The Late Night Levy is a charge on premises licensed to sell alcohol between midnight and 6 am in England and Wales. Implemented by local authorities, its primary purpose is to help fund policing costs for the late-night economy. At least 70% of the net revenue goes to the police, with the rest supporting local authority services that manage the night-time economy, such as reducing crime and public nuisance. Significant reforms introduced in July 2023 aimed to make the levy more flexible, including targeting specific areas, extending it to late-night refreshment outlets, and increasing transparency.

Key Takeaways:

• The Late Night Levy is applied by local authorities to businesses licensed to sell alcohol during a specific "late night supply period," typically between midnight and 6 am.
• Net revenue from the levy is split, with at least 70% going to the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) and up to 30% retained by the licensing authority for night-time economy management services like crime reduction and public safety.
• Key reforms came into force on 13 July 2023. These changes allow licensing authorities to target specific geographical locations, include late night refreshment outlets, enable PCCs to request a levy, and require publishing how funds are spent.
• Licensing authorities can offer a 30% reduction for premises in best practice schemes or those qualifying for small business rate relief.
• Specific types of premises, such as hotels with overnight accommodation, theatres, cinemas, and community pubs, can be considered for exemptions from the levy.
• The reforms followed concerns that the levy was "inflexible" and had not been widely adopted by local authorities.

Definitions and Concepts:

• Late Night Levy: A charge imposed by local authorities on premises licensed to sell alcohol during a specific "late night supply period" (midnight to 6 am).
• Licensing Authority: The local council or body responsible for granting alcohol licenses and implementing the late night levy in its area.

Source: Alcohol licensing: the late night levy
Research Briefing
Published Tuesday, 22 July, 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

The complex world of secondary ticketing in the UK, where tickets for live events are resold, often at inflated prices. We explore the current legal landscape, including consumer protection laws and specific legislation designed to combat unfair practices like ticket harvesting by 'bots' and misleading pricing. Learn about the efforts of regulatory bodies like the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to enforce these rules and hold platforms accountable. We'll also cover recent government consultations and proposed reforms aimed at making the market fairer and more transparent for fans.

Key Takeaways:

• UK secondary ticketing is regulated by a blend of general consumer laws (e.g., Consumer Rights Act 2015) and targeted legislation like the Digital Economy Act 2017 and the new Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.
• Legislation aims to ensure transparency, requiring sellers and platforms to provide clear information like face value, seat location, and seller identity. It also criminalizes the use of 'bots' for bulk ticket purchases and prohibits misleading 'drip pricing'.
• Enforcement bodies, particularly the CMA and ASA, have taken action against major secondary ticketing platforms (e.g., Viagogo, StubHub), leading to changes in how information is presented and how refunds are handled. The CMA is currently investigating Ticketmaster over dynamic pricing practices for Oasis concert sales.
• Calls for reform continue, with recent government consultations exploring options like price caps on resales, increased accountability for platforms, and strengthened enforcement powers for regulators.

 Definitions

• Secondary Ticketing: The resale of tickets for live recreational, sporting, or cultural events after their initial sale, often at a different price than the original face value.
• Dynamic Pricing: A pricing strategy where ticket prices are adjusted in real-time based on factors such as demand, time, and availability, leading to price fluctuations.
• Bots: Automated software applications used to rapidly purchase large quantities of tickets, often in excess of set limits, with the intent of financial gain from resale.

Source: Ticket resales
Research Briefing
Published Tuesday, 22 July, 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

This episode covers how UK schools safeguard children with allergies. We explore legal duties, like Section 100 of the Children and Families Act 2014 requiring support for pupils with medical conditions. Discover nation-specific guidance from England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland on food standards and allergy management. Learn about allergen labelling for school food and the provision of emergency adrenaline auto-injectors (AAIs), highlighting joint efforts for a safe environment.

Key Takeaways:

• UK schools have a legal duty to support allergic pupils (e.g., England's Section 100 Children and Families Act 2014).
• Each UK nation provides specific statutory guidance for schools on food and allergy management.
• Staff training to recognise symptoms and respond to anaphylaxis is crucial.
• Schools can purchase emergency AAIs without prescription; these are spare devices, not pupil replacements.
• Prepacked for direct sale (PPDS) foods require clear labelling of 14 key allergens.

Important Definitions and Concepts:

• Section 100 of the Children and Families Act 2014: English law mandating schools support pupils with medical conditions.
• Adrenaline Auto-injectors (AAIs): Emergency devices for anaphylaxis treatment. Schools can stock spares.
• Prepacked for Direct Sale (PPDS) Foods: Food packaged on-site, requiring ingredient and allergen labelling.

Discussion and Reflection Question: Considering varied UK guidance and 'shared responsibility', what are key challenges for consistent allergy safety, and how can collaboration address them?

Source: Safeguarding children with allergies at school
Research Briefing
Published Tuesday, 24 June, 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

This episode delves into wild camping in the UK, highlighting the Supreme Court's decision to uphold public wild camping rights on Dartmoor. The government supports outdoor access but has no current plans to extend guaranteed wild camping rights to other National Parks, allowing each to decide locally. A key distinction is made between responsible "wild camping" and damaging "illegal camping," which often leads to litter and fires. Concerns are raised about irresponsible behaviour like littering and starting fires. The importance of respecting the environment and adhering to codes for safe and appropriate access is emphasized.

Key Takeaways:

• Dartmoor is unique with an upheld public right to wild camp due to a Supreme Court judgment.
• The government will not guarantee wild camping rights in other National Parks, believing each should decide locally what is appropriate.
• Crucially, responsible wild camping differs significantly from illegal camping, which involves leaving mess or starting fires.
• Fires in the countryside are a significant concern, causing extensive damage to nature reserves and moorland.
• Local authorities have powers to ban disposable barbecues and regulate fires in protected national landscapes.

Definitions and Concepts:

• Wild Camping: Generally refers to camping in remote, natural areas, often with specific permissions or traditions, distinguished from illegal, damaging camping.
• Illegal Camping: Camping without permission or in prohibited areas, often resulting in environmental harm like littering or starting fires.
• Countryside Code: Important guidance for promoting respectful and responsible behaviour while enjoying the outdoors, essential for protecting nature and private property.

Source: Wild Camping
Volume 846: debated in Lords on Wednesday 18 June 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

New UK regulations for land-based casinos aim to modernize rules and boost the economy. Changes include increased gaming machine allowances for 'converted casinos' and allowing them to offer betting. While supporting sector growth, the measures also introduce protections. However, parliamentary debate highlights concerns about potential increases in gambling harm, the adequacy of impact assessments, and enforcement challenges, sparking a debate on balancing economic aims with public safety.

Key Takeaways:

• "Converted casinos" can increase gaming machines (up to 80) if they meet specific size and area requirements, like having a gambling area of at least 500 square metres and a 5:1 machine-to-table ratio.
• The machine-to-table ratio for both small and converted casinos changes from 2:1 to 5:1, aligning them with larger casinos.
• All converted casinos can now offer betting products, which was previously prohibited.
• These regulations are estimated to increase the annual gross gambling yield by £53 million to £58 million.
• Concerns were raised about a potential increase in gambling-related harm and the transparency of the impact assessment, particularly due to redacted information.

Definitions:

• Converted Casinos: Casinos that were already operating when the Gambling Act 2005 came into force.
• Gross Gambling Yield (GGY): The total amount of money generated by gambling, before costs and taxes.
• Machine-to-Table Ratio: A rule limiting the number of gaming machines a casino can have based on its number of tables.

Discussion:

• How can governments effectively balance promoting economic growth in sectors like gambling with ensuring robust safeguards to prevent and mitigate gambling-related harm?

Source: Casinos (Gaming Machines and Mandatory Conditions) Regulations 2025
Volume 846: debated in Lords 17 June 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

The UK and EU have reached a political agreement on Gibraltar, aiming to resolve post-Brexit border issues. This deal prevents a potentially chaotic hard border that would have impacted 15,000 daily commuters and Gibraltar's economy. Crucially, it protects British sovereignty over the Rock. The solution includes allowing fluid border crossings without checks on people, and dual border control checks for air arrivals akin to St Pancras station. A unique customs model avoids onerous goods checks. The agreement has no end date and includes dispute mechanisms, with strong support from Gibraltar's Chief Minister.

Key Takeaways:

• A new political agreement between the UK and EU addresses the "untenable" post-Brexit situation for Gibraltar, preventing a "hard border" and its potential chaos.
• The deal explicitly protects British sovereignty over Gibraltar, including its territorial waters and military facilities.
• Daily land border crossings for people will flow without checks.
• For those arriving by air, there will be dual border control checks (Gibraltarian and Spanish officials performing Schengen checks).
• A unique goods and customs model will avoid onerous checks on products entering Gibraltar by land.
• The agreement is open-ended with no specific end date, aiming for "certainty and clarity".
• The deal includes dispute resolution mechanisms and the possibility for any party to unilaterally end the agreement if necessary.
• The Government of Gibraltar, led by Chief Minister Fabian Picardo, fully supports the outcome, having been involved in every negotiation stage.
• A concern highlighted is that British citizens entering Gibraltar by air may be subject to the 90-day Schengen limit by Spanish officials, even if not intending to travel into Spain.
• Service personnel at British Forces Gibraltar will continue to operate without interference or Schengen checks.

Source:  UK–EU agreement on Gibraltar
Published Thursday, 19 June, 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

Despite being banned in 1999, asbestos remains the leading cause of over 5,000 UK work-related deaths annually, primarily from mesothelioma. It’s still widely present in non-domestic buildings like schools, hospitals, and commercial sites. While the policy has been to leave it undisturbed if in good condition, it naturally degrades, releasing deadly fibres over time. With no national register to track its locations, the government is now exploring a national census and increased HSE inspections to gather better data and strategically plan its removal, aiming for an "asbestos-free Great Britain".

Key Takeaways:

• Asbestos remains the UK's leading cause of work-related deaths, responsible for over 5,000 fatalities annually, often decades after exposure from diseases like mesothelioma.
• It's widespread in many non-domestic buildings (e.g., schools, hospitals, Parliament). Asbestos poses a risk when it degrades or is disturbed, releasing deadly fibres.
• Currently, there is no national register of asbestos locations, which hinders comprehensive understanding and strategic removal efforts across the country.
• The government is exploring an asbestos census and increased Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspections to improve data collection and develop a long-term plan for asbestos removal, particularly from public sector buildings.

Definitions & Concepts:

• Mesothelioma: A fatal cancer specifically caused by asbestos exposure, with symptoms often appearing many decades after initial exposure.
• Duty Holder: A legal entity (e.g., building owner, employer) responsible for assessing and managing asbestos risks in non-domestic premises under UK regulations.

Source: Asbestos Removal: Non-domestic Buildings
Volume 769: debated on Wednesday 18 June 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

The critical debate surrounding Government support for businesses in rural areas, which are vital to the UK economy. Speakers highlight key challenges including poor public transport, inadequate digital connectivity, high energy costs, and workforce recruitment difficulties. Opportunities in agriscience and tourism are also discussed. Calls are made for long-term funding, devolution of powers, business rates reform, and a comprehensive rural strategy. Concerns about recent tax policies, like the family farm tax and National Insurance increases, are also raised.

Key Takeaways:

• Rural businesses are vital: contributing £240 billion annually, making up a quarter of UK businesses.
• Major challenges: poor transport (buses, roads), inadequate digital connectivity (broadband, mobile), high energy costs, and workforce issues (attracting, training, retaining staff).
• Demand for long-term government funding, local accountability, and a clear rural strategy.
• Proposed solutions: infrastructure upgrades, business rates reform, and expanded banking hubs.
• Opportunities: agriscience, renewable energy benefits, tourism.
• Concerns: National Insurance hikes, family farm tax, and changes to agricultural property relief.

Definitions:

• Rural Economy: Businesses and economic activities primarily located in non-urban areas.
• Devolution: The transfer of central government powers to local authorities for tailored decision-making.
• Business Rates: A tax on non-domestic properties; calls for reform to a land-value levy were made.

Discussion and Reflection Question: How can a holistic national strategy integrate improvements in digital connectivity, public transport, and workforce development to ensure the long-term sustainability and growth of rural businesses?

Source: Businesses in Rural Areas
Volume 769: debated on Wednesday 18 June 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

This episode explores the alarming poverty among UK disabled people, with 700,000 families already struggling. It highlights proposed government cuts to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and Universal Credit's health element, forecast to push hundreds of thousands into deeper hardship and cost them thousands annually. Critics argue these are political choices, not economic necessities, potentially burdening the NHS and local services. The debate advocates redesigning welfare with disabled people and exploring alternative funding like wealth taxes for a dignified system.

Key Takeaways:

• High Poverty & Costs: 700,000 disabled families live in poverty; disabled households face over £1,000 extra monthly costs.
• Proposed Cuts: Welfare Bill targets PIP and Universal Credit (UC) health element, risking 300,000-400,000 more in poverty.
• PIP Financial Impact: 800,000 may lose PIP daily living (average £4,500/year loss); 150,000 carers also affected.
• Burdensome Process: Claims are complex, slow; proposed changes are feared to worsen this.
• Employment Support Gap: Proposed employment support won't offset cuts for millions; PIP aids work retention, not just unemployment.
• Economic Shift: Cuts are a political choice, potentially increasing NHS/local council costs, negating savings.
• Call to Action: Halt cuts; redesign welfare with disabled people; explore wealth tax.

Definitions:

• Personal Independence Payment (PIP): A non-means-tested benefit helping cover extra costs of disability for people in or out of work.
• Universal Credit (UC) health element: Additional UC support for claimants whose health condition affects their ability to work.

Discussion: Considering the debate's focus on "political choice" versus "economic necessity", how might different taxation methods, such as a wealth tax, influence UK government support for disabled people?

Source: Disabled People in Poverty
Volume 769: debated on Tuesday 17 June 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

Today we explore the critical issue of prostate cancer treatment, focusing on the drug abiraterone. A UK-developed breakthrough, it has transformed advanced prostate cancer care globally. However, its availability for men with non-metastatic prostate cancer varies widely across the UK. While routinely available in Scotland and Wales, men in England and Northern Ireland face a "postcode lottery", often unable to access this cheaper, off-patent drug through the NHS. The debate calls for equitable access based on medical need, not financial status or location, urging a review of funding and approval processes.

Key Takeaways:

• Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer in the UK; over 50,000 men diagnosed annually, and one in eight men will be diagnosed.
• Abiraterone, a UK breakthrough, has revolutionised advanced prostate cancer care globally, improving quality of life and extending lives.
• Access for non-metastatic prostate cancer varies: routinely available on NHS in Scotland and Wales, but not England or Northern Ireland.
• This "postcode lottery" means access depends on location, not prognosis. Some men in England with non-metastatic cancer must pay privately.
• Abiraterone is now off-patent and costs £2.75 a day, making it much cheaper.
• NHS England acknowledges abiraterone's effectiveness for non-metastatic cases, estimating 7,000 eligible men annually at an additional £20 million/year. However, funding has not been identified.
• Calls for equal, timely access are made, urging assessment of funding models and transparency in drug approval.

Important Definitions and Concepts:

• Abiraterone: A significant drug for prostate cancer treatment, initially developed in London, now widely used globally.
• Metastatic vs. Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer: Metastatic cancer has spread beyond its origin; non-metastatic has not.
• Postcode Lottery: Unequal access to healthcare services or treatments based on a patient's geographical location.

Source: Prostate Cancer Treatment
Volume 769: debated on Tuesday 17 June 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: [email protected]

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.