Community-owned Assets: Government Support

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Gen Kitchen.)

I rise to highlight the case of the Ultimate Picture Palace in my constituency, which shows the need for Government support for community assets.

The Ultimate Picture Palace is the only remaining independent cinema in Oxford. Founded in 1911, it shows an eclectic mix of independent, international and classic films, all in its cosy single-screen auditorium. This beautiful cinema is a real landmark in Jeune Street, abutting Cowley Road in the heart of east Oxford. It was built when dangerously flammable outdoor screenings were being replaced with screenings in safer buildings. The heritage of tented outdoor shows is clear in the beautiful art deco building, not least because of the original box office window, which opens straight out on to the street. The team of staff and volunteers who run the cinema is small but passionate.

In 2022, the cinema became community-owned when 1,200 local people took a stake in it. It is a vibrant place, defying national trends in ticket sales. At a time when thousands of community assets have closed, the UPP stands as a reminder that a different model is possible, and that that model works. It aims to be a leader in community cinema, empowering local people to determine the future of this neighbourhood venue and enabling all local residents, from families to young people, students, workers and community groups, to be uplifted through the joy of cinema. It has hosted numerous festivals, and it really does cater for all. Last year, it screened a wider variety of films than any other cinema in the city, as well as attracting new audiences by, for example, introducing special “Kino Kids” screenings, and through the development of a new education programme. The cinema’s relaxed and welcoming atmosphere means that anyone can come and enjoy a film, whether on their own or with friends or family.

I have heard many wonderful stories about the way in which this small community cinema has shaped local people’s lives. One of the most moving was the story of a new year’s eve screening 50 years ago; it was when a resident who had moved to Oxford finally felt at home in my city. Dame Pippa Harris, co-producer of the Oscar-winning film “Hamnet”, came to the UPP as a young person, and has said,

“Big dreams started in that little cinema and I’m lucky my dream came true”.

Perhaps my favourite quote about the cinema came from the sadly late true Oxford original Bill Heine, who said of his approach to the cinema when he ran it:

“Look, if you’re going to sail why not sail in dangerous waters. Who wants to play around on the beach?”

The UPP has a truly incredible, storied history, from legal fights with Stanley Kubrick and the BBC to the squatted “Section 6” cinema, right through to today’s community ownership.

To be fit for the future, this special cinema needs to invest in better access, sightlines and sound quality, and more efficient use of energy. It has planning permission for those changes, and funders who are keen to support them if their requirements for a long-term lease are met—but herein lies the problem. The landlord of this community-owned asset, Oriel College, will not commit to such a long-term lease. That is because, it appears, the building is in the footprint of its plans for a “fifth quad” to accommodate graduate students. The idea of the cinema’s being used for that purpose strikes me, and local residents, as very strange. The building is Grade II listed, which reflects its historical status and striking exterior and interior. It is one of the oldest independent cinemas in England, and the only one that is community-owned.

I commend the right hon. Lady for raising this subject. I spoke to her beforehand, and she is right to refer to the issues affecting her local cinema and to its community-based importance. Does she not agree that community-owned assets are essential to our quest to overcome hidden barriers, such as transport poverty, social isolation among the elderly and digital exclusion—things that go far beyond the cinema—which prevent rural residents in Oxford East, but also in my constituency, from gaining access to essential community and health services? That does not always apply to their urban counterparts. Does the right hon. Lady agree that support for these assets should not be limited to one community group or another, but should be given to entire populations, who rely on these assets, and on Government help, in their time of need?

I absolutely agree with the hon. Member that community-owned assets are often targeted at those inequalities, because communities understand where the challenges are on their streets, in their backyard or, if we are talking about rural areas, down their lane. They really understand where the need is. That is one of many reasons why community-owned assets are so important. Of course, they are not only important for those communities; they can be nationally significant as well. That is the case with this cinema; the head of cinemas at the Independent Cinema Office has said that the UPP is of national importance.

I and thousands of local residents have called on Oriel College to grant the cinema the long-term lease it needs; indeed, a petition calling for this has gained nearly 20,000 signatures in a matter of weeks. The granting of this lease would be great for local students, and could unlock exciting collaboration between the cinema and Oriel College. There are some brilliant examples of higher education institutions working with arts organisations in the UK, and such co-operation could make the UPP an even more special place. So far, Oriel College appears not to have recognised the potential benefits of engaging with the Ultimate Picture Palace in this way. I urge it to reconsider, and to grant the UPP its long-term lease. I urge the Government to recognise the value of community assets like the UPP, and to go further to protect them.

My right hon. Friend is painting a beautifully evocative picture of the UPP, and it takes me straight to my favourite film, “Cinema Paradiso”. Does she agree that communities often deliver in a way that the Government cannot? They deliver according to what communities and local people need, but they can also act in a more agile way. They can often access different funding, but they need initial support and the capacity to grow their knowledge and experience in order to deliver.

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for making that really important point, and she is absolutely right. The flexibility that community-owned assets often have cannot be underlined enough, and the fact that they can respond to community needs is just one of the many positive aspects of these very special assets. Of course, community ownership shapes who holds power within organisations and over assets. It shapes who makes decisions about them and who benefits from them, as in the cases she talks about.

The right hon. Lady is outlining a really clear case for community-owned assets. Can she elaborate on that and tell us if the UPP is an asset of community value? We have recently had to fight a campaign to stop Harrogate Spring Water chopping down the much-loved Rotary Wood, which is an asset of community value. If that planning decision had gone ahead and not been voted down, there would have been a moratorium that allowed the community to come together and put in a bid to try to purchase it, but there needs to be more support to make sure that those bids are prioritised, and that multinationals like Danone cannot simply swoop in and outbid a local community.

I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman that the “asset of community value” designation can be a really powerful tool. Yes, that has been applied in the case of UPP; it is something that the cinema itself and local people pushed for. I am really pleased that the council granted that designation, and in the case of important community assets, we really need to guard against the kind of development that he mentions.

A recent measure that the Government have been working on, and which will help in this area, relates to the community right to buy, which I know the Minister is really passionate about. The community right to buy is about giving local people the right to own and protect the places that matter to them, from pubs and parks to community centres and sports grounds. When communities have a real stake, as they do with the UPP, they do not just preserve assets; they make them thrive. This reflects a core co-operative belief—fundamental for the Co-op party, of which I am a member—that communities are best placed to shape their future. Where communities have succeeded in ensuring that vital shared spaces can continue to exist, they have done so despite the system, not because of it. The current situation brings into sharp relief how many hurdles communities face in trying to take control of the places that matter most.

The Ultimate Picture Palace is just one example of a community-owned asset facing blockages. We know that communities elsewhere are not eligible for funding streams or tax relief, and that there often is not the correct development support for those trying to pursue community ownership. The community right to buy will mark a landmark shift, but we need to go further, and I know that the Co-op party has argued this.

My right hon. Friend is putting forward a very persuasive argument. In Penn in my constituency, where I live, we have the Old Stag’s Head, a pub that closed down some time ago. Many efforts have been made to allow the community to purchase the pub, so that it can recreate the community value that it provided. Does she agree that community assets can be quite wide-ranging? They can be pubs, community centres or sports halls. This is a very important topic on an issue on which Government support can be so useful.

Absolutely. I strongly agree with my hon. Friend, who is completely right. We have seen many campaigns to keep local pubs open, and we have seen local people working hard to deliver a community asset designation, but they have often lacked the finance. I hope that the new measures coming through will start to deal with that, particularly the right to buy and other measures. I would also mention the community wealth fund and the Pride in Place programme. They all aim to tackle the inequalities, the lack of social infrastructure, including physical social infrastructure, and of course economic deprivation. Too often, as in the case of the UPP, we see a David and Goliath situation for communities that want to control local assets.

In conclusion, I urge the Minister, first, to co-ordinate policy on community assets with other Departments, so that we can truly unlock their promise. Secondly, I urge her to work with Culture, Media and Sport Ministers and Education and Skills Ministers to encourage place-based collaboration between arts and cultural organisations and higher education providers.

The UPP sounds like an absolute cultural gem, and I love anything to do with arts and culture, as a former chair of an arts and culture organisation. The Government have launched the town of culture programme, which will be an amazing way to bring people together. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is a positive step forward, and will she get behind Bawtry being the first town of culture in the country?

I am very fond of my hon. Friend, but I know many other Members are pushing for their amazing towns to become the town of culture. I agree with him that the programme is an exciting new development, as is what we are seeing in community ownership, and the engagement with arts and culture.

My third ask of the Minister is that she comes to the Ultimate Picture Palace and experiences the magic of cinema. She will find a friendly welcome, lovely drinks and snacks, and a dedicated team of staff and volunteers. If she comes, she will experience what promoters of the cinema said it would deliver when it was built right back in 1911: “Real fun and instruction”, in a beautiful building. Long live community cinema, and long live the Ultimate Picture Palace!

I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) for securing this debate, for speaking with such conviction about the importance of community-owned assets and for highlighting the importance of the Ultimate Picture Palace—I do know it—which is a treasured asset in her community. I know she has been a long-standing champion for communities in her constituency, and I recognise the work she has done to bring local voices to this House. As a fellow Co-operative Member, I share her ambition, passion and commitment for community ownership and power.

Community-owned assets matter because they are not just buildings, but places where people meet, organise, volunteer, learn and support one another. When communities lose them, they lose not just bricks and mortar, but connection, pride and opportunity. That is why this Government believe strongly that communities should have more power to protect the places they value. My right hon. Friend is seeing that at first hand in Greater Leys, as it is one of the neighbourhoods receiving long-term funding and support through the Pride in Place programme. That 10-year commitment reflects both the strength of the community and the challenges it faces, and it gives local people the certainty they need to plan ahead and to shape the area for the long term.

Alongside the Pride in Place programme, the Government have also introduced the Pride in Place impact fund. The fund is designed to provide rapid, visible improvements to community spaces, public places and high streets in areas that need immediate support. Further communities across the country are benefiting from that additional route for action, where quicker intervention is needed.

Together, the two approaches reflect a deliberate choice by this Government to combine long-term, locally-led change with the ability to respond quickly where urgent improvements are required. They serve different purposes, but both are rooted in the same fundamental principle of putting communities in the driving seat and ensuring that they decide what is best for their area and their priorities.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Stephen Morgan.)