Government to 'protect pavement pints' and make it easier for new bars and music venues to open
A new licensing framework will also fast-track permissions for al fresco dining in dedicated areas as ministers looks to modernise planning rules.
The government wants to make it easier to convert disused shops into venues, and dedicated 'hospitality zones' will be brought forward that could see permissions for outside dining, street parties and extended opening hours pushed through quickly.
Developers will also be made responsible for soundproofing buildings they construct near pubs or clubs, to protect existing venues from noise complaints.
The government has said the plans will be subject to a call for evidence.
The Business Secretary has said that 'red tape has stood in the way of people's business ideas for too long'.
Jonathan Reynolds said: 'This government has a plan to replace shuttered up shops with vibrant places to socialise, turning them into thriving cafes or busy bars, which support local jobs and give people a place to get together and catch up over a beer or a coffee.
'Red tape has stood in the way of people's business ideas for too long. Today we're slashing those barriers to giving small business owners the freedom to flourish.'
Reeves said that 'pubs and bars are at the heart of British life'.
'For too long, they've been stifled by clunky, outdated rules. We're binning them, to protect pavement pints, al fresco dining and street parties – not just for the summer, but all year round,' she added.
An industry body warned earlier in July that the equivalent of more than one pub per day will close across Great Britain this year, pointing to high bills and taxes.
The British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA) estimated that 378 pubs will close this year across England, Wales and Scotland, which it said would amount to more than 5,600 direct job losses.
The projected 2025 figures compare with 350 closures in 2024.
Bar chain Brewdog announced this week that it would close 10 of its venues, as chief executive James Taylor told staff it is partly in response to 'rising costs, increased regulation, and economic pressures'.
Representatives of the hospitality industry welcomed the changes but said they should go hand in hand with a cut to business rates as cost pressures threaten to 'tax out of existence' some businesses.
Kate Nicholls, chairwoman of UKHospitality, said: 'We strongly welcome these proposals to cut red tape and make it easier to open and operate hospitality venues, create jobs and grow the economy.
'But positive and encouraging as these measures certainly are, they can't on their own offset the immediate and mounting cost pressures facing hospitality businesses which threaten to tax out of existence the businesses and jobs that today's announcement seeks to support.'
Emma McClarkin, chief executive of the British Beer and Pub Association, said: 'After bringing together key voices in the pubs and the wider hospitality sector, it's great news that many of the industry's recommendations on how best to cut red-tape and support growth will be acted on.
'These changes must go hand in hand with meaningful business rates reform, mitigating staggering employment costs, and a cut in beer duty so that pubs can thrive at the heart of the community.'
Andrew Griffith MP, shadow business secretary, said: 'Though any cutting of red tape for hospitality businesses is welcome, this is pure hypocrisy and inconsistency from Labour.'
He said the government was 'crippling the hospitality industry by doubling business rates, imposing a jobs tax and a full-on strangulation of employment red tape'.
'As the result, shorter opening hours, shedding jobs and expensive pints are becoming the norm.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
3 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Price of a pint to reach an eye-watering £11 in some areas
The report puts the current average price of a pint of a standard brand at £5.17 — and £6.10 in London. Sadly for customers, it predicts it could reach £8 nationwide by 2030 — and £11 in cities. But it warns: 'Touristy zones and stadiums could even see £12 to £13 pints becoming the norm.' What drives other people: holidays, houses, cars What drives me: the price of a pint in London The study by an online review site forecasts Peroni rising from an average of £6.83 to £11.33 and San Miguel from £6.36 to £10.55. It adds: 'With the end of pandemic support many pubs are still catching up financially.' One landlord who responded to researchers commented: "Our energy bills have tripled, stock costs are up and we're still recovering from the pandemic. "Prices are rising because they have to - or we don't survive." According to research commissioned by the British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA) and conducted by Frontier Economics, the average price of a pint of beer is expected to reach £5.01 in April, a 21p increase. 'I think, this summer, it will get to the point where on a nice sunny day people will just sit in the garden because they can't afford to go to the pub,' said one drinker to the Guardian newspaper earlier this year. Recommended reading: 'Without a doubt, I can feel the cost of living crisis,' he said. 'You go to supermarkets and you just see everything going up.' 'It is what it is. We go somewhere where it's cheap,' said Gary Swain, drinking a Bud Light that cost £1.89. 'It's a nice pint. You get used to what you get used to.' '[The breweries] have all put their prices up now,' said Lisa Choppen, a pub's manager. She said customers did not always understand that pubs and bars had already cut back wherever they could.
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
The gambling industry is a licence to print money. Tax it properly – and turbocharge the fight against child poverty
From 1945 to 1951, a Labour government, struggling to pay down Britain's war debts in what became known as the 'age of austerity', created Britain's welfare state, pioneered a free National Health Service and implemented family allowances. In the 1970s, facing an oil shock and rising deficits, Labour introduced child benefit for 7 million families. By 2010, despite a global financial crisis, the government had raised tax credits from zero in 1997 to £30bn, taking millions of pensioners and children out of poverty. It is to the credit of Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves that within days of entering office, they set up the child poverty review with a remit to ensure an 'enduring reduction in child poverty in this parliament'. Now, for a fraction of that £30bn spent in 2010, they can resume Labour's historic role and immediately take the first 50,000 children out of poverty without dropping manifesto commitments. As a former chancellor who understands why it matters to balance the books, I sympathise with Reeves's fiscal inheritance. This autumn, as growth is hit by tariffs and trade restrictions, and the fiscal position weakens as we come to terms with defence requirements, a history of low productivity and steep interest payments, the window for long-promised social improvements might appear to be closing. But having been invited to respond to the government's consultations on both child poverty and gambling taxation – and following recent reports from the Social Market Foundation and the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) – it's clear that we can identify sources of revenues to fight the war against child poverty. The first step is raising billions by taxing the extraordinarily profitable gambling and betting industry, without affecting lotteries or bingo. There is an urgent need to act. I have not seen such deep poverty since I grew up in a mining and textiles town where unemployment was starting to bite hard. Now, each night, 1 million children in the UK try to sleep without a bed of their own. Two million households live without cookers, fridges or washing machines, and many are without toothpaste, soap or shampoo. It is heartbreaking that 3 million children go without meals because their families run out of food. The decisions of previous Tory governments have pushed 4.5 million children into poverty. This is a national scandal and a stain on our country's soul. Britain is now enduring the worst levels of child poverty since modern records began, even worse than in the Thatcher-Major years, and far worse than in most European countries. Yet without action to improve family incomes, the numbers will, on the government's own definition of poverty, rise to a wholly unacceptable 4.8 million children by 2029. These are austerity's children, the victims of 14 years of Tory rule, an era whose most vindictive act was to treat newborn third and fourth children as second-class citizens, depriving them of all the income support available to their first and second siblings. By next year, every other child in cities such as Manchester and Birmingham will be condemned to poverty. In 2010, the Trussell Trust ran 35 food banks in the UK. Now, along with independent ones, there are 2,800. Since the election, the number of homeless children in temporary accommodation in England has risen by 17,510 to 169,050. This summer, Dickensian levels of poverty have been reported by the children's commissioner. If we look into the eyes of these young Britons, we won't like what we see: instead of a generation filled with optimism about the future, we'll see among too many a deep, impenetrable sadness reflecting a loss of hope. Yet without action the government will have little chance of meeting its well-publicised target that 75% of children will be ready for school at age five. The child poverty review, when it is published, will deserve credit for proposing more breakfast clubs, free school lunches, family hubs and additional childcare. Moving thousands into better-paid jobs will also help. Sadly, however, none of these measures will prevent child poverty continuing to rise. School lunches are worth £12 a week per child, and breakfast clubs £9 a week, but under the two-child benefit cap families have lost £66 a week for their third child. If they have a fourth child, the total is £132 a week. The Conservative party cultivated the myth that poverty is the fault of work-shy parents and a culture of dependency. Yet 70% of children in poverty live in families where someone is working but on pay too low to make ends meet. Many of the rest are single parents unable to work because they cannot afford childcare or are coping with illness in the family. Abolishing the two-child rule – what the children's commissioner says has to be 'the foundation for all else' – would cost £2bn in 2025-26 and £2.8bn by the end of the parliament. As the Resolution Foundation has shown, almost 500,000 children can be lifted out of poverty by 2029-30 at a total cost of £3.5bn. Inaction will cost more. Currently, local authorities and the NHS are picking up huge bills for ill health, homelessness and the cost of supporting children in care. For every 100,000 children, each 1% increase in child poverty forces an additional five of them into care. Each child looked after by the care system costs an estimated £1.2m in terms of lost productivity and their use of public services. Excluding the lottery, betting and gaming was an £11.5bn sector last year that incurred only £2.5bn in tax. As much as £3bn extra can be raised from taxing it properly. Remote gaming duty (effectively the tax on online slots games) is about 35% in the Netherlands, 40% in Austria, 50% in Pennsylvania and 57% in tax haven Delaware, two of the few US states where it is legal. Yet the same activity is taxed at just 21% in the UK, raising only £1bn. Applying a 50% levy – much less than the 80% tax on cigarettes and the 70% tax on whisky – would raise £1.6bn more. Raising the general betting duty on bookmakers' profits from 15% to 25% could generate an additional £450m, after returning £100m as additional support to boost the horseracing industry. To achieve parity with their online equivalents, machine game duty payable on the revenue from in-person slot machines should also increase from 25% to 50%. According to IPPR estimates, this would raise an additional £880m. The government could then start to reduce child poverty. Unlike almost all other businesses, most gaming and betting is exempt from VAT. Its most addictive practices are responsible for social harm that costs the NHS and other public services more than £1bn a year. Gambling levies aren't the only source of revenue that could pay to alleviate child poverty. But this should be one straightforward budget choice. The government can fulfil today's unmet needs by taxing an undertaxed sector. Gambling won't build our country for the next generation, but children, freed from poverty, will. Gordon Brown was UK prime minister from 2007 to 2010 Comments on this piece are premoderated to ensure discussion remains on topics raised by the writer. Please be aware there may be a short delay in comments appearing on the site.
Scotsman
4 hours ago
- Scotsman
What Claire's Accessories' US bankruptcy means for UK shops
Once a teen shopping staple, the brand could vanish from UK high streets as changes loom 💔 Sign up to the weekly Cost Of Living newsletter. Saving tips, deals and money hacks. Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Claire's US parent company has filed for bankruptcy for the second time The UK arm is not directly affected but is now under review Attempts to sell the 280-store UK business have so far failed Sources say a UK administration filing is increasingly likely Some stores could close as part of a possible restructure or sale The future of a once-thriving high street staple hangs in the balance, as its US parent company files for bankruptcy, sparking fears that UK stores could be next in line for cuts or closures. For generations of British teenagers, Claire's Accessories has been a rite of passage — the go-to spot for getting your ears pierced, picking up sparkly jewellery, and loading up on scrunchies and hair clips before a school disco. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But now, the American-owned fashion and jewellery chain has entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in Delaware, citing rising debt, dwindling footfall, and a challenging retail landscape. It's the second time Claire's has filed for bankruptcy, following a similar move in 2018. (Photo: RICCARDO MILANI/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images) | Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images Despite wiping $1.9 billion (£1.4bn) from its books during its last restructuring, the company says it's been hit hard by weak consumer spending and ongoing supply chain issues. Claire's CEO Chris Cramer said the decision to file for bankruptcy was 'difficult but necessary' given the brand's current financial obligations, rising competition, and the ongoing shift away from brick-and-mortar retail. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Our employees have continued to work diligently in a constantly evolving consumer landscape to deliver amazing products and experiences for our customers,' he said. 'We remain committed to serving our customers and partnering with our vendors and landlords in other regions during this time.' The accessories chain is alsofacing the prospect of administration in the UK, as attempts to sell its 300-store British business appear to be faltering. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad What does it mean for UK stores? Claire's currently operates around 280 UK stores as part of a global network of more than 2,700 outlets across 17 countries. While the UK arm is not directly affected by the US bankruptcy proceedings, its future is now under review. According to reports, Claire's has brought in advisers from Interpath to explore a possible sale or restructuring of its UK business, but has so far failed to attract a viable buyer, according to Sky News. Retail turnaround firm Hilco, the owner of Lakeland, was reportedly among those interested in acquiring the UK operations, but is now understood to have pulled out, with other potential buyers also walking away due to the scale of the company's financial challenges. Sources told Sky that a formal administration filing this month is becoming increasingly likely. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Could your local Claire's close? For now, all UK stores remain open, and customers can still shop in-store and online. But with the business undergoing a strategic review, some locations could be vulnerable to closure. Those in underperforming shopping centres or high streets already hit hard by wider retail decline are particularly likely to be affected by any future moves to shutter British branches of Claire's More updates are expected in the coming months, but shoppers and fans alike are being urged to make the most of Claire's while they still can. Are you struggling to make ends meet as costs continue to rise? You can now send your stories to us online via YourWorld at It's free to use and, once checked, your story will appear on our website and, space allowing, in our newspapers.
