Parliament is not usually the stage for design debates. Tax and trade dominate the agenda. Yet in May 2025, the glow of signage took centre stage. Labour’s Yasmin Qureshi, stood with conviction. Her message was uncompromising: authentic neon is cultural heritage. She contrasted it with cheap LED substitutes, saying they undermine public trust. Marketing should not blur the definition. Chris McDonald added his support, speaking of local artists. The benches responded warmly.

Numbers framed the urgency. From hundreds, the number has fallen to a few dozen. No new entrants are learning. Without action, the tradition could vanish. Qureshi proposed legal recognition, modelled on Champagne. Preserve authenticity. From Strangford, Jim Shannon rose, real neon signs adding an economic perspective. Neon remains a growth sector. His point: authentic craft has future potential. The final word fell to Chris Bryant. He allowed himself puns, lightening the mood.

Yet beyond the humour, he recognised the seriousness. He recalled iconic glows: Walthamstow Stadium’s listed sign. He suggested neon is unfairly judged on eco terms. Why the debate? The risk is confusion. Consumers are misled. That diminishes value. It is no different to whisky or Champagne. If Scotch must come from Scotland, then signage should tell the truth. This was about identity. Do we trade individuality for convenience? At Smithers, the stance is firm: glass and gas still matter.

So yes, Parliament discussed neon. The Act is still to come. But the campaign is alive. If Westminster can defend glow, so can we all. Look past cheap imitations. Keep the glow alive.

When you loved this short article as well as you would like to be given more information regarding LIT Labs generously go to our own webpage.