in hotels by the end of this Parliament, saving the taxpayer £1billion a year. But policing is expected to feel the squeeze as the Home Office grapples with cuts exceeding the asylum savings. The National Police Chiefs' Council warned a projected £1.2 billion shortfall in funding is expected to grow, leaving forces facing further cuts. There will also be £7 billion to fund 14,000 new prison places and up to £700 million per year for probation reforms. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Department for Transport and Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs are all in line for real-terms cuts. Much of the funding has been front-loaded to the start of this Parliament, which means the average increase falls to around 1.5% from 2025-26. Stephen Millard, interim director of the NIESR economic research institute, said: "The Chancellor has yet again said that her fiscal rules are 'non-negotiable'. But, given the small amount of headroom at the time of the spring statement and the increases in spending announced since then, it is now almost inevitable that if she is to keep to her fiscal rules, she will have to raise taxes in the autumn budget." Health leaders said the cash boost for the NHS would not guarantee waiting time targets can be met. Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, warned that "difficult decisions will still need to be made as this additional £29 billion won't be enough to cover the increasing cost of new treatments, with staff pay likely to account for a large proportion of it".
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
KKR threat to NHS landlord: Don't give the barbarians a foothold in a sacred public service, says ALEX BRUMMER
Freed from the proposed £4billion rescue of Thames Water, private equity barons KKR have come fizzing back with an upgraded offer for NHS and private healthcare landlords Assura. KKR's latest and final bid of £1.7billion is only marginally better than that from listed rival Primary Health Properties (PHP) but is being recommended by Assura's board. The battle isn't necessarily over, with PHP still looking at options and claiming Chancellor Rachel Reeves's bonanza spending on the NHS as an ally. As has become customary when listed companies seek to vanish from the London stock market, there is extensive waffle from Assura about careful evaluation and fiduciary duty. The latter is investment banker-speak for running up the white flag. In cash terms, the KKR offer, at 52.1p a share, is barely better than the 51.7p bid from PHP. A 39 per cent premium may seem wonderful but given the depressed state of share valuations in London and a recent tech offer with a 96 per cent premium, the KKR deal is hardly effervescent. There is no obligation for Assura to accept either deal. A braver board would have told the private equity plunderers to get lost. Instead, it chose to disparage the alternative 'merger' with PHP, claiming financial and execution risk. The board also argues that the PHP offer would diminish Assura's efforts to support investment in the NHS estate. Who is Assura kidding? KKR fears too much exposure to regulated British assets and the political risk which comes with it as we learned when it pulled out of the near-complete Thames Water deal. Assura also needs to remind itself of how private equity works. Load up target companies with debt, squeeze costs, do some clever financial engineering with the leverage, raise prices or rents and head for the hills. A Government which better understood how highly indebted deals work might be cautious. A reading of the Competition & Markets Authority's work on veterinary services, revealing how the cost to pet owners and farmers has escalated, illustrates the dangers. More market-based private medicine in the UK eases pressure on the NHS. But allowing the barbarians a foothold in a sacred service is unacceptable even if it's wrapped up with tinsel and a bow. Sign of the Zodiac This week's pandemic of bids for Britain's tech crown jewels and skin care specialists rightly has been accompanied by much handwringing. How is it that companies born and bred in UK science and tech struggle to develop into national champions? After all, the City is second only to New York as a financial centre and is home to one of the world's biggest collection of banks and a strong venture capital industry. There ought to be no bars to start-ups or smaller listed firms accessing capital. Freeing up pension funds, allowing them to be more adventurous, ought to help. But swift market access to funding and liquidity is the key. That is why the launch of Pisces, the London Stock Exchange's platform for 'intermittent' capital, a place to come to raise funding and then vanish behind a privacy wall, is an important innovation. Stock exchange group boss David Schwimmer has been promoting the concept for years but freeing it from the weeds of regulatory bureaucracy is not easy. The insistence on broad-based disclosure rules threatened to sideline it. So it is good to learn that the Financial Conduct Authority, in keeping with the growth agenda, has dropped onerous transparency requirements on the environment, shareholder transactions and director pay. These threatened to strangle Pisces at birth. Let the fundraising begin before the rush to the door of UK tech and AI becomes a stampede. Peer pressure It has become something of a thing for Chancellors to name-check colleagues when delivering grand financial statements to the Commons. Rachel Reeves set a record with her pledges to spend, spend, spend in Labour constituencies in the North, Midlands, Scotland and Wales. Lonely Weymouth was the only southern town to receive much of a mention. Unlike Southport, it already has a serviceable pier.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Reeves sacrifices defence and police for NHS splurge
Rachel Reeves has been accused of sacrificing police and defence spending in favour of a record handout for the NHS. Police chiefs warned that Labour's flagship election promises on reducing crime could be missed after the Chancellor set out her spending review on Wednesday, while former military leaders criticised her 'totally inadequate' plans for the Armed Forces. Instead, the Chancellor prioritised a 'record' funding boost for the NHS, which will now get an extra £29 billion a year compared with 2023-24, despite the lack of a detailed reform plan. Economists said tax rises in the autumn Budget were now inevitable. Treasury documents revealed that the Government was already forecasting a 5 per cent increase in council tax each year until 2028, meaning an extra £395 for the average Band D property. Chris Philp, the Conservative shadow home secretary, said: 'Despite the biggest tax rises for a generation, this Labour Government has made the wrong choices and is leaving our country's national security at risk. 'The military are not receiving the money they need to face a dangerous and uncertain world and it is likely we will not see the record police numbers I delivered as police minister last year being maintained.' Boris Johnson also told The Telegraph that Labour's 'feeble' spending on defence would leave Britain at the mercy of Russia. The spending review set out three years of day-to-day spending and four years of capital investment, with an extra £300 billion spent after money-raising measures last autumn. Ms Reeves told MPs: 'I have made my choices. These are my choices. These are the choices of the British people.' Writing for the Telegraph, she added: 'We are keeping our country safe.' But there was immediate scrutiny of the Chancellor's priorities, which Sir Mel Stride, the Conservative shadow chancellor, described as a 'spend now, tax later'. There were also accusations of questionable accounting as critics asked whether Ms Reeves was being fully transparent on spending levels. Health spending will rise by £17.2 billion a year between 2025-26 and 2029, almost 90 per cent of total additional day-to-day spending, leaving budgets in real terms flat or falling per person for most other Whitehall departments. The real budgets for daily running costs for defence, including the Armed Forces, will rise by just 0.7 per cent per year over the next three years. That compares with a day-to-day budget increase of 3 per cent for the NHS. However, Ms Reeves's cash injection for tanks, warships and military bases will mean the overall defence budget rises by an average of 3.8 per cent until the next election. The Resolution Foundation said the surge in health spending would 'leave little to rebuild other public services'. The think-tank described increases for defence and education as 'small'. Extra funding for the police is expected to amount to just £200 million in real terms by the end of the decade. The policing budget will rise by 1.7 per cent a year. Police chiefs criticised a Treasury suggestion it was increasing by 2.3 per cent, noting that the figure included a past boost to cover the National Insurance increase. Documents released alongside the spending review suggested that higher council tax police precepts would form part of 'additional income' used to increase police budgets, alongside funds from central government. Senior officers warned that the lack of funds puts at risk Labour promises to deploy an extra 13,000 neighbourhood police officers, as well as halve violence against women and girls and reduce knife crime. Gavin Stephens, the chairman of the National Police Chiefs' Council, said: 'It is clear that this is an incredibly challenging outcome for policing. 'In real terms, today's increase in funding will cover little more than annual inflationary pay increases for officers and staff ... the amount falls far short of what is required to fund the Government's ambitions and maintain our existing workforce.' Tiff Lynch, the acting chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, said: 'When this Government came in, they said they had the police's back. It feels like we have been incredibly let down.' The Association of Police and Crime Commissioners said that 'the funding announced is not enough to deliver the Government's Safer Streets mission'. Sadiq Khan, the London Mayor, also claimed it would mean cuts in the number of Metropolitan Police officers. He called the funding 'insufficient'. Earlier this year, it was announced that defence spending would rise from 2.3 per cent of GDP to 2.5 per cent. However, new plans for the 2028-29 financial year show the Government will not go further, despite the stated 'ambition' to reach 3 per cent in the early 2030s. It threatens to undermine Britain's expected endorsement of an even more stretching 3.5 per cent target, which is set to be adopted at a Nato summit this month. Earlier this week, Mark Rutte, the Nato secretary general, warned that failure to invest in defence would mean 'you could still have the NHS … the pension system, but you better learn to speak Russian'. Mr Johnson, the former prime minister, told The Telegraph that the lack of new defence funding beyond February's uplift was a 'wasted' opportunity. He said: 'My view is that this Government is completely failing to show the leadership that is needed to defend Britain and defend Europe. Labour are congenitally hostile to defence spending. Their grass roots are still basically Corbynistas who think Russia is a great thing. Those views are still highly influential in Labour.' The Treasury also came under fire for allegedly massaging its numbers after Ms Reeves confirmed intelligence services spending would be included as defence spending, taking the figure to 2.6 per cent. Sir Ben Wallace, the former Tory defence secretary, said: 'Today's spending review confirmed what we all feared. Rather than making tough decisions on public spending priorities, Rachel Reeves chose to use Treasury tricks to deceive us all. 'They have now folded in intelligence spending, Ukraine spending and even Foreign Office money to the notional 'defence' figure. The result is that core defence spending will not even be 2.5 per cent as promised: not even close. There was no path to 3 per cent either. It was just a con all along.' Lord Dannatt, a former head of the Army, said the figures presented on Wednesday were 'totally inadequate' and warned that the UK would be 'embarrassed' at the Nato summit in the Hague later this month. By contrast, the NHS was one of the big beneficiaries of the spending review. Whereas the defence spending uplift largely came in capital investment, the health budget rise was in day-to-day spending. An extra £29 billion a year for the running of the health service was announced, with Ms Reeves promising 'more appointments', 'more doctors' and 'more scanners'. Another winner was Lord Hermer, the Attorney General criticised for defending alleged terrorists before he took the job. A long-standing friend of Sir Keir Starmer, his law officers were given a spending increase of 5.3 per cent, although the rise was small in cash terms. The Chancellor defended her approach in an article for The Telegraph. She said: 'I have announced record investment in the NHS, with £29 billion more a year to improve patient care. 'But let me be clear: this investment comes on the condition of reform. It's not enough to spend money on a broken system. It is about investing to reform services so they are fit for the modern century.' Ms Reeves insisted she was a defender of national security, writing: 'We are keeping our country safe with an £11 billion real-terms increase in defence spending, making sure our Armed Forces have the equipment they need. And we are boosting funding for our security and intelligence agencies, so they have the tools they need to respond to new threats.' But Sir Mel countered in his own article for The Telegraph: 'Rachel Reeves confirmed that she is a 'spend today, tax tomorrow' Chancellor. Her spending spree on the country's credit card has set us on a collision course in the autumn when more tax rises will hit working families' pockets hard. After a year of chaos, how can anyone take this Government seriously?' There were other claims of questionable accounting. The Government vowed to eventually find £14 billion a year of efficiency savings. But a document some 50 pages long detailing claims by each department on how those savings would be made included loose promises such as better use of artificial intelligence. The Chancellor also pledged to end the 'costly' use of hotels to house asylum seekers by the end of this parliament. However, the Home Office will still be paying £2.5 billion a year by then to support migrants.
