It’s no secret that this Government - and, to be fair, previous ones - views pubs as a considerably bigger vote winner than restaurants and other parts of the hospitality sector. It isn’t difficult to see why. Pubs are widely seen as a British invention, imbued with nostalgia and national identity, the cornerstone of a community in which people congregate.
There is a patriotic strand to all of this, reflected in the Chancellor’s Reform-echoing rhetoric about “restoring pride in our communities” and “backing British pubs” as she announced a welcome if not exactly game changing package of support for pubs after publicans filled everyone’s social media feeds with questionable diagrams designed to show how little they make on a pint.
She is right that the average Brit tends to view pubs as more culturally important than what are often perceived as more metropolitan, European imports such as restaurants and hotels. It’s also true that the public doesn’t mourn the loss of the 42nd outpost of a chain restaurant or coffee shop like they do a local boozer. But for the restaurants and other hospitality businesses left out in the cold by Rachel Reeves’ decision on business rates support, that context does little to soften the blow.
The policy is simply unfair. As many have pointed out - including UKHospitality chief executive Allen Simpson - the entire sector is grappling with the same structural challenges: rising costs, fragile demand and margins that are already perilously thin.
In fact, when it comes to business rates, some parts of hospitality appear to have it a lot worse. According to tax expert Ryan, pubs were facing average increases of around 30% prior to Reeves’ intervention. For four-star and above hotels, that figure rises to 97%.
While there has been outcry over business rates reform across hospitality, the views of what might loosely be termed Hospitality Businesses Other Than Pubs (HBOTPs, if you like, here’s hoping that acronym catches on) have not been amplified nearly as much as those of the pub sector itself.
Tom Kerridge may hold two Michelin stars and charge up to £195 for four courses, but his everyman persona has seen him go viral after speaking out about making no money and facing an average business rates increase of 115% across his four pubs. It is hard to imagine equally high-profile and accomplished operators such as, say, Jeremy King - or others of similar standing - enjoying the same level of media and social traction. Not because their arguments are weaker or not as well articulated, but because they are less relatable and perhaps more easily framed as part of a London, or even elite, dining scene.
One thing that has really stuck in the craw of many operators is the disingenuous suggestion that restaurants and other HBOTPs cannot be community assets in the same way pubs are. Cafés, local restaurants and dessert bars contribute just as much to social life as somewhere where you can grab a pint and are just as valuable in keeping a community together.
The Chancellor’s distinction may be politically convenient, but it is economically incoherent. In most markets, pubs and restaurants compete for largely the same customers, employ the same local workforces and face the same fixed costs. Supporting one while excluding the other does not ‘save’ hospitality; it distorts the market.
Cultural symbolism is not an economic strategy. As UKHospitality’s Simpson has argued, this is a hospitality-wide problem that requires a hospitality-wide solution.