Share this post:

Labour MPs are being barred from UK pubs in a protest against tax rises that landlords say will cripple them.

The government – in what seems to be a spectacular example of doublespeak – says it is supporting the hospitality industry.

The BBC provides a snapshot of the situation:

“The Labour MP ban was kicked off a week ago and more than 250 pubs, restaurants and hotels have signed up all over the country, including the Old Thatch in Dorset.

“The Old Thatch landlord Andy Lennox said the protest was a last resort after multiple campaigns spelling out the need for tax cuts ended with higher taxes for hospitality.

“But the prime minister’s official spokesman said the chancellor had delivered a £4.3bn support package for pubs, restaurants, and cafes because hospitality is a “vital part of our economy”.

---

An honest future-direction message

“Vox Political is nearing the end of its fourteenth year, and I want to be honest with you: the online advertising model that kept the site free to read has deteriorated so sharply that it can no longer sustain the work. 

This is not a reflection on the readership; it is a structural shift affecting small publishers everywhere.

Rather than quietly winding down, I’m giving you clear notice: Vox Political will close at the end of the year unless something dramatically changes. The good news is that The Whip Line already exists, is reader-funded, and is growing. That is where I can continue producing the journalism you value, free from the chaos of advertiser algorithms.

If you want the work to continue, please join me there. Free and paid subscriptions are available, but please remember it is the paid subscriptions – monthly and annual – that directly fund the reporting.”

---

“He said: “Without this intervention pubs would have faced a 45% rise in bills next year. We’ve cut that down to just 4%.

““We’ve also maintained the draught beer duty cut, eased licences rules over pavement drinks and events, and capped corporation tax.

““These measures show we’re backing hospitality not abandoning it.”

“Industry body UKHospitality disputes the government’s figures, both for the support package and the impact of intervention.”

Downing Street is leaning hard on three headline claims:

First, the £4.3 billion “support package”.

This is not a pot of cash handed to pubs. It is the Treasury’s estimate of the value of reduced tax take from a mix of measures, mainly business-rates tweaks, spread across retail, hospitality and leisure.

Second, the claim that without intervention, bills would have risen by forty-five per cent next year, but will now rise by “just four per cent”.

This figure refers to average, first-year increases, after transitional relief and caps are applied — not what businesses will ultimately pay once relief phases out.

Third, the argument that permanently lower Retail, Hospitality and Leisure (RHL) multipliers and licensing tweaks show the government is “backing pubs”.

Those are the talking points.

Landlords and industry bodies say this is misleading, saying the key issue is timeframe and averages.

The “four per cent” claim is not a denial that bills are rising sharply. It is a statement about year one only, with protections switched on.

Here’s what is actually happening:

• Rateable values have jumped, often dramatically, because they are now based on 2024 trading, not Covid-era 2021 conditions.
• The government is phasing in those increases over time.
• In the first year, most rises are capped (15 per cent for most properties, £800 for the smallest).
• That is where the “four per cent average” comes from.

But over two to three years, those caps fall away.

That is why landlords talk about doubling bills, while ministers talk about single-digit rises — they are discussing different points on the same curve.

Both statements can be technically true, but only one reflects the end result.

The £4.3 billion figure is not “support” in the way pubs understand support.

It includes:

• Lower multipliers for RHL properties
• Transitional relief
• The continuation of draught beer duty relief
• Forgone tax revenue compared with a hypothetical full revaluation hit

It does not include:

• Restored 75 per cent business rates relief
• VAT cuts
• NIC reversals
• Direct grants

So from a landlord’s point of view, it feels like the government is saying: “We didn’t hit you as hard as we could have — therefore we helped you.”

That is why the figure is being dismissed as accounting fiction rather than rescue.

The BBC piece explains something politically important about the MP bans: they are not the result of a sudden tantrum.

As Andy Lennox says, they are a last resort after letters to MPs, industry campaigns, meetings with ministers and public warnings were all followed by higher taxes anyway.

The anger is sharpened by the sense that the government is now denying reality, insisting pubs are protected while landlords are staring at figures they cannot pay.

That is why this has escalated into symbolic protest — “No Labour MPs” signs — even though landlords openly acknowledge it is risky and uncomfortable.

The BBC article explicitly notes:

• UK hospitality VAT is 20 per cent
• Most of Europe charges around half that
• The Liberal Democrats’ five-point VAT cut would “solve all the issues”, according to Lennox

This directly supports what This Writer has been saying for months: rates tweaks and licensing gimmicks cannot compensate for a structurally hostile tax environment.

VAT is the one lever that immediately affects

• Prices
• Footfall and
• Viability

Labour refuses to touch it.

This new development strengthens my earlier analysis.

It shows that the government is defending itself using short-term averages and capped increases while landlords are looking at medium-term reality; industry bodies dispute the Treasury’s framing; protest has moved from lobbying to open confrontation; and – crucially – the argument has shifted from “help us” to “stop pretending”

In other words, the gap between rhetoric and lived experience has become so wide that pubs are now willing to burn political bridges to make the point visible.

That is not the behaviour of a sector being “backed”.

It is the behaviour of one that feels cornered.

As for the government: once I suggested that the well-being of pubs and other hospitality businesses could be seen as a yardstick by which to gauge the prosperity of the UK generally.

By undermining that prosperity, it seems Labour is trying to ensure not only that the government cannot rely on such an indicator – but that nobody else can either.

Share this post: