MPs called for financial support for beauty salons and a revival of plans for industry regulation during a parliamentary debate yesterday (April 23).
Conservative MP Julia Lopez, who secured the debate in Parliament, opened by saying, “This debate is about giving a voice to the thousands of small business owners crushed by the weight of tax demands. They are frustrated and exhausted – penalised, it seems, for doing everything by the book.”
The debate followed calls to government from industry associations including Salon Employers Association, British Beauty Council and NHBF, for measures to counteract the increase in costs caused by measures announced in the Autumn Budget, which included a rise National Insurance contributions among other pressures.
Lopez added, “Today, salons are under threat. The combination of the pressures they face is turning into a crisis.”
Lopez warned that the result of salons closing would not just be a loss of revenue to the Treasury but would mean young people without apprenticeships and high streets with empty units left behind.
She added, “Hair and beauty is a labour-intensive sector, and around 60% of costs are wages. As I heard from Toby from the Salon Employers Association, salons trade in skill, not goods, and cannot reclaim VAT on their biggest cost, which is people.”
She also highlighted that beauty salons are disproportionately led or staffed by women, many of whom need flexible hours to balance caring responsibilities.
She added, “It is hard to ignore the impact, let alone the irony, of a Chancellor celebrating herself for being the first woman to hold that office, while simultaneously hammering sectors that employ, serve and are often led by women.”
MP Harriet Baldwin also weighed in on the debate, quoting figures from the British Beauty Council and the NHBF’s recent reports. She added, “We know that the Budget has had a big impact on the hair and beauty sector because the National Hair & Beauty Federation has just published a report examining it.
“It says that businesses in the sector are expected to incur an additional £139 million in costs, and that is before making any operational adjustments. Labour expenses alone will rise by £100 million.”
Response from the Minister for Business and Trade
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, Gareth Thomas, responded to the points raised.
“Many members have asked about the extent to which the Government engage with the hair and beauty sector, and I can confirm that I regularly meet the sector to understand its views and concerns,” he said.
“The hair and beauty sector is one of the industries that I would gently suggest has been neglected for too long over the last decade,” he added.
“I recognise that it has been an exceptionally challenging decade for high street businesses, and that includes the hair and beauty sector. The pandemic, followed by the cost of living crisis and rising interest rates, forced many hair and beauty businesses into high levels of debt, depleted cash reserves and reduced profit margins.”
However, he held strong on the announcements made un the Autumn Budget, confirming they would not change.
“Some of the measures in the Budget have concerned the industry, but I believe that those decisions are important for delivering long-term stability and, in time, and even more significantly, economic growth. Many hair and beauty businesses will benefit from some of the other measures that the Chancellor announced,” he said.
“Later this year, we will be publishing our small business strategy, which will set out the Government’s vision for small businesses.
"It will focus on boosting a range of support to businesses to create thriving high streets, make it easier to access finance, open up overseas and domestic markets, build business capabilities, and provide a strong business environment.
“All those are vital to the growth and resilience of the hair and beauty industry, and I will certainly continue to work with the sector as the strategy develops.”
Will the Labour government regulate aesthetic treatments?
The debate also covered the issue of regulation, particularly of the aesthetic medicine sector.
MP Maya Ellis, who represents the Ribble Valley area, said, “It is deeply concerning that aesthetic medicine, a medical speciality recognised by the Royal Society of Medicine, is often considered just another part of the hair and beauty sector. If it were cardiology or dermatology, there would rightly be huge concern over non-medical professionals performing high-risk procedures.
She added, “Will the Minister confirm whether the Government plan to follow up on the previous Government’s consultation on non-surgical cosmetic procedures?”
Thomas responded, “My hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley specifically asked me about the consultation run by the previous Government, and whether the Government are going to respond to it. We are due to respond as soon as possible.
“The Department of Health is leading on that issue, so I hope she will continue to watch this area and campaign on it going forward.”
Industry response
Commenting on the issues raised in the debate, NHBF chief executive Caroline Larissey said: "The parliamentary debate on the hair and beauty sector marks a significant step forward in recognising our sector's economic contribution and challenges.
“We're encouraged by the Minister's acknowledgment of increased support measures and particularly welcome the upcoming small business strategy.
“Our Straightening Out the Costs report has clearly resonated with MPs, and we look forward to building on this momentum at next month's sector roundtable to ensure the voice of our Members continues to be heard at the highest levels of government."
