BUSINESS forum boss Ian Cass has stressed the importance of local pubs for communities.

Mr Cass is managing director of the Knutsford-based Forum of Private Business, and is supporting a new campaign to review the Pubs Code.

Tied pub tenants from across the country held a demonstration opposite Parliament as they launched the campaign.

As part of the event tenants and campaigners, including Mr Cass, met Conservative and Labour MPs to seek support.

The Pubs Code applies to all businesses owning 500 or more tied pubs in England and Wales.

It governs their relationships with tied pubs but not with their managed houses or free-of-tie pub tenants.

The two principles of the code are, fair and lawful dealing by pub-owning businesses in relation to their tied tenants, and tied pub tenants should be no worse off than if they were not subject to any tie.

Mr Cass said: “Local pubs are vital for communities. Brewing and pubs are a key part of our culture. Just look at each soap opera- the pub plays a central role in them all.”

Campaigner Dave Mountford said: “The legislation supposed to offer tenants the opportunity to improve their financial situation, by severing the tied agreement with their Pub Owning Businesses, has clearly failed to achieve its key principle of ‘fair and lawful dealing’.

“Similarly, the notion that ‘tied tenants shall be no worse off than the free of tie’ has not come to fruition either.”

Shadow Business Minister, Gill Furniss MP, who met campaigners during the demonstration, said: “I was pleased to join pub campaigners calling for an urgent review of the Pubs Code.

“Unfortunately, the Code has failed in its fundamental objective which was to create a level playing field for all pub tenants.

“Instead, we have seen bigger corporate chains exploiting loopholes in the Code, all to the detriment of smaller local pubs.

“The Code is not fit for purpose, and the Government must urgently review it.”

Dave Mountford thanked those who took the time to support the event, which highlighted what he said was the ‘complete and abject failure of the legislation of which so much was expected’.