The countryside makes up over 90 per cent of our land and adds over £250 billion to our economy in England alone, thanks to the hard work and dedication of the nearly 10 million people who call it their home. My colleagues and I in the Conservative Party greatly want to see a vibrant, thriving countryside with freedoms to enjoy and celebrate long-held rural traditions and pastimes, enhanced by a prospering community with a richly biodiverse environment.
I am, however, very concerned this Labour Government does not properly understand the interconnectedness of the rural economy, the value of rural communities, their pastimes and their culture which has been shown by their damaging policies such as the Family Farm Tax affecting working family businesses and our food security, soaring business rates on local pubs, the intention to ban trail hunting, their rush to carpet prime farmland with industrial solar farms and their dire top down housing targets which do disproportionately hit rural areas and food security with the Prime Minister having already admitted he will bulldoze through the concerns of local communities.
The Labour Government is currently proposing changes to the UK’s shotgun and firearms licensing regime and I am very concerned, like many of my affected constituents, that these will have far-reaching, perhaps unintended consequences on rural employment, food production, our land management and the vital rural way of life – all administered by Ministers and a, perhaps too urban-centred, civil service who have little knowledge, real understanding or empathy for our countryside way of life.
There is a petition Do not merge section 1 & 2 regulations on firearms licenses which, at the time of writing this, has 121,465 signatures, 446 from my constituency of East Grinstead, Uckfield and the Villages.
Parliament will now debate this petition on 23 February 2026 and those of you who are interested will be able to watch online on the UK Parliament YouTube channel.
I am aiming be there, representing my constituents and am hoping to be able to speak.
Here is the transcript for the debate: Firearms Licensing - Hansard - UK Parliament
The last Conservative Government decided, before publishing its consultation in 2023, to not to seek views on recommendations to align shotgun and firearms legislation. This decision was one the basis that shotguns are already subject to significant, clear controls and have important uses in farming and leisure pursuits.
I have had many people writing to me on this issue; what I have found interesting is this is not a mass organised campaign scripted by a well-funded activist group as is so often the case these days, but rather individuals personally writing, sharing their experiences and knowledge, their thoughts and their deep concerns. I would like to thank them here for taking the time to share their expertise and I have taken the opportunity to quote them when I feel they had set out the arguments better than I can!
They are all keenly aware shotguns play a key role in helping farmers control vermin on their land.
‘For many farmers and landowners, shotgun use is not recreational but essential to effective pest management. Regular control of pigeons, corvids, foxes and other species is critical to:
• Protecting crops and stored grain
• Safeguarding livestock, particularly lambs and free-range poultry
• Maintaining biosecurity and agricultural productivity’
Shotguns are also used in various rural pursuits; I have a large number of game shoots, farm shoots, and clay shoots in my constituency, all of which generate income for otherwise stretched rural businesses. A constituent wrote,
‘Commercial shooting supports a broad employment ecosystem that extends far beyond individual licence holders. Commercial and private estates and farms provide year-round work for:
• Gamekeepers and under-keepers
• Beaters, pickers-up and casual shoot staff
• Estate managers, farm hands and rural maintenance teams
In addition, shooting underpins secondary employment across a wide range of sectors, including:
• Rural hospitality: hotels, pubs, restaurants, caterers, transport providers and wider rural tourism
• Specialist trades: gunmakers, gun shops, gunsmiths, ammunition manufacturers, clothing and equipment suppliers, gun dog trainers, breeders and associated retailers
• Agriculture: farms rearing game birds, incubation equipment providers, feed producers, veterinary services and allied rural businesses
• Other: insurance, educational sites, regulators, advertising, social media and online/physical publications
Any reduction in accessibility to shotgun licensing or shooting activity – including for visitors travelling from elsewhere in the UK or overseas – will directly reduce demand for these services’
According to The Value of Shooting 2024 report published by BASC, shooting contributes £3.3 billion in Gross Value Added (GVA) to the UK economy each year. The report takes a more comprehensive and detailed approach than previous assessments by also quantifying contribution in kind (CiK) and wider supply-chain effects, showing that shooting activity generates an estimated £9.3 billion of wider economic activity across the UK. Changes that materially restrict participation therefore risk real and immediate economic consequences for rural communities.
Shooting is deeply embedded in Britain’s rural communities and has been for many generations - it plays a practical role in land stewardship and conservation as well as providing connection and community for those who work on the land and in rural areas.
‘Shooting providers and volunteers carry out habitat management and conservation work across an estimated 7.6 million hectares of land, funding long-term land management that benefits a wide range of non-game species.
Shooting also supports seasonal community gatherings involving people of all backgrounds and ages, fostering intergenerational knowledge and long-term engagement in countryside management. Participation provides broader wellbeing benefits, including time spent outdoors, physical activity, and meaningful social connection.
Beyond heritage and community, shooting contributes to sustainable, low-carbon food production. Wild game is among the most environmentally responsible protein sources available – free-range, locally sourced and requiring minimal inputs. Any decline in shooting activity resulting from more restrictive licensing risks reducing the availability of this healthy, sustainable food and undermining efforts to promote ethical meat consumption.’
Another constituent, a professional woodland and land manager, believes the proposal to align shotgun licensing with firearms certification is not supported by the available evidence, writing that,
‘As of 31 March 2024, England and Wales had 1,345,973 shotguns covered by shotgun certificates (SGCs), and over 510,000 certificate-holders (for either shotgun or firearm certificates) in total.
Almost all shotguns on SGCs ( >99 %) are “section 2” shotguns (i.e., non-magazine, fixed barrel) used for clay pigeon shooting, vermin control, land management and game-shooting purposes.
While figures for illegal firearms remain the major issue, there is no reliable evidence showing that lawfully held shotguns under SGCs are a significant driver of gun crime. For example, the UK’s gun-crime briefing from the Commons Library makes clear that the majority of firearms offences involve illicit weapons.
The most recent data on stolen firearms (including shotguns) shows increases in thefts from certificate-holders (from 239 in 2021 to 306 in 2023) but these remain very small in absolute terms, and do not justify sweeping change to the licensing of all lawful holders. Hence, applying a licence regime designed for higher-risk firearms to the current shotgun certificate holders would not align with risk-based regulation principles.’
proposing instead a proportionate, targeted reform approach to
Introduce optional or tiered enhanced checks for higher-risk categories of shotgun certificate holders (e.g., those requesting unusual quantities or types) rather than a wholesale regime shift.
Implement an annual or biennial check-in process for existing SGC holders: storage inspection, use-review, risk-assessment. Many certificate-holders would voluntarily pay a modest fee for this service if it improved confidence and safety.
Ensure any new requirements are supported by data demonstrating that they would materially reduce crime or misuse, rather than being applied purely as symbolic regulatory tightening.'
He added 'that the contributions extend to mental-health benefits, outdoor recreation, social cohesion and land-management practices that help maintain woodland, farmland and biodiversity. Therefore, any policy change that imposes additional barriers or costs on lawful shotguns is likely to have knock-on effects on these economic, environmental and social benefits.'
Another constituent wrote to point out that,
‘My local force, Sussex, currently licenses 17,490 individuals to own Section 2 shotguns, and 108 registered firearms dealers.
Full alignment would place a massive additional administrative burden on police firearms licensing units, reduce shotgun ownership by placing a significant financial and logistical burden on certificate holders and damage some of the most marginal communities in rural Britain.
Whilst the government is rightly concerned with improving public safety, the alignment of Section 2 shotguns with more highly powered Section 1 firearms will not achieve that end. The same rigorous character suitability, background and medical requirements must already be met to own either a Section 2 shotgun or Section 1 firearm.
Full alignment would simply require a huge increase in bureaucracy, without any guarantee of a reduction in any inappropriate gun ownership. Sadly, the primary factor in many instances where legally held guns have been misused is a failure of the licensing authorities, not the law.’
He suggests that
‘If the government is concerned about improving public safety it should first be looking to create a single, centralised firearms licensing body with full digitisation to replace the current outdated system involving 44 separate licensing authorities in Britain which urgently needs updating. The body should be akin to the DVLA or DBS, which would improve public safety, provide a consistent service for gun owners and allow police forces to focus on law enforcement, rather than licensing – a function they were never set up to deliver. Shotgun and firearms licences should be digitised in a central database to allow real-time checking by dealers and private sellers.’
We rightly have some of the strongest gun laws in the world. The intent to strengthen those safeguards further is understandable, but my colleagues and I urge the Government to pause, listen to and work with rural communities and estates, farming and land management organisations, shooting and conservation bodies, equipment and supply-chain sectors on their serious concerns that current proposals will have grave and unintended consequences.
I wrote to the Home Office on behalf of constituents who raised their concerns with me back in September and I have copied the response I received, on the 1st of October 2025, from the current Minister of State for Policing and Crime, Sarah Jones MP here:
Thank you for your email of 5 September to the Home Office on behalf of your constituent(s), who have expressed concerns about the alignment of shotgun licensing with that for high powered firearms. I am replying as the Minister of State for Policing and Crime.
I note concerns about the Government’s intention to run a public consultation later this year, seeking views on the greater alignment of the controls on shotguns and other firearms. The Government response to the 2023 firearms licensing consultation, published on 13 February this year, included a commitment to issue a new consultation seeking views on strengthening the licensing controls on shotguns in order to achieve greater alignment with the controls on firearms in the interests of public safety. The Government will determine next steps following consideration of the responses to this consultation.
I would therefore urge (your constituents) to respond to the consultation when it is published so that he can provide views on this matter. Turning to (the) proposal for the creation of a single centralised police firearms licensing body, the Government has no plans to introduce a new national body for firearms licensing. The Firearms Act 1968 places statutory responsibility for firearms licensing on the Chief Officer of Police of each individual force in England, Wales and Scotland. This framework is supported by Statutory Guidance to Chief Officers of Police issued by the Home Secretary in respect of firearms licensing and by Authorised Professional Practice issued by the College of Policing.
Police forces are best placed, therefore, to carry out the various checks necessary for firearms applications, including the gathering and assessment of information about the suitability of the applicant and licence holders, interviewing the applicant and family members, checking security, and taking into account local information and intelligence; such duties are all best undertaken by trained police officers. Local police forces are also required for the continuous monitoring of the certificate holder during the five-year licence period.
I trust this clarifies the Government’s position for (your constituents)
I do hope the Labour Government listens carefully to those with the specialist expertise, experience and knowledge during the consultation - my colleagues and I will continue pressing Ministers to ensure this is the case. This includes considering methods that may make the system more efficient and ensure the proposed restrictions do not place a significant burden on the many law-abiding shotgun owners in our society. However, I have little faith they will take heed and I appreciate there is a growing feeling this Labour Government is pursuing a string of policies which are negatively impacting rural communities, farming and rural pursuits. This change in policy simply being the latest in a line of Government policies failing to recognise, and act on, the needs of rural communities.
It is vital we protect independent rural livelihoods, support environmental stewardship and defend lawful activities that support the direct and indirect employment of people across the UK. Rural communities are the backbone of Britain and they must receive the support and attention they deserve. The attacks on the countryside, rural communities and the rural way of life must stop.
Finally, it’s worth noting today the Government has confirmed the necessity of culling the exploding deer population with ‘33% of English woodlands now classed as being in an "unfavourable condition" due to excessive trampling and grazing by deer, up from 24% in the early 2000s.’
So, clearly some joined up, pragmatic thinking needs to happen.
