← Back to Westminster Hall Debates

Face-to-Face Banking: Rural Areas

01 September 2026

Lead MP

Caroline Voaden

Responding Minister

Lucy Rigby

Tags

Crime & Law EnforcementEconomyTransportBusiness & TradeAgriculture & Rural AffairsMental HealthLocal Government
Word Count: 14331
Other Contributors: 33

At a Glance

Caroline Voaden raised concerns about face-to-face banking: rural areas in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key Requests to Government:

The Labour Government is urged to address the issue urgently, expand the rules for granting banking hubs, and amend the Financial Services and Markets Bill to protect wider banking services, not just access to cash. The Government is also called upon to adopt a Liberal Democrat amendment in the House of Lords to consider local community needs for essential in-person banking services when making regulations.

How the Debate Unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:

Lead Contributor

Opened the debate
Banking services in rural areas have been severely impacted by branch closures. Last year, Lloyds, despite reporting a £6.7 billion pre-tax profit, shut 218 branches and announced plans to close 95 more. This has left 64% of branches closed since 2015, with only one branch remaining in Caroline Voaden's constituency. Poor internet, non-existent public transport, and a high elderly population make the closure of local banks particularly problematic. In her constituency, the only remaining branch is under threat, and she cites the case of Totnes, where residents face major inconveniences due to the lack of nearby banking services.

Government Response

Lucy Rigby
Government Response
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Wishart. I am very grateful to the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for securing this debate. I recognise that she has been a consistent advocate for her constituency on this matter. Access to banking attracts considerable interest from across the House, given the number of hon. Members who have attended today. I shall endeavour to respond to all the points that have been raised today, especially the practical and personal circumstances shared by Members. In rural communities, the loss of a branch can make everyday banking much harder. Around 3.3 million current account holders did not bank online or through a mobile app in 2024, and branch closures can have a significant impact on communities, especially where transport links are limited. The Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 protects access to cash, but access to banking services is currently not. The Government announced an independent review into access to banking services chaired by Richard Lloyd, which will assess whether changes in access to in-person banking services are causing detriment. The review has been gathering evidence from consumers, businesses, charities, community organisations, local authorities and industry right across the UK. The Financial Services and Markets Bill includes a power that will allow the Government to take action to protect access to banking services. The Government's review and the Bill will enable the Government to respond swiftly and proportionately to the results and evidence from the review. The Government's commitment is further reflected in our support for the roll-out of 350 banking hubs by the end of this Parliament. More than 280 banking hubs have been announced, and 240 are already open. Customers can now get help not only with account opening and changes of address, complaints and powers of attorney, but with things such as bereavement support and concerns about fraud and scams. Decisions about the location of banking hubs are made independently by Link, following an access to cash assessment. Link assesses a range of criteria and factors, including population size, vulnerability, transport links, the local retail environment and post office facilities.
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy

About Westminster Hall Debates

Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.