PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Remote Coastal Communities - 8 September 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government’s fair funding review is right to take into account the sparsity and rurality of coastal areas and visitor numbers into the new calculations? For example, a hotel in Cornwall in the winter can cost £53, but in the summer it can cost £100, and county councils spend twice as much on home-to-school transport as London boroughs, proving how much more it costs to provide those services in rural areas.

I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward the debate. As I said when I spoke to him earlier, there have been many debates on coastal erosion and remote coastal communities. In my constituency of Strangford, as in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, the problem of coastal erosion was financed from Westminster some years ago, but that has now fallen by the wayside. The issues are not just about coastal erosion, but about social erosion—the closure of the pub, the post office and the shop, and reduced public transport, if it even exists. Ever mindful that the drive to change that must come from Westminster, does the hon. Gentleman agree that there must be more money put into community budgets to address greater social isolation?

On transport links, does the hon. Gentleman agree that the final repair in phase 5 of the Dawlish rail resilience programme is vital to remote coastal communities in both Devon and Cornwall?

When I visit teachers in Torbay secondary schools, I reflect on how there is often a bay mentality and a lack of aspiration for youngsters. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that often in our local coastal communities there is a lack of aspiration compared with many metropolitan areas, where there is greater richness of culture and opportunity for our young people?

My constituency is a lot closer to here than the constituency of my hon. Friend—it is just a bit further down the Thames. We have a strong tourist economy, but due to the housing pressures across the country these days, the housing and accommodation on the Isle of Sheppey hides a masked community living in holiday accommodation all year round, particularly in caravans. That is not picked up in the Government data at either a national or local level. I am interested to hear from my hon. Friend whether that is a problem for him as well; in my community, it means that we have high levels of deprivation that simply are not being accounted for in the current Government spending plans or formulae. I welcome the Government’s revision to the spending formulae, which will help my constituency, but we could go further.

In my constituency, high levels of second home ownership, short-term holiday lets and holiday homes reduce the housing supply for local families and force them away from their important support systems. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need stronger support for generally affordable housing delivery in coastal areas such as ours, backed by sufficient infrastructure?

I thank the hon. Member for giving way and for securing this important debate. He is focusing on tourism and housing, but in my coastal constituency, there are many businesses—particularly in the fishing industry—that could benefit from investment to deliver economic growth. In May, the Government launched the fishing and coastal growth fund, worth £360 million over 12 years. Does the hon. Member agree that in her response to this debate, the Minister should update the House on the progress of that funding, and that those funds should be allocated proportionately to reflect the size of Scotland’s fishing industry?

I thank my hon. Friend for securing this important debate. He is Labour’s south by south-west to my north by north-west. It is good to have our communities connected to a Government who make change for rural areas and coastal communities. My constituency has much in common with his; it faces the same challenges of connectivity, demographics and housing, and it also has the same potential with fisheries, the people themselves, the culture, the language and the renewables resource, which all of the community should have a share in. Does he agree that we need not only more central Government support, but more devolution? My constituency has been badly treated by devolution: we faced the ferry fiasco that has cost half a billion pounds; we have faced the farce of highly protected marine areas being imposed on us by devolved Government that would have closed down our entire fishery; and because of depopulation, we face the fiasco of reduced funding—being punished for people moving away. Does he agree that we need not only more central Government support, but more power in these peripheral areas so that we can run our own affairs?

I thank the hon. Member for securing this debate. Does he agree with me about the extra pressures on people living in remote rural coastal communities, such as Ilfracombe in Devon? The life expectancy there is 10 years lower than in other parts of Devon. The integrated care board needs to be funded for the costs of supporting the local minor injuries unit at Ilfracombe hospital, especially during tourist times, when the population of my area doubles.

Does the hon. Member agree that the Government need to go further, and appoint a Minister for coastal communities?

I call Andrew George.

Meur ras, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I congratulate my constituency neighbour, the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon), not only on securing the debate but on the way in which he covered the issues and made such a strong case for the very special needs of remote and coastal areas. We hope that the new group of Ministers will attend to those needs, although the previous Ministers were doing good work in this regard, and I am not in any way dismissing or disapproving of that work.

As the hon. Gentleman said, only 8% of the population of England, Wales and Cornwall is coastal. In my constituency, which covers west Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, 95% of the population live in coastal communities—and, being in the far south-west of the country, we are in that sense remote. Most people in our area actually see London as remote; indeed, remoteness is a concept that depends on which end of the telescope we are looking through. The big difficulty for people living in coastal areas is the remoteness of where the decisions are taken, and for them the remoteness is the other way around: people in the centre are often not listening to, or not hearing, the words and the needs of people in rural areas and, in particular, people in coastal areas such as the hon. Gentleman’s, mine and those of all the other Members who have spoken this evening.

I welcome the Minister, who needs time to absorb the magnificence of the hon. Gentleman’s speech. I am using my speech as a buffer during which she can absorb that magnificence, but I want to add a few points, which I hope she will take on board, in addition to those that the hon. Gentleman made. I particularly want to embellish a little further his points about housing. It is not an accident that coastal areas often contain a lot of highly desirable housing markets, where a lot of people with wealth are very keen to invest their money—that is very much an investment, although sometimes they also buy houses for personal recreational use.

What we have found in Cornwall in recent years, especially since the small business rate relief was introduced in 2012, is that there has been an almost industrial level of shifting of second homes—from council tax to business rates—that are purported to be or actually have become holiday lets for business rating purposes. Owners apply for small business rate relief, and then pay nothing. We are talking about wealthy people, who can afford more than one home, simply flipping their property, with the benefit of their tax lawyers and others, depending on what is to their advantage in terms of tax. Frankly, one must take into account the obscenity of the fact that all those who had done that and were entitled to small business rate relief also benefited from covid aid—so they received four levels of payment amounting to £20,000 apiece. In the case of Cornwall, most of those people have their primary addresses outside Cornwall, and one might argue that they did not need a penny piece of that money, but they still claimed it.

By the end of the last decade half a billion pounds of taxpayers’ money had gone towards subsidising the wealthy having holiday homes in Cornwall. I have made this point to Treasury Ministers and Housing Ministers before, and I am somewhat surprised that Ministers have not yet been prepared to look at this policy and to consider at least reviewing it. Surely it is far better to spend half a billion pounds on first homes for the thousands of families in desperate need, rather than simply shovelling that money into the pockets of wealthy second home owners. I hope that the Minister will be prepared to look at that.

My next point is perhaps rather unique to the Isles of Scilly. Some of the big pressures that Scillonians face relate to transport, given that they are 30 miles off the mainland. Not a lot of people appreciate that from east to west, my constituency is about 70 miles when one takes into account all that wet stuff between Land’s End and the Isles of Scilly. It is a very expensive area to cover, either by air or by ferry. What we are seeking for the Isles of Scilly is something approaching parity with the Scottish islands. People on the Isles of Scilly pay four, five or sometimes six times the amount that people in Scottish islands would normally expect to pay to get on a ferry or to fly to and from the islands. That also has an impact on freight and on build costs on the islands, meaning that although we desperately need affordable homes, it is very difficult to get them off the ground within the viability thresholds of Homes England. It is a very significant challenge.

There is no parity in relation to older people’s bus passes, because there is not a bus and those subsidies therefore do not exist. People who live in the off-islands have to pay significant amounts—£20 or £30—for a ferry just to get from an off-island to St Mary’s to do some shopping. There is no such thing as subsidised transport, and the £3 fares, as for the buses, would be really nice between the islands if we could possibly get it. The Isles of Scilly do not have parity with the mainland on that.

The Isles of Scilly also do not have parity on post-16 education. There is not sufficient capacity in the islands to provide it there, so all the 16 or 17-year-olds—under the mandatory rules that apply for post-16 education—need to go to the mainland, but there are insufficient funds available to be able to do that. I am talking to Baroness Smith at the moment to try to make sure that the Isles of Scilly get the full support, so that students get the backing not only for transport costs, but for accommodation and support. There are a lot of costs in relation to the Isles of Scilly that are simply not met, and I hope the Minister is seized of that.

The final point, which the hon. Gentleman, who represents Camborne, Redruth and Hayle, emphasised—and I know he will be serving on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill Committee—is that it is absolutely important to get devolution right. In some coastal areas such as Cornwall it is really important not simply to apply the same bland uniformity that we might be able to get away with for other locations. Places such as Cornwall need a unique settlement. We were making good progress on that with the Minister’s predecessors, who were certainly understanding, and the conversations were going well. I hope that the Minister will be listening to the voice of Cornwall on the devolution settlement. The only region for Cornwall clearly has to be Cornwall, and there are very strong arguments for it. I do not have the opportunity to make them this evening, but I know the hon. Gentleman and, indeed, all six Members from Cornwall—and the Isles of Scilly—are very keen to make sure that the message gets to this new group of Ministers that Cornwall deserves a special settlement on devolution.

If the speech of the hon. Member for St Ives (Andrew George) was nothing more than a buffer, I dread to think what mine will be. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) on securing this important debate.

Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland is an odd constituency, and my hon. Friend mentioned the Middlesbrough part of it. East Cleveland is a rural and coastal community defined by its proximity to the North sea. From the cliffs of Huntcliff and Boulby, which are some of the highest in England, to the hidden gem of Skinningrove beach, it is a place of great natural beauty. It is also a place of great talent, yet too often that talent is lost. I completely agree with my hon. Friend about the brain-drain migration of young people inland to find opportunities elsewhere. Time and again, employers in my constituency have met me and told me of their frustrations at seeing their talent pool displaced to nearby urban centres or even further into Leeds, York, Newcastle and so on. I hear the same from young people themselves, who feel they have to get out to get on, and that is holding our communities back in so many ways.

There has been a lot of discussion about devolution, quite rightly, and I completely agree that it has to be done in the right way. We have a devolved combined authority in our region, and I feel quite strongly that our coastal communities and our rural communities are not fully acknowledged in some of the strategies brought forward by the regional government. Skills are a great example. I think insufficient work is put in to make sure that young people can access opportunity in some of the new industries coming into Teesside. As my hon. Friend mentioned, public transport is another example; getting from the furthest part of my constituency to urban centres is extremely difficult and very challenging for young people, and that is exacerbating some of these divides and the deprivation that we see.

Coastal communities are often described as left behind. I really want to get across the point that we are not a problem to be resolved, as I think my hon. Friend said, but an opportunity. It is a decade since IPPR North published a report, “Northern Prosperity is National Prosperity”. That can be extended to many communities across the country. By unlocking economic growth in remote areas, we can benefit the whole country and the whole economy. We are untapped in our potential.

Governments of many colours have missed a trick by not investing and unlocking economic growth in our communities. We are not a problem, but we could be if not addressed.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that if coastal communities had just a fraction of the investment in public transport that is made in places such as London and other big metropolitan areas, they would flourish beyond belief?

I do agree. That is part of the problem in our part of the world. By investing in infrastructure, whether that is public transport or grid connectivity for our manufacturers, the entire economy across the country can benefit. I have one village, Aysdalegate, which does not have a clean water supply; these are the basics of modern-day life.

My hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth mentioned, towards the start of his speech, that the economic divides among our regions have led to a kind of fraying of the social fabric. There is a danger that we become more vulnerable to the anger, resentment and radicalisation that we often see in our politics. It is a mistake to assume that radicalisation can only happen to a very small number of people who are particularly vulnerable. It can happen to anyone when the economic conditions are ripe, particularly at a time when social media giants have built algorithms designed to keep us angry and afraid, and to make us think that our country has never been so bad.

It is important to remember that that is not real. When we visit our coastal communities, we see that England is alive and well. It is there in fishing villages, farmsteads, the stained glass of church windows, dry stone walls and rolling fields. It is there in marketplaces, allotments and so much else. We must not lose sight of that. That England is alive and kicking. That unpixellated England is waiting for us all to come home.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) for securing this important debate for my first day in this job, and for his tireless advocacy on behalf of coastal communities. I completely agree: coastal communities are a vital part of our national identity, serving as postcards of national pride, and a reminder of our heritage and shared maritime history. But behind those postcards lies another story, as my hon. Friend has rightly alluded to, for the beauty of our coasts can mask the everyday reality of the people who live there all year round.

These communities face a unique set of circumstances. We know, as my hon. Friend pointed out, that coastal communities tend to have older populations and lower rates of employment, which often mean fewer opportunities for young people. We know that the Social Mobility Commission found that coastal communities have some of the least favourable conditions for childhood in the country; a disproportionately high number of children are eligible for free school meals and their parents have relatively low qualification levels. We know that these communities tend to suffer from a lack of connectivity—a point that hon. Members have made—geographically, economically and digitally, with worse 4G coverage and fewer business opportunities than in high-growth sectors.

Let me assure the House that this Government understand the challenges faced by coastal communities. The Government’s mission is to reverse inequalities and unlock the full potential of all our communities, including our coastal communities, to ensure that they play a vital role in our economy and our future.

I appreciate the Minister listing the disadvantages that we have in our coastal communities, although she did not mention the fact that our health services are overwhelmed in the summer. The Dawlish minor injuries unit not being open due to lack of staffing, for example, does not help when numbers in our towns double in the few weeks of summer. It really is very disadvantageous for the local residents.

I thank the hon. Member for making that important point about the pressures faced by our coastal communities, particularly at peak tourist points. It is important that we acknowledge that.

What we are trying to do as a Government, through long-overdue reforms to the local government finance system, is redirect around £2 billion of existing funding to the places and communities that need it the most, which will enable councils—including in our coastal areas—to deliver reliably for their residents. We also acknowledge and recognise that delivery costs vary across the country. Deprivation, remoteness, varying abilities to raise taxes locally and the impact of commuters and tourists, as the hon. Member pointed out, can all affect how hard it can be to deliver services in coastal communities. That is why we are committed to ensuring that those factors are accounted for in future funding allocations—an important move that will have an impact on our communities.

I am concerned about the Getting It Right First Time NHS template that the health service applies to our health services in Devon and Cornwall. It is a system that is very much drawn from the metropolitan experience of health provision and does not account for sparsity and the fact that we have seas either side of us. Can the Minister assure us that Getting It Right First Time will take account of places where there is rurality and coastal impact on our health services?

Whether it is our NHS or our public services, there is a challenge for us to ensure that we are designing services that work for different communities and that recognise the diversity of those communities, and that is what we are committed to as a Department. We are committed to working with our colleagues across Government to ensure we are providing the services that people need, tailored to the needs of local communities. That is a big thrust of the devolution agenda, which I am very committed to and passionate about, on which we have made big progress as a Government, and will continue to do so.

I have submitted proposals to the Tees Valley combined authority to get East Cleveland’s economy moving—the focus of my Invest in East Cleveland event on Friday. Will the Minister commit to working with me to bring investment into our rural and coastal communities so that we can unlock jobs and growth for the whole country?

I thank my hon. Friend for championing his area and for the work he is doing locally, and I will absolutely commit to working with him. The opportunities to unlock the potential of our areas are huge, and I am very committed to playing my part to help us to deliver that.

Alongside that, we are clear that we want to deliver a wide range of programmes to address economic, social and health disparities across the country, including in our coastal areas; in Camborne and Redruth, for example, we are already investing £24.7 million via the Camborne town deal through to March 2027, as well as £12 million via the UK shared prosperity fund until the end of this financial year.

In addition, our £1.5 billion plan for neighbourhoods will deliver up to £20 million of funding and support over the next decade into 75 communities across the country. One in three of those communities is coastal, meaning that up to £500 million will directly support regeneration in coastal towns and neighbourhoods. At the spending review, the Chancellor announced an expansion of this programme to as many as 350 places, including 25 new trailblazer areas, such as Barrow and Bootle South, with these areas receiving early support to tackle local challenges and drive growth. The programme will help communities to improve cultural venues, health and wellbeing services and, critically, local infrastructure. It will champion local leadership, foster community engagement and strengthen social cohesion.

Members raised challenges around flooding, which the Department recognises. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is taking action to improve resilience in coastal areas, particularly on the key issue of flooding. We are conscious that we need to take action as we respond to climate change. The flood resilience taskforce is improving the co-ordination between national and local agencies, which we need to get right. We have invested a record £2.65 billion over this year and last year for the construction and maintenance of flood schemes, supporting 1,000 projects and protecting 52,000 properties by March 2026. Over the next three years, a further £4.2 billion will be invested in flood and coastal defences.

Critically, we recognise the strategic importance of coastal communities such as Barrow, which play a vital role in our national security. This Government have committed to providing £200 million over 10 years to improve education, employment, skills and health and wellbeing, alongside investment in the town centre. There are significant opportunities for us to capitalise on the natural assets and strengths of our coastline, including by supporting clean energy industries.

Finally, on the key question of fair funding, we recognise that we need to take better account of the drivers of deprivation when we allocate funding. We are consulting on the proposal and taking in all the representations we have been given, and we will respond in due course. Members should be assured that we recognise the specific challenges in coastal areas, such as connectivity, and their impact on deprivation. We are trying to factor that into the approach we are taking with the fair funding formula.

As a proud coastal nation, there are many opportunities available to us, and this Government are already taking steps to make sure that we capitalise on them. We are committed to working with Members across the House to unlock the full potential of our coastal communities. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth for bringing forward this important debate and for being a tireless champion of coastal communities. I look forward to working with him and colleagues from across Cornwall and across the House.

I am so sorry to interrupt the Minister’s peroration, but she covered without detail the funding formula for local authorities and whether it will properly address the poverty and deprivation in rural areas. Cornwall is the poorest region in the country and achieved European objective 1 status—one of the highest levels of regional development aid—but it is not seen in Government eyes as the poorest region, certainly as far as the criteria is concerned. Will the Minister ensure that the criteria the Government use properly assesses the levels of deprivation in rural areas?

We are very exercised about ensuring that we support areas of deprivation, and we always keep all indices and metrics under review. My hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth talked about the research, which I look forward to reading in detail. Ultimately, my objective is the objective of hon. Members. We know that there are areas that face huge challenges, and we need to get the right support to them. In order to do that, we must ensure that we understand the issues and are targeting them. Obviously the metrics that are used have a critical role, and the House has my commitment that we will keep this area under review.

I am committed to working with Members across the House on this issue. We recognise the importance of our coastal communities and we see huge opportunities. The Government are putting in place a large number of programmes and support schemes, and we are keen to work together to make sure that we unlock those opportunities.