Commons Chamber

Wednesday 9th September 2026

(began 1 day, 8 hours ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:33
None Portrait Q1. What discussions she has had with Cabinet colleagues on the potential impact of camera-enabled smart glasses on women's privacy. (901252)
-

Good. >> I know that a greater than
11:33
11:34
None Portrait Oral questions: Women and Equalities
-

11:34
11:34
11:35
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:38
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:46
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:52
None Portrait Q8. What steps she is taking to help improve outcomes for neurodivergent women and girls. (901261)
-

OK, Juliet Campbell. >> Mr. Mr Speaker, autistic people, people with ADHD have been struggling to get the right support
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:54
11:55
11:55
11:56
11:57
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:01
12:02
12:02
12:03
12:04
12:05
12:07
12:08
12:10
12:11
12:11
12:12
12:13
12:14
12:16
12:16
12:17
12:19
12:20
12:21
12:22
12:22
12:23
12:24
12:25
12:26
12:26
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:32
12:33
12:34
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:37
12:38
12:38
12:39
12:39
12:40
12:41
12:42
12:44
None Portrait Ministerial Statement: Summer Health and Resilience
-

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
12:44
Yvette Cooper Portrait Rt Hon Yvette Cooper MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley, Labour)
-
-
To. on health this summer. As a result of the heat. The action our NHS has taken in response and some of the next steps. The Department is now taking on investment and reform to help our NHS improve its resilience and performance in the face of new health challenges. Before I do, let me say, as I did last night, what a pleasure and honour it is to be back at this Dispatch Box as Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, 27 years after I first became a health Minister under the last Labour government, and whilst there have been many changes in health and health care in the last quarter century, the values that underpin our NHS care and compassion for all of us based on need and not the ability to pay, are the best of British values and they have endured through generations.

And what has also endured is the incredible dedication of NHS and social care staff as a result of their work and with the support of this government, despite record health demand, we have seen millions of additional appointments, record numbers of patients receiving treatment waiting lists down by 350 zero zero 0 in 2 years. Ambulance and A&E waiting times down in the winter, thousands of extra doctors, nurses and mental health workers in place, and patient satisfaction with access to GP services. Up to 75% from 61% two years ago.

But alongside recognising the dedication of NHS staff, I also want to recognise the impact that Covid has had on staff across our NHS and social care, the pressures they faced and to recognise that they were there for us then and we should not forget that now. And that is also what makes me incredibly angry about the figures that show 1 in 7 NHS workers have faced violence and abuse while doing their job, and much higher in emergency care. That is a disgrace and I hope I speak for the whole

**** Possible New Speaker ****

House when I say to those staff, we are on your side and we will always stand up for you. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Mr. speaker, let me also pay tribute to my immediate predecessors in this role. My right hon. Friend the Member for Ilford hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North. My right hon. Friend the Member for Ealing North, and also to the work of other health Ministers over the last two years Ministers over the last two years who together have commissioned the Darzi report drawn up the NHS ten year plan, the cancer plan for year plan, the cancer plan for which I particularly pay tribute to my hon.

Friend the Member for West Lancashire and who have driven the additional investment reforms and improvements in performance we have seen in the last two years, but I want to focus on the immediate pressures on health that our NHS has faced, exacerbated by the summer heat. We've experienced what's officially been registered as the hottest summer on record five heat waves, 40 days of temperatures above 30 degrees and extremes that we now expect to be the new normal because of the impact of climate change.

During May and June of this year, it's estimated there were more than 2800 excess deaths. To put that in perspective, it's almost twice as many as the 1500 heat related deaths during the entire summer of last year. And once the analysis of July and August is complete, it will be clear the extreme heat we've seen this year has had an unprecedented impact on the health of the nation and represents a new a significant threat to the very oldest, the very youngest and the most vulnerable in our society.

Extreme temperatures also pose additional challenges to the normal functioning of the NHS. So this July saw the highest number of attendances at A&E of any month, in any year in the history of the NHS. Ambulance teams handled over 800 000 incidents that month, the second highest month outside winter. And this is against a backdrop of continued pressure in A&E, where today's Nao report recognises the NHS is beginning to see improvements in A&E performance, but not yet at a scale that we need to see.

The heat has also highlighted some of the weaknesses in the NHS estate, overheated wards and operating theatres, which comes against a backdrop of the damaging under-investment in NHS estates that we inherited. And that was highlighted in the Darzi report, which said the NHS was starved of capital after 2009, impacting on productivity and performance, as well as letting patients and staff down. So let me set out the action we are now taking to boost the resilience and performance of our NHS in the face of these new summer and other pressures.

First, in the spending review, we allocated for the first time a multiyear 6.75 billion estate safety fund, I can announce the first wave of investment from this fund today, covering 950 hospital projects across England, which will receive a share of a £1.5 billion investment to fix urgent problems with ageing buildings and facilities schemes. Tackling issues including failing fire safety systems, outdated ventilation, ageing electrical equipment that could put patients and staff at risk. More than 32 million will be spent specifically on projects that improve, improve that include improving cooling and ventilation, helping hospitals cope with extreme heat as well as winter pressures.

As part of this funding, I can announce ten major schemes worth £200 million for Wycombe Hospital in High Wycombe, the Royal Free Hospital in north London, the Linden Centre in Essex, the John Howard Centre in London, Lister Hospital in Hertfordshire, Southend Hospital in Essex. The Stepping Hill Hospital in Stockport, Saint George's Hospital in Stafford, the Bristol Royal Infirmary and the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Gateshead. I have also asked the NHS to look particularly at extreme weather resilience, as part of future waves of capital plans.

Second on resilience and planning. For many years the NHS has run a detailed planning process to ensure it's prepared for the pressures of winter months. This summer shows us seasonal resilience is just as important at other times of year, so we have established a new heat task force, including the Chief Medical Officer, NHS England leaders and several NHS chief executives from services that have been most affected. I have requested the task force examines the impact, particularly on vulnerable groups, including those who are frail, expectant mothers, those with mental health conditions, and I will share its first meeting in the coming weeks.

It will help to ensure our summer planning is on the same footing as winter planning, looking at staffing expertise and patient flow, corridor care, links to social care, and also, crucially, prevention and public health as well. And this comes against a backdrop where we are investing £450 million to improve urgent and emergency care, expanding urgent care centres, mental health needs and shifting more care into the community. And that takes me to the third area on social care, because many of those most vulnerable to extreme heat are in social care.

So the work our care system does is vital for people's health. But we also know the persistent lack of join up between health and social care continues to be a problem, with frail, elderly people sent to hospital who would be better cared for at home patients held in hospital for far too long because care support is not in place and this feels like Groundhog Day, we are having the same discussions about coordination between health and social care. When last I was a health Minister 25 years ago.

So the government is taking action, including through the Better Care Fund, Neighbourhood Health and an additional £4 billion investment into adult social care by 2020 829, as well as through the planning process to improve coordination. But we know that the problems are structural and will need much more substantial reform. And that is why the Prime Minister announced this summer we are bringing forward Baroness Casey's commission to report next year and alongside it, taking forward cross-party talks to see what consensus can be built.

Mr. speaker, the legislation to create our NHS went through this House 80 years ago this autumn and at its heart was what Nye Bevan called at Second Reading, lifting the shadow from millions of homes, ensuring a health care service to care for all of us when we need it, and improving the health of our nation. So ensuring that shadow stays from our doors for the next 80 years means not just the modernisation of NHS, the ten year plan, the improvements we will debate many times in this House.

It also means building that level of resilience, be it to changing weather and climate, or a changing world that impacts on our health and healthcare too. We will only do that working together and with the dedicated staff, patients and communities across the country. So I commend this statement to the House.
12:53
Damian Hinds Portrait Rt Hon Damian Hinds MP (East Hampshire, Conservative)
-
-
Can I welcome the new Shadow >> Can I welcome the new Shadow Secretary of State, Damian Hinds? >> I'm grateful, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. And thank you to the Secretary of State for her statement and for advanced sight of it. Preparedness statements to date have tended to focus on winter, as she said, and it is correct that now we need such a statement, such an approach also for summer. So I welcome her statement today. But we must also ask, Mr.

Speaker, what about this year, the summer just gone? Yes. The intensity and length of high temperatures was new with the spikes that it brought in emergency admissions and all the council appointments. But it was also predictable. High temperatures were forecast. So what lessons had the department learned from the UK Health Security Agency reports on adverse weather and health? What preparations had they made in advance of this summer? What guidance was given were trust left to develop protocols themselves, specifically, what guidance was given to care and nursing homes.

And of course, these high temperatures were not unique this summer to the United Kingdom. Nor indeed is the UK the hottest country in Europe by quite some way. So what conversations has she been having her Ministers been having with counterparts in other countries, and making sure each learned from the other? Mr. speaker, right now the NHS is amidst a massive top down reorganisation. What assessment is she made of the effect of that, the uncertainty and the upheaval that always comes with a major reorganisation on the NHS, ability to put in place changes at short notice for the future.

With the extreme heat that staff were enduring, what steps is she taking not only on building temperature, ambient temperature, but also to ensure the design of PPE, for example, reflects these changed needs? What specific consideration is being given to the ambulance service? And there is a connected issue, Mr. Speaker, of the cost of of energy for summer as well as winter. So what is she doing across government to make heating and cooling more affordable? Also for, for, for households, for individuals which will bring down admissions? And will the government now adopt the cheap power plan that we have set out? And finally, we are talking about the summer, but already it is September, and I think it is reasonable and timely to ask also about winter.

And we do understand that supply of the RSV vaccine is in place. But what guarantees can she give on wider preparedness, and when will she come to the House to set to set these plans out? The number of people waiting, Mr. Speaker, in A and E for more than 12 hours for admission is up significantly since the change of government. What is she doing to grip this well ahead of those coming winter pressures?
12:56
Yvette Cooper Portrait Rt Hon Yvette Cooper MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley, Labour)
-
-
Can I thank the right hon. Member for his response. Hon. Member for East Hampshire, because I did not reply to him yesterday, obviously did not get yesterday to welcome him to his post and to his appointment. He referred to my personal links to East Hampshire. I can say I do remember going to see the GP at the health centre on Anstey Road in Alton for an earache. I think it was not that I am associated him with health and earache, I promise.

Well, the future I. He raised the point about this summer. What I can say to him is as actually, as a result of the huge amount of planning and work that had been done on performance, particularly around A and E, particularly around emergency care and around electives. Despite the huge and record demand on the health service in July, we actually saw improvements in performance, around waiting lists, around waiting times and also on emergency care as well. That is tribute to the work across the National Health Service, and also all of the planning work that had been done nationally, including to improve performance as well.

He also raised the issue about preparedness for next winter, again for the coming winter again, rightly so, I can tell him that the health Ministers have meetings about the winter in the summer, and I think we are now going to increasingly have to have winters about the summer in the winter as well. But that planning is already well underway. The right across the NHS and across NHS England as well, and we will continue to provide updates for the House in due course.

And then he raised some of the particular issues around heat. So the look, the approach of the NHS, I think, needs to have is to have a seasonal resilience, to be ready for what might be extremes of flooding, which might be extremes of hot weather, might be different kinds of conditions that will impact on the country, and also to be able to respond to changing patterns of health need. And that is why things like the capital investment is so important in terms of building that greater resilience, which we don't have at the moment because of what we have inherited.

And also it's why we have specifically the heat task force now to look at through the journey on both prevention and also how we modernise and how we ensure that the right response is in place right across the NHS. And very happy to discuss those details with him further as that work progresses. I hope that he will recognise actually a lot of the investment that has gone in over the last two years in contrast to what we inherited and also the improvements in the reforms that are taking place as a result of the changes that we have made.

And I look forward to discussing this with him further.
12:59
13:00
13:01
Helen Morgan Portrait Helen Morgan MP (North Shropshire, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Helen Morgan Helen Morgan, Liberal Democrat spokesperson. >> And I welcome the Secretary of State to her place and the Shadow Secretary of State to his place. And I have to say, I wasn't And I have to say, I wasn't expecting to be the continuity figure in the health in the health portfolio. But we need to be honest, the NHS is now in crisis. As outlined by the National Audit Office report, the hallmarks of peak winter pressure in the past overcrowded A and E's queuing ambulances and soaring 999 calls are now a feature all year round.

This summer was particularly difficult due to record temperatures across the UK, with over 33 NHS trusts reporting temperatures well above the 28 degree limit set by NHS England. And I think we can all agree that that's not acceptable. It's inhumane not just for patients but for staff. 42 degrees is unbearable. A constituent of mine suffered in his final days in a desperately hot setting in Shrewsbury Hospital, until managers worked with my team to ensure that he was made more comfortable. And we don't want to be dealing with cases like that every year.

We need hospitals that can withstand the heat. And Lib Dems have been calling for a new NHS rapid adaptation unit to urgently heat proof the most heat affected hospitals and care homes. Now, turning to corridor care, the percentage of people waiting 12 or more hours in A&E has tripled since before the Covid-19 pandemic. Analysis suggests that people waiting this long are twice as likely to die within 30 days of leaving A&E, compared with those who ate just two hours. It's abundantly clear that the policies to deal with A and E aren't working.

Spend is increasing as outlined in the report. While outcomes are decreasing, we are pumping money into emergency departments with no proportionate improvement. Now, the Lib Dems have outlined our plan to end 12 hour waits in a year by investing more in step down care and support for people to leave hospital in social care. Now, the health bill reduces cooperation between local authorities and icbs, risking those improvements in social care. So while we welcome the cross-party talks on social care, I hope that the Secretary of State will look at this issue as the health bill makes its way through the Lords, so will she listen to our plans, change her approach and commit to ending the ongoing A&E scandal? Thank you.
13:03
Yvette Cooper Portrait Rt Hon Yvette Cooper MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley, Labour)
-
-
And again, I thank the hon. >> And again, I thank the hon. Member for her questions on this and also for her drawing on her expertise and interest in this area as well. Let's start with the issue about the the capital fund. It's exactly why we are allocating £32 million as part of the emergency, as part of the additional the capital fund that we have set out specifically to deal with repairs, specifically to deal with safety issues that are have become acute across the NHS estate as a result of really more than a decade of underfunding of the capital.

Underfunding of the National Health Service is something that Ara Darzi and his report made clear, had a huge impact on patients, on staff, but also on the productivity of the NHS, because we have facilities that cannot be used, because of the underfunding of that capital investment, £32 million is particularly going to be targeted at measures that will improve on cooling systems. But I have asked the NHS to look further as part of the second wave of funding, to look at other areas across the country where there will be particular needs as a result of buildings needing to deal with extreme heat that they were never designed for.

There's £1.5 billion going in now as a result of the announcements I've made today into improvements to existing facilities, to upgrade them and make sure they reach the right quality and standards. On the corridor care point she made, nobody should have to be treated in a corridor or to be seen in the corridor, or have to wait for a long time at one of the most distressing times of all, when you need emergency care and support, I've seen some phenomenal examples. It's discussed with hospitals, such as in Watford, in the work that they have done in order to eliminate the corridor care challenges they had.

We've introduced reporting and publication of those statistics for the first time exactly to in order to ensure we have that priority. But I would pay tribute to the work that was done by A&E teams in order to actually improve performance, even despite the huge increase in demand that they saw in July. They are working to do a really important job.
13:05
13:06
13:07
13:08
13:08
13:09
13:09
13:10
13:11
13:11
13:12
13:13
Yvette Cooper Portrait Rt Hon Yvette Cooper MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley, Labour)
-
-
I thank the the hon. Lady for the work that she does and also the work that her committee does, and I know that her committee has actually highlighted many of the issues that, in fact, the government has then responded to and needed then to look at. And as a result of the extensive work that they have done. So I welcome the work they do and look forward to obviously, coming to give evidence, but also responding to the inquiries and to the reports that they have underway.

One of the issues I have asked the the task force to look at that's looking around the summer pressures is particularly around the staffing resilience, because I think whilst in a lot of areas, there were all sorts of extremely good preparations in place for this summer that responded well, including in July. I think she is absolutely right to raise this issue about staff resilience, the pattern Shipley of staff holidays, of all of our holidays as well, and the impact that that has there needs to therefore have on planning.

And I take immensely seriously that she's right to raise the workforce plan. We are continuing to do the work to complete the workforce plan. It is needed. We are looking as well at how do we also ensure we have a proper workforce plan around social care and what the links there should be? One of the key areas we want to prioritise in response to Baroness Casey's work is actually developing a proper workforce strategy for social care as well, alongside the work being done for the NHS.
13:14
13:15
13:16
13:16
13:17
13:18
13:19
13:20
13:21
13:22
13:23
13:24
13:24
13:25
13:25
13:26
13:27
13:27
13:28
13:28
13:29
13:30
13:31
13:32
13:32
13:33
13:33
13:34
13:35
13:36
13:36
13:37
13:37
13:38
13:38
13:39
13:40
13:41
13:41
13:42
13:43
13:43
13:45
None Portrait Ministerial Statement: Education and Skills Reform
-

Ian.
13:45
Lucy Powell Portrait Rt Hon Lucy Powell MP, The Secretary of State for Education (Manchester Central, Labour )
-
-
statement to update the House on the government's education and skills reform. Madam Deputy Speaker, skills reform. Madam Deputy Speaker, it's a real privilege to address members for the first time as Education Secretary. Without Education Secretary. Without question, the best job in government. I got a reminder of why this is such a special job. When I this is such a special job. When I went to GCSE results day in Harper Green School in Bolton, while I was Green School in Bolton, while I was with Mika.

As he opened his exceptional results, his mum beamed and gave him a massive hug. She then gave me one too because she was thanking me for his success. Madam Deputy Speaker, that is the power of education, a source of pride and hope, a sense of achievement and confidence. I was a proud mum myself on GCSE results day this year and I know how much hard work goes into it and how committed our teachers and staff are.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

IATA. But results day isn't like that for every child. There are too many for every child. There are too many locked out of opportunity and left behind. That's why we are leading behind. That's why we are leading an education revolution. We have real strengths to build on. As yesterday's Pisa results showed, a yesterday's Pisa results showed, a 30 year consensus begun by the last Labour government and continued by successive governments, successive governments, particularly focusing on literacy and numeracy, has raised standards and performance.

Generations of children have benefited from world leading practice in fundamentals like phonics introduced by Labour, built on by the Conservatives. And today more pupils are getting the top grades in GCSE maths and are going on to do a level. As someone who loves maths and did an A-level in maths myself, that brings me huge joy. So I think the whole house should celebrate and thank our fantastic teaching workforce for the latest Pisa data out yesterday, which showed which shows strong international rankings in maths, reading and science.

I will always keep pushing for ever higher standards, but continued improvement is about challenging ourselves about what's going wrong, not just what is going right, and an honest appraisal of the evidence is that our current system works well for some, but is leaving just too many behind a disadvantage gap that remains stubbornly wide, a gap between regions that is widening, ascend crisis that is growing. 1.5 million children persistently absent from school at the last general election, a doubling of those educated at home since 2019, and now a million young people, all educated during the last 16 years, not in education, employment or training.

Anyone who cares about the futures of these young people can see the need for change. Alan Milburn has warned of a lost generation labelling education as the faltering foundation. The co-chairs of the white working class inquiry said that, and I quote, doing more of the same is unlikely to solve the problem. And even Andrea Schleicher, who oversees Pisa commenting on our results, said a big share of young people think school is a waste of time. That's really not good news. This is the other side of the same coin of a one size fits all system.

Nothing symbolises how we've lost perspective more than the treadmill of failure young people are on with the endless cycle of maths and English resits of those retaking their maths GCSE this summer, under 14% got the standard pass they needed. That's nearly 9 in 10 experiencing failure again and again. Maths and English are essential, Madam Deputy Speaker, but everything we know about how to build confidence in young people tells us this approach doesn't work. Yet we carry on. Researchers from UCL called it a wellbeing penalty.

I call it wrong and that's why I'm changing it. Madam Deputy Speaker, we are in the middle of a huge technological revolution. The world is changing faster than anyone can keep up. My children. All our children will be doing jobs that my generation couldn't have conceived of. In this world of change, we have a duty to change too. But a way that builds rather than abandons what we know to be true about learning. Because let's be clear in the AI social media age, the human ability to understand and interpret the world around us becomes more important, not less.

Literacy and numeracy become more important, not less. We must equip our young people to master technology, not be mastered by it. And there's value in human endeavour that IAIAI can never replace. Whilst pen and paper exams have their place, we need to rebalance toward the applied skills of the modern world and include practical learning in practical subjects like computing, drama and PE, as well as ensure human skills like speaking and presenting are developed. Knowledge and skills, not one or the other.

So, Madam Deputy Speaker, a broader, more inclusive education built on strong foundations with pathways for all facing the future. Education as a passport, for work, for life to success. No matter your needs, your ambitions or your postcode. Supporting every child every step of the way, from their first days of life to their first days of work and beyond. Early intervention, smoothing transitions, boosting enrichment, creating clear pathways, raising standards, keeping young people engaged, and closing the gap between classroom and the workplace.

Excellence for all, not just for some less an exam factory and more a talent factory. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I can confirm that we will see through the vital send reforms built in partnership with parents and professionals. We are investing now in a new system of early intervention and the right support close to home, so families can get the help they need first, and we will introduce legislation and set out our response to the consultation in due course. Our commitment to opportunity doesn't stop there.

We'll make this country a technical education superpower, creating new pathways of equal esteem and equal ambition. We'll connect our young people to the careers, not of some dusty past, but of an exciting future. That's why the Prime Minister and I announced over the summer our plans to transform technical education and work experience from the age of 14. Building on the revolution already happening. Post 16, combining with high level academic subjects, will develop top quality technical qualifications that give a clearer pathways into T levels, A-levels and the new V levels, as well as apprenticeships, University and beyond.

A clear line of sight into work tailored to local opportunities. By working with mayors and local leaders. Madam Deputy Speaker, some claim that improving technical education is somehow anti-academic, but those lazy falsehoods are stuck in the past. Technical education can also give new purpose to academic subjects. Countries that boast low levels of NEETs combine the two. Yes, our curriculum and assessment reform will go hand in hand with that ambition, and we will publish proposals building on the Becky Francis review soon.

We'll have fewer barriers to progression and new emphasis on the skills to succeed, including critical literacy as well as more foundation and stepping stone qualifications. More space available, including for creative subjects P and to develop deeper understanding but not a system of separation. Instead, choices. Options, chances a curriculum broad enough for long enough to capture the imagination of every child. That means changing how schools are measured to incentivise a broader offer and reward. Inclusion underpin now and always by progress in English and maths.

I will set out these proposals in due course. I know many worry about change, even though they agree that change is needed. Let me reassure education leaders, teachers and the workforce that you will be part of this process every step of the way. Perhaps even more important than these new reforms is a new way of working. We'll design change in partnership with the people who deliver it based on the very best evidence and practice, not reform beamed into the classroom, direct from Whitehall mayoral and strategic authorities, for example, helping to deliver real work experience opportunities for the first time, mayors will have control of the 16 to 19 education budgets and in the early years and early intervention, I know we can transform outcomes through the power of place.

Madam Deputy Speaker, this is just the beginning. Big reform is on the way. We're moving quickly because this can't wait. Those young people locked out of opportunity who don't see education working for them. Their eyes are on us, and it's our duty to show them that we get it. Some have called this bringing back stupid. Not a bit of it. Madam Deputy Speaker, as the Prime Minister said last week, we're bringing back hope and I commend this statement to the House.

Trott.
13:55
Laura Trott Portrait Rt Hon Laura Trott MP (Sevenoaks, Conservative)
-
-
Yes. And may I begin by welcoming the new Secretary of State to her place. Madam Deputy Speaker, just yesterday, the new statistics showed that English pupils are now in the top ten in the world for reading, for maths and for science. This is a huge achievement and a real English success story. We are punching well above our weight while other countries are falling behind. And Madam Deputy Speaker, this did not happen by accident. It happened because of hard won, evidence led reforms and brilliant teachers.

We raised expectations, we strengthened the curriculum. We learnt from the highest performing education systems in the world. My noble friend Lord Gove and Sir Nick Gibb built on labour reforms to create an evidence led school system which has catapulted us up into National League tables. So why, when the Education Secretary herself said that we should celebrate the Pisa results when the rest of the world are trying to learn from England, has the government decided that now is the moment to change course? The Secretary of State says that everyone can see the need for change.

I think the opposite is true. The Secretary of State has argued that there has been an overfocus on academic outcomes. I profoundly disagree. High academic standards do not hold children back. They lift them up. Instead of acknowledging that our schools are the one part of the state that it's not just working well, they're world leading. The government seems determined to point the finger at schools for problems it has failed to solve elsewhere. Over the summer recess, while schools were closed and teachers were on holiday, our new Prime Minister used his so-called grand tour of the country to announce fundamental changes to our education system.

Extraordinarily, this government now seems to be blaming the crisis on schools, not those on the benches opposite. Who in government failed to get a grip on the spiralling welfare bill, nor the government's genius plan to impose red tape on businesses and make it harder to hire young people. Nor, critically, the government's huge rise in business taxes, which have made it employing young people way more expensive. It is basic economics, Madam Deputy Speaker, if you make it more expensive for businesses to hire young people, fewer young people will be hired.

But instead of addressing these problems they have created, the government is laying the next crisis at the door of schools and in response and confirmed today they're tearing up the education system once again and returning to a policy that has failed before introducing a vocational pathway at 14. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, this is not about being against technical qualifications. Quite the opposite. We on this side of the House have championed technical education and apprenticeships, but 14 is far too young.

Start closing down academic options and we've tried this before. It failed Labour's reforms to GCSEs in 2005 were intended to strengthen vocational education options, but what happened was that children were from poorer backgrounds, were channelled away from the rigorous academic subjects instead of raising it is what happened. Instead of raising aspirations, the system lowered expectations. So therefore, the danger in what the government is proposing is obvious. History is going to repeat itself highly. Academic schools will continue to push their pupils towards academic qualifications, and schools serving more disadvantaged communities will come under pressure to steer children towards technical routes far earlier, because that is what happened before.

So can the Secretary of State tell the House what evidence she has that her reforms will produce a different result? And can you guarantee that choosing a technical pathway at 14 will not close down a young person's opportunity to go on to complete academic GCSEs? And can the Secretary of State explain just how this is different from the failed approach in Scotland and in Wales, and where I'm sitting? It sounds very similar. There are also serious practical questions about how any of this is going to work.

The government says these new pathways will begin in 2028, but what qualifications will schools actually be expected to offer, and what standards will those qualifications have to meet? And do schools have the specialist teachers facilities and employer partnerships required to meet them? And what assessment has the department made of the additional burden this will place on schools? What funding is going to be provided? Because this is not happening in isolation. Schools are already being asked to implement major reforms, and.
14:00
Lucy Powell Portrait Rt Hon Lucy Powell MP, The Secretary of State for Education (Manchester Central, Labour )
-
-
The right hon. Lady has had over five minutes. Now, if I'm going to five minutes. Now, if I'm going to be tough on members for long questions, I should also be tough on the front bench. Secretary of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

State. Will I also look forward to having many of these exchanges across the despatch box? I would have hoped, though, that the right hon. Lady might have been a little bit more generous in also building on the sense that there has been consensus around these issues for over 30 years, which began with a Labour Prime Minister talking about education, education, education, introducing the Literacy Numeracy hour, introducing phonics, bringing in Sure Start for that early intervention and an evidence based cycle of continued improvement improvement, which was built on by her government.

There's no question about that. And there actually used to be a consensus around technical education as well. It was her government that they should be proud of, actually, of introducing T levels, which are now really coming on stream in a way. They also introduced Utcs, which offered a completely separate pathway, actually in separate institutions for young people at 14. So she might want to look at her own record there before she starts having a go. I'm absolutely clear that this is not about creating a two tier system.

This is about creating multiple pathways. For some, it will be to the same destination. It might be to a career in engineering. They take a different pathway. Some might go A levels university, others might go a different route and a different route and arrive at the same destination. But we have got to address the underlying problems in our current system and the outcomes that they are giving to people, because you can't just take credit for all the good without also taking responsibility for what's not worked either.

And I will just take this opportunity because a few people that she once lauded who agree with us on this, Madam Deputy Speaker, Sir Hamid Patel, has said our education system is not working for every child. The Education Endowment Foundation said inequality of outcomes has blighted our education system for far too long. And Lord Agnew, I remember Lord Agnew, the well known conservative education Minister, said that our reforms are a laudable ambition and a good signal. So yes, I would agree with her.

These these things will be challenging, of course, and there'll be lots that we have to get right. But in Harper Green, where I was on results day, they brought in a new construction centre. They are massively oversubscribed for those courses at 14 to 16. And a couple of the young lads that I met said to me, I don't really get on with English and maths, but I come to school every day because I get a great sense of achievement out of building a brick wall, and I'm afraid it's those kind of kids that I'm really thinking about.

And just to leave it there, I will just say, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I agree with the previous Education Secretary who said for many years our education system has failed properly to value practical education, choosing to give far greater emphasis to purely academic achievements. Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, I agree with Michael Gove. I think it's the first time I've said that.
14:03
14:05
14:06
Munira Wilson Portrait Munira Wilson MP (Twickenham, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Spokesperson Munira Wilson. >> Spokesperson Munira Wilson. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Can I start by welcoming the Secretary of State to her new role? And it's good to finally have the chance to question her on this announcement. Now, despite some of the rhetoric, academic and vocational education are not enemies. A successful economy needs both. However, in the past, creating technical pathways without parity of esteem and funding has led to children from more disadvantaged backgrounds being disproportionately funnelled into technical pathways earlier on.

And their options narrowed too soon. Successive governments have rightly moved us away from that. Academic excellence matters and remains a powerful engine for social mobility. We should never apologise for wanting children, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, to have access to the same intellectual opportunities as the most privileged. Yesterday's Pisa scores show that here in England we have some of the best results in the world, and that's testament to the dedication of brilliant teachers and the work and the work of all parties to drive up standards across our schools in recent years.

And yes, I am proud that the Liberal Democrats have played our part too, through introducing the pupil premium and progress eight scores. Yes, whilst the Prime Minister has put a heavy emphasis on parity of esteem, how will the Secretary of State ensure that technical qualifications will be as rigorous as academic qualifications? Will a child be able to move between technical and academic pathways easily after the age of 14? Crucially, parity of esteem needs parity of funding. On top of the upcoming reforms, unfunded enrichment activities, underfunded pay rises and school meals budgets are already cut to the bone.

So will there be new funding attached to these reforms? And despite Labour's promises? Teacher numbers are down. Where will new schools find new specialist teachers? Will she be reversing the mandatory qualified teacher status? Secretary of State.
14:08
14:09
14:10
14:11
14:11
14:12
14:13
14:14
14:14
14:15
14:16
14:17
14:18
14:18
14:19
14:20
14:21
Lucy Powell Portrait Rt Hon Lucy Powell MP, The Secretary of State for Education (Manchester Central, Labour )
-
-
Secretary of State. >> Actually really agree with her, and I didn't just mention it. Then I mentioned in my opening statement that the white working class commission, which I think has done commission, which I think has done some really valuable work, and one of their findings was that for white working class boys in particular, they just couldn't see the purpose of school. It didn't relate to their lives. They didn't understand where it was going to take them. And that's why offering technical and vocational pathways or qualifications for those is part of that answer, which is absolutely right.

This is also about how we engage, how we have a more interesting curriculum from right, interesting curriculum from right, from when children start school to when they leave school, and we give them those opportunities to express them those opportunities to express themselves in a different way to perhaps other students. perhaps other students. Oliver Ryan thank you, Madam Secretary of State, for the statement and welcome her to her role. She's such a powerful advocate and thought leader when it comes to our students and brilliant teachers in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield.

Does she agree with me that we shouldn't be complacent with the Pisa results and robustly act to address England's weaknesses, particularly in reading and maths, and too many children who don't see school as valuable?
14:23
14:23
14:24
14:25
14:26
14:26
14:28
14:29
14:29
14:30
14:31
14:31
14:32
14:33
14:33
14:34
14:35
14:36
14:37
14:37
14:38
14:39
14:39
14:40
14:41
14:42
14:43
Blair McDougall Portrait Blair McDougall MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (East Renfrewshire, Labour)
-
-
Well, he's absolutely right. I mean, obviously the work placement requirement in the T levels has been challenging, but that is now really coming on stream. And many more students taking T levels and that valuable work experience or experience of work whilst you're at school, we know the value of it, yet it is something that can be very challenging to deliver. So that's why we do want employers and alongside mayors, to work with us to really give these experiences of work and work placements for our young people.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Shockat Adam thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I welcome much of the Secretary of State's statement, especially acknowledging the fact especially acknowledging the fact that one size does not fit all and highlighting that 1 million of our young people are not in education, young people are not in education, employment or training. One way out of that is obviously our apprenticeship schemes, but apprenticeship providers are really apprenticeship providers are really struggling. Madam Deputy Speaker especially my constituent Amanda, who runs an independent hairdressing business, who is now paying £204,000 a year in employment taxes and VAT before even she before she even pays her wages.

We need entrepreneurs like her, but current policies mean that she cannot afford to take them.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

What steps is the Minister taking to address that issue? Well, look, I.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, look, I. Really hear what he's saying. And. Look, I'm I know my own And. Look, I'm I know my own hairdresser and her team really well. They do a great job on on my well. They do a great job on on my hair. And it's thank you. And indeed the hairdressers here in the indeed the hairdressers here in the Commons. You do a great job on on my hair and the Deputy Speaker there at the times as well. But actually, you know, hairdressing is a job that AI is never going to do.

AI is not going to be colouring or cutting my hair anytime soon. And these are actually good careers for young people. So we do need to look at the barriers of entry. It once used to be a really clear pathway

**** Possible New Speaker ****

into work and apprenticeship in a hair salon, but For many reasons. Those numbers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For many reasons. Those numbers are really falling, and it's something I think we need to look at. Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaker. Thank you for letting me take part in this question. For the fact that I had to be away for to carry that I had to be away for to carry out my duties around the house, can I welcome my right hon. Friend's I welcome my right hon. Friend's statement and also ask her what she's likely to do in my part of South east London for technical and vocational places? And can I just remind her that there is a former education college site that is in the ownership of the Education department in my constituency, which could be ready made for creating such places? And would she take the opportunity to meet with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

me to to discuss the future of that site? Secretary of State. Well. The Minister for School Estates

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Minister for School Estates sitting next to me, and he's very happy to meet with the hon. Gentleman to discuss that. Look, Gentleman to discuss that. Look, part of this is we are going to need to look at the school estate as the pupil role in the early years is, is is diminishing. Yet requirements on further education requirements on further education and apprenticeships and technical education is expanding. These are some of the issues that we will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

have to address, but the Minister will meet with him soon. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Secretary of State mentioned persistent absence. Parents of children with unmet needs continue children with unmet needs continue to be unfairly prosecuted for their children's absence before recess. I met the Minister of State for met the Minister of State for school Standards with a number of charities, including square, Peg and the Fine fine. We're working together to try to end this injustice and as a first step to ensure that this issue is properly recorded, as it is not at the moment.

So will the Secretary of State commit to review this ahead of the education for all Bill, with the aim of ending this scandal? Yeah.
14:51
Julia Lopez Portrait Julia Lopez MP (Hornchurch and Upminster, Conservative)
-
-
Well, can I pay tribute to her >> Well, can I pay tribute to her and all her engagement and the leadership and the work that she's done on these issues? I know they're much appreciated by the they're much appreciated by the schools Minister who's been leading many of those conversations. I absolutely agree with her that issues around absenteeism, exclusion, off rolling the home schooling, which is often not actually what the parents in those circumstances want, but they just feel that the mainstream system isn't working for their children are of paramount importance.

And part of what we will be tackling in the reforms that we'll be making.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Rosie Wrighting thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was at my old school, Montsaye Academy at GCSE school, Montsaye Academy at GCSE results day, and it was really heartwarming to see the students receive their results. After going through a journey of improvement at the school. I received my results there not that long ago and then there not that long ago and then went on to study creative subjects. Now, the students studying creative Now, the students studying creative arts are down 47% since 2010.

Could the Secretary of State say what more her department can do to develop the next skill? The skills of the UK's next generation of creatives?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, can I thank her for all the championing she's done on these issues in the time that she's been here? Yeah, I'm sure her results day was not as long ago as mine was. I, I would like to to add, but she's absolutely right. The, the creative subjects, the creative industries, fashion, which I know she's a particular champion on she's a particular champion on textiles. You know, there are huge job opportunities in these sectors. And frankly, our curriculum and our system as it's been designed recently, hasn't allowed them to flourish as much as they could.

And she can rest assured that that's top of my mind when looking at the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reforms we're going to be making. Connor Naismith thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I know that the Secretary of State is already well Secretary of State is already well aware of the excellent work being undertaken by providers like Crewe undertaken by providers like Crewe Engineering and Design, UTC and Cheshire College South and West in equipping young people with the technical skills that local employers need. But what steps is she taking to build on successful she taking to build on successful examples of colleges and utcs with proven industry partnerships? And

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will she visit Crewe and Nantwich to see that work in action? Well. Can I just say that I actually

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I just say that I actually met a student recently at Alstom and had made a video with him who and had made a video with him who had attended Crewe UTC and Utcs have provided a pathway for some children, some young people, to then go into apprenticeships or to then go into apprenticeships or to go on to to do other study or great opportunities like he had at Alstom, but it is not really been on the scale. I think we need to have it, and that's why we need to have more technical and vocational pathways and qualifications available to all children, not just those that can children, not just those that can get into one of the Utcs.
14:57
14:59
15:00
15:02
15:03
15:05
15:05
15:06
15:07
15:08
15:09
15:09
15:10
15:11
15:12
15:12
15:13
15:14
15:15
15:15
15:16
15:16
15:17
15:18
15:19
15:19
15:20
15:21
15:21
15:22
15:23
15:24
15:25
15:26
15:26
15:27
15:28
15:29
15:29
15:30
15:30
15:32
15:32
Chi Onwurah Portrait Dame Chi Onwurah MP (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West, Labour)
-
-
manufacturers and their supply chain. She rightly mentions trade chain. She rightly mentions trade deals we have, and she is right to to recognise that a trade deal with the United States that no other the United States that no other country enjoys. I notice, and we can all understand why she did not mention the relationship with Europe and the impact of trade deals that we inherited there, which Ministers across the government are working incredibly hard to to deal with at the moment in terms of made in Europe and rules of origin.

And finally, we inherited the Zev mandate from her party. We have already. We already. We already. The hon. Gentleman says from a sedentary position will change it. We did change it, we changed it. We changed it last year. We changed it last year, in part to help plug in hybrids, which was of enormous importance to Jaguar Land Rover. And again, I say, as I said in the statement a moment ago, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have recognised the scale of the challenges that the automotive sector faces worldwide.

All of the criticisms that she makes, I would say Volkswagen, who are letting 100 000 staff go, are not governed by a Labour government, but we have recognised those global headwinds and it is exactly why we are putting in the biggest investment into the automotive sector of the post-war period, rather than criticising the industrial strategy,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

she should get in the car and travel that journey with us. Chair of the Business and Trade

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Chair of the Business and Trade Select Committee, Liam Byrne. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. 4000 jobs lost. At Jaguar.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

At Jaguar. Land Rover is a body blow for workers, families and communities across the West Midlands, so I across the West Midlands, so I commend Richard Parker, the mayor of the West Midlands, for moving quickly to put half £1 million on the table on Monday to help make sure everybody gets back to work. But will the Minister pledge that if more is needed, he will act to back the mayor in getting everybody back into work? But more broadly, will he reiterate the pledges that he made in front of the Select Committee yesterday to bring down costs, especially energy costs, and leave his mind open to the necessity of implementing tariffs on China, which is importing cars that are, frankly, over subsidised.

At the end of the day, everybody in this House believes in competition, but it needs to be competition that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is fair. I thank the Select Committee

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Select Committee chair for that series of questions. I know this is not just a committee interest for him, but a but a local interest for him, but a but a local interest as well, taking his points in reverse order on the issue of in reverse order on the issue of Chinese imports into the UK. This is, as I said to him at the Select Committee yesterday, something. We Committee yesterday, something. We have to be very careful about. Our automotive industry is very export focussed and the industry themselves want us to be very, very careful not to do anything which in protecting our domestic manufacturers, might also hurt them by closing down markets elsewhere.

So as I said to him yesterday, we are we are looking very carefully at this, but we have to be very careful on energy. We would love to go further than because it is worth noting that when we introduced the proposal for the British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme, initially it was for fewer businesses than will be eligible and will start to apply for in a matter of days now, and we will continue to see how far we can go on that, because we are aware of how much of a problem for so many parts of industry it is.

And then finally, we are working incredibly closely with the mayor. I have to say that the main request to us from those involved in that situation at Jaguar Land Rover is to continue to focus on that support we are giving to them in terms of innovation, in terms of supporting the supply chain and standing behind them, so that on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the other side of these global challenges, they come out strong and resilient. Liberal Democrat spokesperson

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Liberal Democrat spokesperson Sarah Olney, thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker, on the same day that the Chancellor stood up day that the Chancellor stood up and claimed his growth mission was working, it was reported that 4000 more manufacturing jobs were being more manufacturing jobs were being cut in the West Midlands. This news will have been devastating for the thousands of workers and their thousands of workers and their families affected by these redundancies at Jaguar Land Rover, as well as for the companies in the impacted supply chain industries.

When Starmer's government announced that they would underwrite a rescue loan for JLR last year, the Liberal Democrats asked that the Prime Minister assure workers that the deal would be enough to protect their jobs. It wasn't. This development lays bare that the government's growth mission is falling far short, so we need to see bold action from the Chancellor on growing the economy across the UK. Earlier this year, we called for the government to review their tariffs on the steel sector due to the impact it would have on our manufacturing and defence industries.

Yet Ministers won't even negotiate a new growth and defence partnership with the EU that would unleash our auto industry by removing crippling rules of origin trade barriers. So is this Chancellor's growth mission serious ambition or just words? And what will the government do to ensure that these highly specialised skills are not lost and are fully utilised within our are fully utilised within our manufacturing sector? Thank you. Good.
15:43
15:43
15:44
Heidi Alexander Portrait Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, The Secretary of State for Transport (Swindon South, Labour)
-
-
of global trade challenges. She asks about, rightly the relationship with Europe. I can relationship with Europe. I can reassure her that our posts in capitals across Europe, our capitals across Europe, our Ministers, including myself, are constantly engaging with member states and their representatives on both of those issues on rules of origin and on Made in Europe. I origin and on Made in Europe. I think one of the encouraging things in that process is that you see, not only our industry making that argument, but also the deeply interconnected other side of the supply chain across the channel.

Also making that argument with member states. So I can reassure her that we are working hard on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that. Marie Eagle thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. There is concern amongst my constituents who work at amongst my constituents who work at JLR, Halewood and amongst those who work for the supply chain in the whole of the north west of England. About this news. The five week suspension of manufacturing last suspension of manufacturing last year, as a consequence of the cyber attack, has left a legacy of attack, has left a legacy of concern about the future and issues about financial resilience for some companies.

So what steps is he taking to ensure that the full impact of this announcement on the supply chain is also mitigated as much as possible, and resilience in our automotive supply chain is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

boosted for the future? Well, I know how important Jaguar Land Rover is for her Jaguar Land Rover is for her constituents, and she's a constant voice of concern on their behalf. Jaguar Land Rover have been very clear that those jobs are focussed largely on back end and management largely on back end and management staff, and that the productive staff will not be impacted. That should be, I hope, a source of encouragement and reassurance to the wider supply chain. We are investing a huge amount into that wider supply chain.

I mentioned a moment ago. That's a £380 million investment for us, which leverages in £5 billion of investment. I could just as easily talk about the supply chain pilots we are doing through drive 35 to make sure, as I say, that that competitive edge we have, that excellence we have in automotive engineering survives this global challenge period, and we come out of it still as a productive and proud car making

**** Possible New Speaker ****

nation. Saqib Bhatti thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. In Meriden and Solihull East, we

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In Meriden and Solihull East, we have Jaguar Land Rover, Solihull, and I can tell him that the. And he will know this, that Jaguar Land Rover is in the DNA of my constituents in the West Midlands, the automotive sector, and I agree with him about the global headwinds. with him about the global headwinds. But there is. There is a massive issue here, which is around the high levels of red tape through the Employment Act and also the National Insurance rises, which will inevitably destroy consumer demand and make our automotive sector less competitive.

Will the Minister at least acknowledge that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that has also had an impact? Absolutely. I recognise that it's our job to lower costs on the it's our job to lower costs on the industry. That is why we are, for example, taking the action that we example, taking the action that we example, taking the action that we are on energy costs to make it more and that should take us roughly to and that should take us roughly to where his staff and Jaguar Land Rover in Solihull. I was at Jaguar Land Rover in Coventry just a few days ago, seeing the extraordinary, almost sci fi level of work that they do.

And I think it is right that we all express concern today and worry for our constituents, but I think we should also all celebrate the incredible manufacturing that they are doing now and will continue to do for generations to come.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Paulette Hamilton thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. On Saturday, I was particularly disappointed by I was particularly disappointed by this announcement. Over the last two years, we have worked hard in Birmingham Erdington to protect jobs at Jaguar Land Rover Castle Bromwich site. Given the Bromwich site. Given the announcement of 4000 job losses across JLR, my constituents are across JLR, my constituents are deeply concerned what this means for their livelihoods. After losing thousands of jobs in previous rounds of reorganisation, can the Minister give me an assurance today about the future of the Castle Bromwich site, and what steps is the government taking with JLR to not just protect jobs now, but in the future? If they do plan future job losses to ensure that they're working with others? Because we want to ensure that there are no

**** Possible New Speaker ****

future job losses. Thank you and thank you. I thank the hon. Lady for the question, and I know how important question, and I know how important JLR is to our constituents. And she she makes that very clear to myself she makes that very clear to myself and other Ministers constantly. I would say the key thing we can do is to invest in that future productive capacity of the company. I mentioned the investment into I mentioned the investment into agriculture's a moment ago.

It is very recently, again, we made a substantial investment through DRI 35 into software defined vehicle research within the company as well. And that's the conversation we are having with JLR right now, is about how to protect not just the high value jobs within JLR directly, but that wider supply chain and those high value jobs that so many of our constituents rely on.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Zarah Sultana. Cut 4000 jobs is devastating for workers, families and communities workers, families and communities in Coventry and across the West Midlands. Based in my constituency and its highly skilled workforce is vital to our region's economy and industrial future. Trade union unite is right to demand urgent answers and for every alternative answers and for every alternative to job losses to be explored, the Business Secretary has now met JLR and unite. So can the Minister tell and unite. So can the Minister tell the House what has actually been secured from JLR, a company that has already been granted £1.5 billion of public money? Will the department publish the company's plans in full, rule out compulsory redundancies and make it clear that not a penny more of taxpayers money will support a company that is throwing thousands of workers onto the scrap heap?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I agree with I think the hon. Lady right up until the end. I think we have to keep investing think we have to keep investing into JLR to secure those jobs. But I think some of her constituents I think some of her constituents last week felt that sense of pride they have. It's not just a job. It's not just economic production. It's not just economic production. It's part of the sense of local pride in her area. When we met with the Secretary of State, the union and management earlier on, we pressed them on exactly those issues.

We had a conversation about the phasing of those changes, how they interact with the rollout of new models that are coming. And when those jobs, job losses would kick in. And that is something that the union and the business will continue to work on. And we will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

continue that conversation as well. Deputy. Speaker, and today's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaker, and today's announcement from Jaguar Land Rover is devastating for its workforce, for the automotive industry and the for the automotive industry and the wider supply chain and manufacturing supplier to JLR. In my constituency of Birmingham, my constituency of Birmingham, Edgbaston has lost more than 150 jobs. So what access to finance will the government provide to help will the government provide to help West Midlands firms diversify into new markets and protect skilled

**** Possible New Speaker ****

jobs? Well, she she rightly raises the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, she she rightly raises the issue that Jaguar Land Rover and the other big automotive names do not exist in isolation. They are not exist in isolation. They are part of a much wider supply chains. On the issue of access to finance On the issue of access to finance and funding, the DRI 35 programme, obviously a lot of that goes to those larger companies, but it goes those larger companies, but it goes right across that supply chain, investing in so many of the strengths that we have across, particularly electric propulsion software, defined vehicles, and other other strengths that we have.

And in addition to that, within the West Midlands, £50 million has been devolved to the mayor to work on those supply chain resilience and will continue to work with the mayor to agree what needs to be done to secure those supply chains for the future. As I say, as we go through a pretty challenging period for automotive.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

David Reed thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. The Jaguar Land Rover hack started over a year ago. Manufacturing grinds to a halt, and the government stepped in and made the government stepped in and made the UK taxpayer the insurer of last resort, to the tune of £1.5 billion. Yet the government have still not Yet the government have still not said who did this to our country, and it's been widely reported that and it's been widely reported that this attack was state sponsored at a time when we should be having a national conversation around the threats we face.

Can the government tell us and use this opportunity, which country did this to us? And

**** Possible New Speaker ****

more importantly, have there been repercussions? Well, I, I may look suave and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I, I may look suave and MoD, but I'm not James Bond. And so I will resist commenting on the I will resist commenting on the attribution of that. Look, it would be for the National Security Minister and the Home Secretary to Minister and the Home Secretary to do that. These are serious matters. What I would say is, I think we What I would say is, I think we were right to put that £1.5 billion there. It has not been drawn on, but it did give that vote of confidence to one of our most

**** Possible New Speaker ****

important manufacturers at a moment of genuine crisis. Chris Bloore thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Deputy Speaker. Can I thank the Minister for his statement? As someone who represents Redditch with a proud represents Redditch with a proud automotive history and is home to thousands of the 100,000 plus jobs that are part of the supply chain that are part of the supply chain that support JLR, we're all deeply concerned about the statement from JLR, but as this government did JLR, but as this government did everything it could with the 1.5 loan, not bail out to support JLR.

Can he also assure me that if worse is to come, that this government will will not falter in any way to give the support to protect these jobs? Because if these jobs are at risk further down the road, they will never come back. As as other areas in Birmingham can attest to. So can you assure me that this Labour government will make sure that whatever the headwinds facing JLR and the pressures from China, we will not lose this crucial industry as part of this country?
16:06
Richard Holden Portrait Rt Hon Richard Holden MP (Basildon and Billericay, Conservative)
-
-
I can reassure my hon. Friend on >> I can reassure my hon. Friend on that. I should say Jaguar and Land Rover in our conversations, have Rover in our conversations, have been at pains to talk about. This is a. It was described, I think, earlier on as as bitter medicine. But they are not in any way rolling back from their investment. They are investing really significantly in the future of the company, and we will be alongside them, making those strategic investments and making sure, as the hon.

Friend says, that this company continues

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to flourish for a long time to come. Manuela Perteghella thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This announcement is a devastating blow for my constituents who are for my constituents who are employed by JLR, and they will be incredibly worried for their future and their families. So what and their families. So what discussions that the government had with JLR and the affected authorities, not just the West authorities, not just the West Midlands Combined Authority, because JLR is present in Warwickshire as well.

Regarding support for employees at risk of redundancy, and what measures or measures will the government be putting in place to help affected workers secure alternative employment? Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

So we are working very closely on behalf of our constituents who I know will be troubled at the moment with the local mayors and local with the local mayors and local authorities. We as well as that, as I say, most of the conversations, most of the asks that have been most of the asks that have been made of us is to ensure that that wider automotive supply chain and wider automotive supply chain and advanced manufacturing sector in the region continues to thrive so that those workers who are highly skilled, they come from a country, a company with an incredible pedigree can more easily move into other jobs within that sector, and the skills can be maintained in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

your part of the world. In her part of the world. Mary Creagh Madam Deputy.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaker and the actions taken by this government stand in stark contrast to the actions of previous conservative governments, who were conservative governments, who were happy to watch the closure of the Massey Ferguson factory, the Alvis Massey Ferguson factory, the Alvis tank factory and Peugeot in Coventry throughout the 80s, which led to unemployment levels of 20% led to unemployment levels of 20% in the city where I grew up. Can I ask him? From those previous rounds of closures? We have seen the financial services industry come in and target workers, some of whom may be considering voluntary redundancy on defined benefit pension schemes, and target them and persuade them to transfer their pensions out into less beneficial pensions.

Many of those firms then go bust, and people realise afterwards that they have been mis sold. Can he take every step he can to protect the pension prosperities of those who are going to face voluntary or compulsory redundancy at the global headquarters of JLR at Whitley in Coventry.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She raises a really important point, and one. I confess that I had not come across my desk yet. I will, after this statement, go away and make sure that we are raising and make sure that we are raising that with the relevant regulators and perhaps talk to Friends and Treasury about that, because it Treasury about that, because it would be awful if workers, really skilled workers who have a skilled workers who have a redundancy payment that they have earned through years of hard work, have it snatched away from them by disreputable finance companies.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Ayoub Khan thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Learning of these potential job losses was deeply concerning for me as a member of Parliament for Birmingham, because we know that job losses don't just impact individuals and their impact individuals and their immediate families, but it impacts local economies. Now, I know that the regional mayor has set aside the regional mayor has set aside half £1 million, but that's not new money. That's money which the mayor had for other projects. So the question is, will the Minister specifically state what funding is this government going to provide the local mayor and the local councils? And I'm not talking about

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the 1.5 billion loan. As I said to other hon. Members throughout the conversations we've throughout the conversations we've been having, both with people in the region, including the mayor and the company themselves, the ask has the company themselves, the ask has been to make sure that we, our they feel our job is to stand behind feel our job is to stand behind that wider sector and wider supply chain, and to make sure that things are available in the future.

He mentioned skills in particular, he will be aware that the changes we have made to shorter, more flexible apprenticeships, for example, are very focussed on the automotive industry. So we are already putting significant amounts of funding into advanced manufacturing in the hon. Gentleman's part of the world and will continue to. But we stand ready to work with people in the region to make sure that whatever it takes, we maintain the skills,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the manufacturing within his region. So Rachel Taylor.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaker, my next door neighbour works at JLR and people in my constituency of North Warwickshire and Bedworth have worked their and Bedworth have worked their whole lives at JLR. They and others in the wider manufacturing supply in the wider manufacturing supply chain will be rightly concerned about their future and I share their concern. I welcome the their concern. I welcome the package of measures put in place by Labour Mayor Richard Parker, but I would like to ask the Minister what more he will be doing to support motor manufacturing in the West Midlands to protect our industrial

**** Possible New Speaker ****

future. Well, she makes an incredibly important point on behalf of her constituents who work in automotive as as she always does, many of these workers, because they are very highly skilled, because Jaguar Land Rover is such a prestigious organisation to have worked in will find themselves and work very find themselves and work very quickly. But that's almost not the point. This will be like morning for them, because they will be leaving a company with which they leaving a company with which they are deeply connected.

Emotionally. We are investing £4 billion into the automotive industry. As I said earlier, the biggest investment in post-war Britain into the automotive sector, and it is precisely to ensure that the high quality jobs that her constituents rely on, not just in the big automotive primes, but all across the supply chain, are there for her constituents for generations to come. And I will continue to work with her on that.
16:18
Ruth Cadbury Portrait Ruth Cadbury MP (Brentford and Isleworth, Labour)
-
-
Sir Ashley Fox. largest car manufacturer, so to learn of 4000 job losses is deeply concerning to workers and the whole supply chain, including in my constituency. Now, JLR is at a competitive disadvantage given the excessive energy costs in Britain. So will the Minister agree that the key to protecting Britain's manufacturing is to provide lower electricity costs to all businesses

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in Britain? Yeah. I would absolutely agree with him, which is precisely why we are him, which is precisely why we are taking action, not just through the British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme, but through the Scheme, but through the supercharger as well. It is an incredibly important issue for automotive manufacturing, for automotive manufacturing, for advanced manufacturing, but for the entire economy in terms of the impact on our growth, which is impact on our growth, which is precisely why we are acting on it, I would say in addition, though, to energy costs, investing in innovation is incredibly important because that is what we will compete on in this global market, not on low costs, but on better ideas and better products.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam. Deputy Speaker. 4000 job losses give me a massive impact to West Midlands, massive impact to West Midlands, but also for me in particular into Birmingham Selly Oak, where hundreds of jobs and people's economic futures will be will be economic futures will be will be cut short. I welcome Richard Parker's half a million to help support that situation. But I do support that situation. But I do worry that Jlr's global market conditions boils down to three key things. One, Chinese domination of things.

One, Chinese domination of the electrical vehicle market, not just here in the UK, but across the entirety of Europe. Secondly, tariffs from America. And third,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

replacing a lot of these jobs, and how are we helping them? Minister. So I think he nails so many of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

So I think he nails so many of the challenges. I mean, he mentions Chinese imports as well. I think the flip side of that is our the flip side of that is our ability to access the Chinese market with our manufacturers, and particularly the difficulty of particularly the difficulty of competing against highly subsidised Chinese made cars within within China, which is incredibly difficult. On the issue of technology, part of the reason we are investing so heavily into, for example, software defined vehicles and autonomous vehicles is because we want to be ahead of that curve.

We want to be the country that leads on this. We saw just a few days ago the beginning of autonomous vehicles on the road in this city. I was in the Midlands a few days ago with Arrigo, an incredible company making autonomous vehicles that take freight and luggage around airports. We have so many companies who have the ability to turn what he rightly identifies as a potential threat into a competitive advantage for us

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in the world, and that's why we are investing so heavily in it. Richard. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This House needs to wake up urgently, because the truth is, these 4000 JLR jobs are being these 4000 JLR jobs are being sacrificed on the altar of Net Stupid Zero, which was introduced Stupid Zero, which was introduced in 2019, introduced in 2019. Since when JLR production has collapsed when JLR production has collapsed from almost 400,000 to under 200 000, energy prices have doubled.

The previous conservative government introduced the ridiculous Zev mandate. Meanwhile, the Chinese imports have increased from a few thousand to almost 300,000, some 15% of the market. The whole of the UK market will be destroyed in the next 5 to 7 years. Unless this government takes urgent action. Will the government do the right thing, scrap the EV mandates and do what the US has done? Introduce a 100% tariffs on all Chinese EV imports? Well, I welcome this question. He knows that we are reviewing the Zev mandate to make sure that the destination of electric remains.

But the question of how quickly we go there is under review. I have to say, in standing there as the defender of Jaguar Land Rover, I will simply remind him that when we stepped in with £1.5 billion to protect Jaguar Land Rover, his party leader said, I predict Jaguar will now go bust. And you know what? They deserve to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He should apologise for that. Sureena Brackenridge thank you

**** Possible New Speaker ****

madam. The hon. Gentleman. Will allow the hon. Lady to say

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will allow the hon. Lady to say her question undisturbed. Sureena Brackenridge thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I've had Madam Deputy Speaker. I've had reassurance for my residents at the I 54 Wolverhampton site that they I 54 Wolverhampton site that they will be largely unaffected. However, for those who are affected across the West Midlands, this is deeply concerning. So I thank the mayor, Richard Parker, for the 500 000 support package. Will the Minister take heed of JLR and the wider automotive sector's concern about exports flooding the UK market and Act so the industry remains competitive and safeguards future jobs.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm glad she's had that reassurance on behalf of her constituents, but I think she'll constituents, but I think she'll know that they will be affected by it in the sense that they will feel they're part of one family across JLR, which is such a strong identity as a company. As I said earlier on, we are working very earlier on, we are working very carefully on the issue of of Chinese export imports with the Chinese export imports with the industry themselves.

It is worth saying that they are nervous about this issue. They are worried about the cost and the impact of the increase in the number of Chinese EVs coming into our market, but they also want to be able to access the Chinese market and do not want to get into a sort of retaliatory situation. So we don't rule anything out, but we are being very careful as we think as we work with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the industry on that issue. Warinder Juss thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I thank the Deputy Speaker. I thank the Minister for his statement and for keeping members of this House informed as to the situation in JLR. informed as to the situation in JLR. Although we've had reassurances that production jobs are not going to be affected when the cyber to be affected when the cyber attack happened, a lot of the supply chain companies were adversely affected and their adversely affected and their employees as well.

So can the Minister give some reassurance that with the latest round of redundancies, those supply chain companies and their employees will not be affected? And can he also please give reassurances that he will continue to work with the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

trade unions and other partners? So I can certainly give that reassurance. Myself and Secretary of State and the Prime Minister of State and the Prime Minister have been in contact with unions in recent days about this. I should say, Madam Speaker, it is difficult say, Madam Speaker, it is difficult in a day when we are talking about so many people worried about their job losses, to sort of strike a job losses, to sort of strike a positive note. But within everything that JLR have been saying, not only about protecting saying, not only about protecting those sort of blue collar production workers because they recognise they do not want to eat into their future as a as a company, and is a reassurance that that investment pipeline will continue.

And beyond this difficult period, they and the supply chain will have a really bright future in this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

country. Connor Naismith thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Minister will appreciate the concern that appreciate the concern that announcements of redundancies at major manufacturers like JLR will create for employees, families and businesses across not just at JLR but across the wider supply chain but across the wider supply chain and industry. In my constituency, Bentley Motors have invested hundreds of millions of pounds over hundreds of millions of pounds over the last decade, but I wonder what more the government can do to support the UK automotive sector.

And will he join me in welcoming the forthcoming launch of Bentley's first electric vehicle, the Torkel, on the 23rd of September? Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, when my hon. Friend mentioned the Torkel, I thought he was referring to the hon. Member was referring to the hon. Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar, but I was I was with Bentley in the Midlands I was with Bentley in the Midlands at the Horiba testing facility for a round table to talk about exactly a round table to talk about exactly those issues the other day, and we are working very closely with the company on their plans for their company on their plans for their next stage of activity, particularly with regards to making the most of the Indian trade deal for Bentley.

I have to say, I warmly congratulate them on the Torkel. I mean, the some of the details about how high end that vehicle is. A thousand layers of walnut veneer within the interior. This is a seriously impressive product from a company with an

**** Possible New Speaker ****

incredible heritage. Sean Woodcock thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. The automotive sector is hugely important to Banbury, with numerous important to Banbury, with numerous companies supporting hundreds of jobs, including in the supply chain for Jaguar Land Rover. They will be nervous about the news over recent days. Can the Minister provide them days. Can the Minister provide them and me with reassurance about the level of support that this government will provide to them and other areas of the supply chain?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

So, as I said a moment ago, the yes, the focus is rightly on Jaguar Land Rover and the individual Land Rover and the individual workers, but we know that that will worry people, particularly, as has been mentioned with the recent been mentioned with the recent memory of the impact of the cyber attack on those supply chains. We are absolutely committed to investing in those supply chains to learn the lessons of that attack learn the lessons of that attack and to invest in their resilience, which is why we are putting particular pots of money to the areas generally, but also through drive 35, through the caf cam Pathfinders.

Pots of money as well, ensuring that we are investing in that supply chain resilience, which is important for automotive, but also important for defence and all

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sorts of other areas of advanced manufacturing. Well, that seems to be the end

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, that seems to be the end of the Minister will be happy with that. So we come to the conclusion of the Jaguar Land Rover redundancy. Should I let the front benches Presentation Presentation of Presentation of Bill John McDonnell? Utilities and Services Bill Second Reading. What

**** Possible New Speaker ****

day? 4th of December. Friday.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

4th of December. Friday. Friday. The 4th of December. We now come to the ten minute rule now come to the ten minute rule bill. Personal data. Digital twins Damian Warren.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I beg to move that leave be given to bring a bill to make provision to bring a bill to make provision about the regulation of software or algorithms which use or hold personal data for the purposes of modelling the preferences or behaviours of a person to make provision about the rights of individuals in respect of the holding and use of their personal data by such software or algorithms, and for connected purposes. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, we know that tech companies collect data on everything we do.

Every click we make, every photo we share, every sandwich we buy, every post we like. But now that data is being combined with AI to turn an individual. For example, you, Madam Deputy Speaker, into an algorithm to predict your behaviour, to target advertising at you, to persuade you to watch a particular video or believe a dodgy news report. Think about it. Who is best able to persuade you to do or say something, if not an automated version of yourself? And when the tech platforms have processed every action you make and applied AI to it, well, that is what they have.

It's called a digital twin. And this bill will require explicit
16:44
16:47
Andrew Cooper Portrait Andrew Cooper MP (Mid Cheshire, Labour)
-
-
they smile at, what they frown at, what makes them angry because that is what is happening. The automated is what is happening. The automated version of our kids will grow with them. And with the power of AI them. And with the power of AI targeting advertising and products at them and worse, the science, Innovation and Technology Select Committee has heard some of the tragic consequences of online tragic consequences of online grooming by algorithms and chatbots. A vulnerable boy persuaded to kill himself, a vulnerable girl fed more and more extreme dieting advice, children hooked and reeled into extreme behaviours and views.

So my Bill will expressly protect children from digital twinning. It is not possible for a child to meaningfully consent to the creation or use of a digital twin of themselves, and parental consent cannot provide a substitute for this. Now on deep fakes, His Holiness Pope Francis was the subject of one of the very first deepfake memes when a fake photo of him in a puffa jacket went viral. Since then, deepfakes have proliferated. The hon. Member for Mid Norfolk was shown crossing the floor in Parliament to join reform.

To his constituents consternation and his. It was a fake. And then there were the horrendous photos of women and girls naked that Elon Musk's AI created on demand. I want to place on record my thanks to the government for taking action on that so quickly. But deepfakes in general are not illegal. My bill would ensure that malicious deepfakes are tackled by protecting each of us from someone digitally replicating and altering our likeness without our consent. I want to be clear this bill does not ban digital twins.

It simply requires that the actual human being who is being copied has to consent. Now, in the arts, entertainment and tech industries, many performers are agreeing to the creation and use of digital replicas replicas as part of their work. Think of other voyage. But performers increasingly encounter unauthorised digital replicas of themselves, which pose a threat to their career, to their livelihood and to their reputation. And there's no clear and reliable means of controlling and licensing like likeness. Instead, performers must piece together a degree of protection from existing frameworks, all of which are uncertain and ill suited for those in the arts industry.

The trade union equity would like to see a contractual requirement. My bill does not go that far, but it establishes the principle that you cannot be impersonated. The current regulatory framework also does not address this deepfake misinformation. My social media feed was absolutely full of adverts showing an. Andrew Bailey and the Member for Clacton fighting on Question Time. Now, there may be good reasons why the Member for Clacton and Bailey disagree, but the fact is that this kind of deepfake harms public trust in media, undermines democratic institutions, and can be used by state and non-state actors to foment unrest.

Last year, my select committee's report on social media Harms and algorithms called for the right to reset algorithms. We also recommended addressing the digital advertising, which drives misinformation and for which so much data is collected. And this year, my Select Committee has heard from experts in child development about the impact of digital devices and indeed from the young people themselves. So I'd like to place on record my thanks to the organisations and individuals from across academia and civil society
16:55
Luke Taylor Portrait Luke Taylor MP (Sutton and Cheam, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
who have contributed to making sure that the bill protects as many that the bill protects as many people as possible. I'm delighted to have the support of equity, the centre for Countering Digital Hate five rights, the Online safety Network. Professor Ghislaine Network. Professor Ghislaine Boddington, from the University of Greenwich, and Professor Luke McDonough from the LSE Law School, McDonough from the LSE Law School, amongst many others. And I was also influenced by His Holiness Pope Leo's recent encyclical, Magnificent Humanity.

He chose protecting the uniqueness of real people from AI impersonation as the subject of his very first letter to Catholics around the world. The Pope also highlighted how the billions, the billions on online digital twins, the billions of online digital twins constitutes an unprecedented concentration of power in the hands of a small number of men. Madam Deputy Speaker, amongst the many consequences of the 40 years of neoliberalism repeatedly called out by the Prime Minister, is a libertarian attitude to technology.

We are told governments are too slow and too stupid to shape tech, and that the market knows best. The market will ensure the best, most innovative products and services are delivered to the people who need them and keep them safe in the process. I hope that we can all agree now that neo libertarian complacency has not worked. The tech giants are hubs of amazing innovation, but as my committee has heard, they are controlled by a small number of extremely wealthy men without the usual corporate governance or competitive constraints.

We need to limit their power with our democratic power to protect our citizens. And what better way to do that than by giving power to people to control whether we are being copied by companies looking to make money out of us? Madam Deputy Speaker, there is only one you. We

**** Possible New Speaker ****

need to keep it that way. The question is that the hon. Member have leave to bring in the Member have leave to bring in the bill. As many as that opinion say I. As many that opinion say I the contrary. No. The ayes have it. The contrary. No. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. Who will prepare and bring in the bill?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

bring in the bill? Jess Asato. Rachel Gilmour. Neil Duncan-Jordan. Graeme Downie. Gareth Thomas. Adam Jogee. So. Gareth Thomas. Adam Jogee. So. Roger Gale. Wera Hobhouse Ayoub Khan. Dame Caroline Dinenage. Sian Berry and myself.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Personal Personal data. Personal data. Digital Personal data. Digital twins. Bill.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Bill. Second Reading. What day? November 13th. Sure. November the November 13th. Sure. November the 13th. Right. If there's no more.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

13th. Right. If there's no more. Point of order. Madam Speaker, point of order. Louise Haigh. Thank you. This afternoon, the Metropolitan

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This afternoon, the Metropolitan Police confirmed that a criminal investigation is underway into allegations of foreign money reaching reform UK allegations under the Political Parties Elections and Referendums Act 2000. The party denies any wrongdoing. It's right the police continue their investigation without any interference from this house. But we've just finished considering the Representation of the People Bill just a week ago. It's now in the other place where it can be strengthened. I wonder if the speaker's office or Madam Deputy Speaker has been given any any indication that the Minister intends to come to the House and update members on whether they feel that the government thinks that the measures in that bill are still sufficient.

The public should not have to rely on an undercover reporter to reveal where their politics is being funded from. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The point of order and its content is not a matter for the content is not a matter for the chair. I have not been alluded to any Minister coming forward at this point, but I've only just come into the chair. If the hon. Member needs the chair. If the hon. Member needs to seek further advice, there's no doubt the speaker's office can let him know where he needs to go to him know where he needs to go to further his point of order.

If everybody is content, we'll now move on to the business. The clerk

**** Possible New Speaker ****

move on to the business. The clerk will now proceed to the orders of the day. Civil aviation, consumer Protection and regulatory Reform bill. Lords Second Reading now.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister to move. Second Reading. Secretary of State Heidi Alexander. I beg to move that this bill be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move that this bill be now read a second time. Madam Deputy Speaker. Today is an Deputy Speaker. Today is an important day as this bill starts on its Commons journey. But it is a hard day on which to be talking hard day on which to be talking about the criticality of our civil aviation sector. Given the aviation sector. Given the disruption endured by so many over the last 24 hours. With your permission, I would just like to take a few moments to address this issue.

A four hour air traffic outage yesterday left hundreds of thousands of passengers facing cancellations, diversions and delays. I would like to apologise wholeheartedly to passengers for this disruption. We often take for granted the way in which our aviation system just works. But yesterday that was not the case. Safety must remain. Air traffic controllers overriding priority. And this morning I have spoken to Nats chief executive Martin Rolfe, who informed me this outage was due to a technical issue at their Swanwick site.

So while my understanding from that is that we can rule out a cyber attack on this occasion, I do not believe this issue was unavoidable. We also spoke this morning about how Nats responded to resolve and minimise the disruption as quickly as possible, and I am grateful. Madam Deputy Speaker, to the airports and airlines who responded straight away. But I am clear that passengers should not have to face this disruption. I have therefore asked the CAA to conduct an independent review to establish cause and ensure that our air traffic control systems can get passengers to where they need to be.

And this will review will report to me within six months. Madam Deputy Speaker, robust systems that support our national infrastructure are the bedrock of the measures contained in this bill, from better rights for disabled passengers and modernised airspace to slot reform and quicker enforcement of passenger rights. And whilst passengers undeniably experienced a bad day yesterday, it is still true to say that few industries match aviation's ability to adapt, evolve and innovate. For generations, it has pushed the boundaries of what is possible, from faster aircraft and new destinations to safer technology and cleaner fuels.

Bad days like yesterday just serve to underscore how central aviation is to Britain's success, not only making our summer holidays and family reunions possible, but also connecting businesses to the global marketplace and supporting thousands of skilled jobs across our island nation. And right now, fresh challenges and fresh opportunities are emerging. Drones are beginning to transform our airspace. Flight numbers are climbing year after year. All this while global headwinds continue to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

put enormous pressure on the sector and those who depend upon it. I will give way. I am.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am. Grateful to the Minister for giving way. I'm really grateful as well for updating the House on the well for updating the House on the gnats outage and what her and colleagues are doing to ensure that it's sorted with speedily. Does she anticipate that the review that she's ordered will be the way that we make sure this never happens again? Because so many of us have constituents who've been very badly and unacceptably impacted by these delays.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend is right to raise the impact on people who were caught up in this disruption. I've caught up in this disruption. I've read reports of people having to sleep overnight in airports. People that have potentially missed weddings. And so we can't we can't say enough about how important it is that we address this problem. Madam Deputy Speaker, I've learned in politics that absolute guarantees when it comes to managing the operation of a vast
17:12
Amanda Hack Portrait Amanda Hack MP (North West Leicestershire, Labour)
-
-
and complex transport system, can be unwise. But what I can say to my hon. Friend, is that I will leave hon. Friend, is that I will leave absolutely no stone unturned in understanding what has happened here and what can be done to here and what can be done to drastically reduce the likelihood of something like this ever happening again. I do think we need happening again. I do think we need to ask tough questions about resilience of Nat systems. We need to ask questions about progress to ask questions about progress with planned upgrades.

And I think we also need to think about consumer redress issues as well. Madam Deputy Speaker, moving back

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to the bill, it is important to. I will give way. I'd like to thank the right hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'd like to thank the right hon. Lady for her comments and also recognising the issue around that. But would the hon. Lady, perhaps But would the hon. Lady, perhaps given the importance of this to the House, make a statement tomorrow so that actually questions can be that actually questions can be asked rather than in this situation in a Second Reading, actually, on behalf of all members of the House behalf of all members of the House who have got lots of questions matter.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

So I'd say to the hon. Gentleman, I'm keen to address these issues today. I think it's a significant importance in the public would importance in the public would rightly expect the Transport Secretary to answer questions here and now stood at the despatch box. and now stood at the despatch box. And so any interventions that individuals wish to make, I'd be individuals wish to make, I'd be happy to take. Madam Deputy Speaker, Moving back to the Bill, many colleagues will know that most colleagues will know that most civil aviation legislation is assimilated in.

Is assimilated EU law and the government's power to update it has now expired. This bill will restore that power, giving government the flexibility to regulate at a pace which will enable us to keep up with the world around us. I should say I'm very grateful to my hon. Friend the Minister of State for rail for his excellent stewardship of this bill through the other place. And now, Madam Deputy Speaker, if I may, I would like to outline the main elements of this bill and what we hope it will achieve.

Aviation serves millions of us well each year, but when things do go wrong, passengers must have confidence that they will be protected. The bill will allow passenger rights to be bolstered through secondary legislation, helping us to tackle

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the issues that matter most. I would give way. Thank you, Secretary. Of State. jurisdictions.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

jurisdictions. And other countries around the world have taken steps to look at the issue of fume events on board aircraft cabin. When. When such things happen, there's no requirement to engage and let passengers on planes know. And there's a lack of regulation and scrutiny around that. Would she scrutiny around that. Would she meet with me and the other members of the APPG for cabin air quality

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to to look at this issue? The aviation Minister has very kindly just said to me that he'd be very happy to meet with the hon. Gentleman to discuss this in more detail. I know it's something that detail. I know it's something that my officials are looking at. Madam Deputy Speaker, I do think that Deputy Speaker, I do think that this bill can provide extra consumer protection on the things that matter most, whether it's about delays, cancellations, baggage, and, very crucially, on the issue of accessibility.

The government did listen very carefully to concerns raised in the House of Lords about the experience of disabled passengers and those with reduced mobility. That's why we are committing to consult on a range of accessibility issues. We want to hear directly from passengers about the problems they face, and what we can do to make sure everyone feels safe and is able to fly. We've also acted immediately to scrap the unfair compensation cap for damaged wheelchairs and mobility equipment on domestic flights.

These items are essential to the lives and livelihoods of many disabled people, and lifting the cap reflects that reality. I hope the whole House agrees with me that this was absolutely the right thing to do. Madam Deputy Speaker, if I may now turn to enforcement. The Civil Aviation Authority currently relies on slow and resource intensive court action to secure redress for consumer protection issues. This bill will grant the CAA direct enforcement powers for consumer protection, bringing it in line with other regulators such as the Competition and Markets Authority.

That means faster action when rules are broken, less burden on consumers to fight for what they're owed. Taken together, these measures will ensure all passengers have meaningful, enforceable rights, which help them to travel with ease and confidence. Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill will also help to unlock the full potential of our
17:22
Graham Leadbitter Portrait Graham Leadbitter MP (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey, Scottish National Party)
-
-
aviation infrastructure, driving economic growth across the country. economic growth across the country. The UK has some of the world's busiest and most complex airspace, yet much of it is still based on designs from the 1950s, an aviation industry fit for the 21st century simply cannot rely on infrastructure that was built for the last. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the last. I will give way. I thank the Secretary of State for giving way. The UK aviation sector is one of the best in the world, and my constituency of Paisley and Renfrewshire North Glasgow International Airport has been very successful recently in attracting new routes. Can the Secretary of State confirm that new, further expansion is not going to be hindered going forward by slow

**** Possible New Speaker ****

regulatory frameworks? Madam Deputy Speaker, I would say to my hon. Friend, we want to move at pace, and we want to move swiftly on these issues, and the provisions within this bill are provisions within this bill are designed to do that. I recognise the importance of the airport to her constituency, and I look forward to discussing with her what more we can do to support that more we can do to support that important economic hub for her constituency. Madam Deputy Speaker, I was talking about how our airspace is still based upon designs from the 1950s, and that's why this government believes that we must get on and move quickly to modernise that airspace for safety reasons, for reliability and capacity reasons, and for the communities who deserve cleaner and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

quieter skies. I will give way. I thank the hon. Member for giving way. Many people in my giving way. Many people in my constituency of Ealing Southall work in the nearby Heathrow Airport, so it's extremely important for jobs. But for many other of my constituents, the noise of the airport can be annoying to them and they worry about emissions too. they worry about emissions too. Does she agree that the airspace modernisation offers an opportunity modernisation offers an opportunity to stop that stacking of aircraft over west London, and to have quieter and cleaner aircraft to reduce noise and emissions? And she also confirmed that this bill will still allow local people to have a say on any decisions on airspace modernisation.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I can guarantee to my hon. Friend that there will be meaningful consultation with local meaningful consultation with local communities about airspace changes. This bill does not change the processes that are around that. I processes that are around that. I also say to my hon. Friend that when it comes to matters of noise, I do appreciate the impact that this will have on local communities. this will have on local communities. Nothing in this bill changes the the process that will happen.

For example, in the case of expansion at Heathrow. She will be aware that the Heathrow National Policy statement. The draft which we've consulted on, includes a proposal for a night time ban for 6.5 hours between the hours of 11 and seven in the morning. And I can guarantee to her that I will continue to work with her and other colleagues in London on these very important and sensitive issues. Airspace modernisation, Madam Deputy Speaker, is important to both tackle noise issues and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from aircraft.

If we can have planes pursuing simpler, more direct flight paths, that will reduce the amount of time that those planes are in the air. But the truth is, if we don't act on airspace modernisation, it will be passengers and businesses that end up paying the price. With up to 1 in 5 flights estimated to face significant disruption by 2040 unless we act. And that is why we've wasted no time in setting up the UK Airspace Design Service, which is already getting on with the job.

This bill strengthens government's ability to ensure
17:30
Tim Roca Portrait Tim Roca MP (Macclesfield, Labour)
-
-
airspace changes, which have been properly consulted on and approved, are actually delivered, and we are are actually delivered, and we are also updating the rules on who can be charged for air traffic and air be charged for air traffic and air navigation services, so costs can continue to be recovered fairly as new airspace users emerge. And new airspace users emerge. And finally, we're making it easier for government to respond quickly and proportionately to pressure on the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

proportionately to pressure on the aviation sector. I will give way. I thank the Secretary for giving way. With regard to noise, specifically, the government recently changed the the height at which noise is considered an important factor, reduced it from 7000 down to 5000ft. So. So therefore between 5 and 7 that noise is is now has less impact in decision making. That was not meaningfully consulted on. It's a change that's just been made. And now importantly, everybody could has an impact in my constituency and perhaps in many others.

Will she will she give comment now on how that decision was reached and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is it changeable from here? It's not the case, Madam Deputy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's not the case, Madam Deputy Speaker, that noise noise won't be considered in airspace design changes above 5000ft. It's about changes above 5000ft. It's about the relative balance between noise considerations and greenhouse gas. considerations and greenhouse gas. We need to find a simpler way to make these changes, because the make these changes, because the previous mechanism was too cumbersome, and I believe that this is a sensible and proportionate change to make. Madam Deputy Speaker, I was talking about some of the changes that this bill will enable the government to be able to make in future, so that we can be more responsive and flexible as a government.

Hon. Members will know that there has been significant uncertainty for the aviation sector, given the conflict in the Middle East and the crisis there and the impact upon jet fuel. A few months ago, my department introduced temporary changes to relax slot usage requirements and reduce disruption to passengers. However, some of these measures rely on powers that were put in place after leaving the EU and the power. I have to act in this way. Did expire in June. That was the reason why we took the decision we did before that point in time.

This bill will introduce permanent powers and therefore the bill will support, I believe, a more agile and resilient approach to the regulation of airport slots. This means that the UK can continue to act decisively when appropriate, safeguarding passengers and maintaining airport capacity. I'll give way first there and then I'll come there.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Secretary of State for giving way again. Air space modernisation has been consulted on in Scotland. Will she do everything in Scotland. Will she do everything she can to ensure that the Scottish airports air space change modernisation programme remains a priority? With Nats.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We have looked to prioritise airspace work on airspace changes in the London region, given the importance and the benefits that that could bring to London and the South East, I am aware that there South East, I am aware that there has been agreement over the summer to resume work on airspace to resume work on airspace modernisation in Scotland, which will be of importance to her constituents. And when we've got to constituents. And when we've got to get the balance right about bringing benefit quickly to the communities that are currently looking for improvements to improve the quality of life of her and her

**** Possible New Speaker ****

constituents, I give way to my hon. Friend. Thanks. I apologise, my right hon. Friend. I should have checked this Friend. I should have checked this before the debate itself, but on before the debate itself, but on the page 19 of the legislation refers to the new section 61 G priorities and objectives of the priorities and objectives of the Secretary of State. This includes a requirement on the Secretary of requirement on the Secretary of State to issue a document that sets out the government's priorities and objectives overall for the CAA.

So it's quite. It's the guiding light from government to the CAA for that, which includes issues around how they consult, how the CAA consults, how it takes on board environmental principles, and a whole range of things. It is this new document to be published after the legislation or how I apologise for this. Have I missed something? Is there a document already that's been produced? So it seems quite fundamental to me. If it's a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

revised document, could we have a her view on the timetable for the publication of it? Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I produce regularly a priorities letter for the Civil Aviation Authority setting out my priorities, Authority setting out my priorities, and I'd be happy to write in detail about the timeline for my hon. about the timeline for my hon. Friend, as he requests. Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill is also Deputy Speaker, this bill is also about improving safety. This government is determined that UK airspace remains amongst the safest in our world in the world. Yet our current safety framework is fragmented and cumbersome to update.

It holds back innovation, and it
17:41
John Milne Portrait John Milne MP (Horsham, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
puts the UK at risk of falling behind on its international obligations. To fix this, the Bill obligations. To fix this, the Bill will hand over responsibility for technical, aviation, safety and technical, aviation, safety and operational rule making to the CAA. This is not a blank cheque. It follows a well-established model in follows a well-established model in which trusted regulators make rules within boundaries set by Parliament. Indeed, ministerial and parliamentary oversight was strengthened during scrutiny in the other place.

The bill also reinstates government's ability to update or create aviation safety, aviation safety related criminal offences in assimilated legislation, which was lost after EU exit. This will allow safety rules to keep up with international standards while making sure they are enforced consistently now and in the future. These steps will create a clearer, more workable system, one that maintains the UK's strong safety record and sustains public confidence in air travel. Now, I know that some hon. Members will be interested in what this bill means for airport expansion expansions.

Let me be clear that this bill does not determine whether any airport should expand, nor does it change the processes around that. The measures before the House are sector wide reforms that will support a safe, efficient and resilient aviation industry. Questions about airport expansion will continue to be considered separately outside of the bill process. Madam Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, despite a bad day yesterday, for over 100 years, aviation has refused to stand still. The industry remains at the forefront of innovation and progress, taking every challenge and every opportunity in its stride.

Quite simply, the type of country we want to be aspirational, outward looking, full of opportunity depends upon giving this industry the tools that it needs to go from strength to strength. The Civil Aviation Bill will do just that, bringing passenger protections into the 21st century, unlocking sustainable growth that works for our communities, and maintaining the UK's safety record in an ever changing world. I hope honourable and right hon. Members will agree that this is not a government that drags its feet.

We have moved swiftly to address the concerns raised by the Lords, particularly on accessibility, accountability on accessibility, accountability and passenger protections. Government has not just listened, but we've acted, and I believe that but we've acted, and I believe that provides a strong foundation for the bill to continue its passage. I commend this bill to the House.
17:46
John McDonnell Portrait Rt Hon John McDonnell MP (Hayes and Harlington, Labour)
-
-
Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Shadow Transport of State Richard Holden. Yes. Thank you very much indeed,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, before I turn to the bill, the events of the last 24 hours have shown just how important effective oversight of our aviation sector is. The shocking failure at sector is. The shocking failure at Nantes has left hundreds of thousands of passengers in the lurch, and serious questions have been raised about the resilience of been raised about the resilience of our air traffic control system and aviation infrastructure. We considered, as we consider legislation giving further functions to the CAA.

We must therefore ensure that proper parliamentary scrutiny and ministerial accountability are not lost when something goes badly wrong. The House must be able to demand answers now. It was my understanding, having spoken to the speaker earlier today, that the urgent question which my party put forward, and an urgent question from the Liberal Democrats, were not accepted because there were assurances made from the government that there would be a statement tomorrow in this House. The government could have chosen to make a statement today, and it didn't.

It chose to prioritise other matters. So if the Secretary of State would like to intervene on me and say that they will be a statement tomorrow in which all members can ask proper questions on what has happened, I would welcome that. Otherwise, again, a Second Reading debate is not the right place for questions and answers to be taken. In fact, only at one hon. Member from our own benches have done that. It's not it's not an appropriate way to do it. So if the hon.

Member, if the Honourable right hon. Lady would like to confirm, there'll be a statement tomorrow. If not, then I'm afraid it looks like there's been a serious miscommunication with the speaker's office and the government frontbench. Sorry if the honourable is the hon. Member wanting to speak from a sedentary position, or does he want to come to Dispatch Box and speak? OK, well, if he doesn't want to answer the questions, then we'll have to drag him to the house tomorrow to answer those questions. And, well, yes, if the hon.

Member would like to speak, he can stand at the despatch box. No, the Minister doesn't want to do that. OK, fine. Well, we'll have him here tomorrow then, because we were told today that our Urgent Question wouldn't be accepted because the Minister would be making a statement. So we'll have to see whether that actually happens. Having said all that, I would actually like to welcome the engagement from the Secretary of State and Ministers in the other House on this bill. And actually, the engagement that has taken place so far on this matter as well.

And that engagement has been very welcome. And I would like to see it continue. And I hope I hope that it can. I would also like to say that the opposition agree with the stated aims of the Bill, namely to promote economic growth and infrastructure development, to strengthen consumer rights and protections, and thirdly, to enhance aviation security. Those are that for those reasons, we will not be dividing on the Second Reading today. I also agree with the Secretary of State's observation in a letter to colleagues of the 1st of September, that the contribution of noble Lords have helped strengthen this legislation before the House today.

At its core, this is a broadly administrative bill, and we on these benches recognise that, especially as the Secretary of State highlighted following our exit from the European Union, certain measures must be taken to ensure that regulatory gaps are indeed filled and continuity is maintained in a way that ultimately keeps Britain's aviation industry working safely. This bill pays much attention to consumer rights and associated protections, as we, on this side of the House welcome important parts of that agenda. Indeed, I appreciate her department showing some flexibility on these issues, particularly with regard to safeguarding disabled passengers.

However, I should ask that given this violent agreement between her and me on these matters, which I confess, Madam Deputy Speaker, isn't always the way across this Dispatch Box. I am slightly puzzled by one item. Why on earth did her party whip members in the other place to vote against a review of airport drop off charges? Why is it, Madam Deputy Speaker, that passengers are paying such exorbitant drop off charges? Well, it would appear that the government doesn't want us to know that.

Why is it, as The times has reported, that charges at Gatwick now reach £10 for ten minutes, while Luton, under Labour's run Luton Council, have increased from £2 to £7. It. Of course I will. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Shadow Secretary of State for giving way on that. In Bournemouth the prices have now Bournemouth the prices have now gone up to £8 and yet there are no buses to Bournemouth Airport. There buses to Bournemouth Airport. There are two buses that go at six in the morning, and they go up and come back at six in the evening, which serve the industrial estate. They serve the industrial estate. They don't serve the staff, they don't serve the passengers and it's impossible for people to get there any other way.

Does he agree with any other way. Does he agree with me that these should be restricted or banned until such time as the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

airport puts in alternatives for all passengers? Yeah. Well, the hon. Lady makes a very

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, the hon. Lady makes a very clear case as to why such a review of airport parking charges is necessary. One hasn't happened for a decade, and it was great to get a decade, and it was great to get the support of Liberal Democrats in the other place, backing Lord Moylan and the conservative proposals on that space. So I hope that it's something that now it's in the bill. The government won't in the bill. The government won't won't seek to remove. In any case, there are obviously concerns around the impact that surface access targets have had on some of these airport parking charges as well, especially when, as hon.

Members have already made clear, that genuine alternatives often do not properly exist or are incredibly expensive. Does I? I genuinely find it difficult to believe that the Secretary of State has. Self doesn't believe that there is a single link between Gatwick having a minimum target of more than half of passengers getting to and from the airport, and those by public transport and soaring drop off charges. I hope that this perfectly reasonable proposal for a review that puts passengers first and allows that to take place will not be removed from this bill, and it would be great to hear later if the Secretary of State or the Minister winding up does intend to actually stick with that important review, which was inserted against the Labour Party's wishes in the House of Lords.

Another point on this is also worth mentioning, and it's a part, a part of the Bill with the power it rearranges and all the regulations that enables. It does offer a remarkably little vision for where British aviation should actually be heading. The government has talked in the past a lot about growth, yet have refused to set tangible targets to deliver it, whether in this aviation bill or indeed in the rail Bill regarding passenger growth as well. We on these benches understand the economic growth and the competition that fuels it are essential not merely to the success of individual airports and airlines, but to indeed to maintaining Britain's global reputation as one of the world's outstanding aviation nations.

Yet too often this government appears to regard the aviation industry as less an engine of growth and more as an ATM. Indeed, members opposite seem to be beset with some Tigger like
18:01
Noah Law Portrait Noah Law MP (St Austell and Newquay, Labour)
-
-
pleasure at finding new costs to impose on businesses while growing the welfare bill rather more successfully than they are growing successfully than they are growing the economy. Ministers must understand that every additional burden, every tax, whether that's burden, every tax, whether that's air passenger duty or the business rates, are having huge impacts on aviation. I was with Manchester aviation. I was with Manchester Airport Group recently, and they're now facing an effective tax rate of now facing an effective tax rate of 77%.

When you combine corporation tax and business rates. After facing an over 100% increase in their business rates, and it's not them alone, it's airports up and down the country facing huge increases in tax. So I would be really important, I think, for Ministers to address that as part of that broader concerns around growth. Every charge deters investment and makes new jobs, new routes and greater passenger choice that little bit harder to deliver. That principle must apply to to the new powers being given to the CAA.

So can the Secretary of State assure the House that, significantly, that significant new regulatory, safety and airspace decisions will be evidence based, proportionate and subject to the proper assessment of their costs and benefits? So I'd happily give way to my hon. Friend.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. Just to touch on the point he made earlier, rightly, on the tax increases that airports the tax increases that airports have faced when combined with business rates and increased regulations. Airports like Blackpool, where we're trying to Blackpool, where we're trying to build a business case for commercial flights, come out of Blackpool again and things like this make it really hard for this make it really hard for airports who are trying to reopen and do new routes.

And does he agree that that's something that should be looked at?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

should be looked at? I would like to thank my hon. Friend for that. Obviously, the airspace does not exist within this bill alone. There are huge implications for those tax changes and whether it's a Blackpool airport or a Humberside airport, which I visited recently, who are facing real life and death pressures as to whether they will continue to be going concerns. And actually, it's not just about them themselves and the jobs that they create directly. It's about the connectivity that is provided by those airports for the entire regions, which they serve as well.

So I think the hon. Member makes an incredibly important point on that. So I fear that, as has been the case with too much legislation of late, that this bill leaves plenty of questions up there in the air. Where are the measures to secure the future of the workforce, our mechanics, our engineers, the next generation of skilled workers? Where are the measures to ease the burdens surrounding apprenticeships? An issue raised with me directly by apprentices I met at Heathrow recently. Why is there no indication of how to champion our excellent aviation colleges at airports like the one at Stansted? I had the pleasure of visiting recently.

Where is the plan to tackle pilot shortages? Has she not received representations calling for the government to assist with pilot recruitment? And or is she just turning a deaf ear to them? Where is the vision for Britain being a world leader in single aisle aircraft manufacturing? Something industry, as she knows, is clamouring for from the rafters? I know the Secretary of State is incredibly busy setting out selling out taxpayers the latest meeting of her union Barons who have her over a barrel.

I know she was apparently too busy to join me or many of the shadow ministerial team at the Farnborough Air Show recently. And in fact, my understanding is that not one single Minister from the DfT actually went to Farnborough this year. Perhaps she could correct me, if not Europe's largest airshow, a world a symbol to the world of Britain's openness and leading edge in aviation. It does seem, it seems quite bizarre that as we are all sat there waiting for the reshuffle, that none of them pop down, maybe it shows actually this government's general view of aviation that it's just not interested.

But, you know, it's you know, I mean, it just seems shocking that the shocking that the
18:08
Danny Beales Portrait Danny Beales MP (Uxbridge and South Ruislip, Labour)
-
-
shocking that the ministerial team didn't get there. If they don't want to do the job, rather than shouting at me from Sutton and Cheam means we can just swap sides of the House. Madam Deputy Speaker, finally, too often it seems this department is in the business of department is in the business of delaying bills with drafting left to the last moment, then tabling realms reams of amendments to its realms reams of amendments to its own legislation before expressing surprise that the opposition might wish to scrutinise what has wish to scrutinise what has happened.

We will not oppose sensible measures simply for the sake of it. Of course, we welcome stronger passenger protections where they are needed. Of course, we want the highest possible standards of safety and security, but we also want to build. That really backs Britain's aviation sector. Backed by ministerial team who also backed Britain's aviation sector, and also a bill which gives that sector the space to succeed and an economic environment to succeed in, to to create the conditions needed for competition, innovation and enterprise to thrive.

In that vein, I look forward to the opportunity to table amendments at committee so that we can hopefully work together to improve the bill. As hon. Members from this side did in Another place as well, to ensure that British British aviation remains safe and is more competitive and remains world

**** Possible New Speaker ****

leading. Thank you very much. Before I ask any other members to contribute, I just need to set to contribute, I just need to set the record straight. You can be seated. Government statements are seated. Government statements are within the gift of government. UQs are private and confidential conversations between members and the speaker, and should not be speculated on inside or outside of speculated on inside or outside of the chamber, and government statements are in the. Are within

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the gift of the government of the day. I now. Go to Ruth Cadbury. OK.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

OK. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I'd like to say it's a pleasure and I'd like to say it's a pleasure following the Shadow Secretary of State for transport. And I think State for transport. And I think most people here today will want to address, obviously, the incidents that happened yesterday and the that happened yesterday and the implications on passengers and the aviation sector. And more importantly, of course, the reason we are here is the bill today. And most of my remarks, unlike the previous speaker, will actually focus primarily on those.

So it is an unfortunate coincidence that today's debate takes place the day after hundreds of thousands of passengers travelling to and from the UK had their journeys seriously disrupted by another outage by Nats. Given and given that the title of this bill is the Civil Aviation, Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform Bill, so many passengers have been. And many. Still. We will be frustrated and angry with what's happened, their plans in tatters. Which of course, not only affects them, the passengers, but their friends, their families.

And if they're on work journeys, colleagues and business associates, I must put a word of praise and thanks in for all those working in aviation, to having to support and advise frustrated passengers, having to make alternative arrangements for for them and for many staff, especially aircrew not being able to get home last night. Our thanks and gratitude are with you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The this is the third major outage of our air traffic control system in the last three years, and there's clearly widespread frustration within the sector about the system's resilience.

The CAA report into the 2020 2023 outage eventually reported the following year. It had 34 recommendations, but as of last year's interim report update by the CAA, of the 34 recommendations, only 18 had been completed. So I thank the Secretary of State for her remarks at the start of this speech in saying that she will be reporting to the House, and she's also said that she will be delivering. She will ask Nats to to to do a rapid review of the incident.

And she's asked for preliminary findings by next week. Now, whilst Nats say these incidents are unrelated, I hope that when she she does update the House on the progress on ensuring that we learn the right lessons from 2023 and this out outage. We can then start addressing the issues that I know many of us and the aviation sector has about the resilience of this key part of our national infrastructure. I know that she she will be coming to the House, and I hope that she will also be coming to committee in due course.

Now, linking yesterday's incident with the bill that we're here to debate, the. There are many questions that passengers, freight handlers and airlines are asking about their rights when their flights are delayed or cancelled. Whatever the reason, tens of thousands of people slept on airport floors once again last night. So I want to ask, are passenger rights fit for purpose? And will the bill and the following regulations look at this and hopefully address and improve it? Airline we know that airlines are responsible for providing refunds or rerouting for cancelled flights, as well as providing for the care and assistance such as refreshments, while passengers are waiting for their flight or where whatever hotel they end up in.

Yes, of course, I. Would like.
18:20
Alistair Strathern Portrait Alistair Strathern MP (Hitchin, Labour)
-
-
To to reflect on an incident that happened to me over the summer where I was flying back from a a family holiday and our flight was continually delayed and we kept getting extraordinary circumstances, which we know is code for you won't get compensation. And throughout the wait, that was the message until we got on the plane, when the pilots told us the truth, and he told us a list of all of the things that had happened. And I believe he told us so that it would help us to know that it wasn't extraordinary circumstances.

Would she agree with me that removal of that phrase needs to be key in changing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

passenger rights? Yeah. The hon. Member in her description of her holiday description of her holiday experience is has happened to so many of our constituents and many of our constituents and frankly, people. There's two there's two issues. One is getting there's two issues. One is getting information regularly updates, or even, as we know from yesterday, even, as we know from yesterday, one pilot who every 20 minutes had the decency to say, look, I don't know what's happening, but at least he assured, you know, at least that gave some assurance to the passengers waiting in that plane.

So that is one thing. And the other thing is, whatever the cause of the problem and whoever ultimately pays the cost of whatever needs doing, passengers need, they need toilets, they need refreshments, they need a bed for the night, or at least somewhere comfortable to sleep, etc. etc. So. You know, for instance, should airports have supplies of camp beds and emergency drinks and snacks, baby food, etc. along with allocated train staff able to come in at short notice to support passengers so that they're ready for these incidents.

I mean, our local authorities have contingency plans and stores in case of incidents such as homes having to be evacuated. And many of us have had had to deal with those kind of experiences. So maybe airports could learn something from our local authorities who don't start asking who's going to pay, or telling one tenant and one resident they're not eligible in another is they open the doors. There is a contingency plan, community centres open up, etcetera, etcetera. It's it's not rocket science.

So I'm going to now go back to the bill and firstly, what is in it, and then I'll cover what I would like to see in it in an ideal world. So passenger rights and protection, the, the for disabled passengers, I particularly welcome that passengers with wheelchairs and other expensive mobility aids will now benefit from the removal of the limit on compensation. I regret that at this point it can only apply to domestic UK flights, but I hope that this is an example of the UK leading the way and that this can.

You know, this basic right can be extended for travellers to and from other countries, and I would particularly want to mention the work that the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford has been doing. The chair of the APPG for wheelchair users who sadly wasn't able to be here this afternoon. But the work he's been doing as the parent of a wheelchair user. But on behalf of all wheelchair users trying to have a normal family holiday without with, you know, and and their family member being treated with respect as we all expect to be when we travel through airports.

But I would like to say that's that that that's great. I mean, that's all that, you know, the problem is solved, but it hasn't. Disabled people are still facing a patchy experience as they travel through our airports. And our report, published early last year called Access Denied, did come across across
18:29
Alison Griffiths Portrait Alison Griffiths MP (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, Conservative)
-
-
A number of issues for disabled passengers at our airports, and one of the issues is the variable quality of contractors at airports. There's a huge gulf between the best and the worst experiences that disabled passengers face. There's no single standard, and I would ask the government if some kind of single standard of treatment could be hardwired, so, and that airports be made accountable, or airports and airlines as well. And rather than what too often happens is that airports and airlines pass the buck when a disabled passenger is stuck on a plane or trying to get on a plane.

Some airports, like Gatwick, have put disabled passengers on their forums to ensure that passenger experience is fetid. And there's a good example of of good practice that should be the norm. And when we're talking about accessibility at airports, they need to also consider how accessible the public transport links at the airport are. And I my experience is too often the airports, the airports feel that their responsibility stops at the perimeter fence and that the public transport issues are someone else's problem on wider, wider passenger issues.

I welcome in the Bill the strengthened powers for the CAA on consumer rights and safety, and I look forward to the Transport Secretary's drafting of the secondary legislation on these matters, which will are going to cover issues that all all our constituents raise. Flight disruption lost or damaged luggage accessibility. As I've mentioned,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

price transparency and airline death. If. My hon. Friend.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

If. My hon. Friend. Certainly I appreciate her giving away, giving an excellent speech, and I commend the government for bringing this bill. Reflecting on what she said and the focus that the government has had on taking away barriers for consumers and our constituents to be able to assert their rights, be able to assert their rights, especially in the cost of living challenges we face. I wonder if she agrees with me, that there may be a lesson for the Secretary of State to reflect on from the automated delay, repay that we see with rail, whereby if there are delays over a certain period, there is an automated compensation that transfers to constituents.

And reflecting on an experience as a colleague across the House had myself and the experience I had with Iberia, where still to this day hundreds and hundreds of pounds that my husband and I are owed, which is not automatically been transferred to us, and that we have to put lengthy time into compensation claims. Why is it not the case that these rights, which extend to all our constituents, should be automatically that made automatic on the airline companies? And is there something in that that perhaps the Secretary of State could reflect on when she is drafting the secondary legislation to which she's referring?
18:34
Keir Mather Portrait Keir Mather MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport) (Selby, Labour)
-
-
To my hon. Friend makes a very good point. And I think the delay repay system that we now take for granted, in a way on our rail system, except on Eurostar, you know, is is a good model. And I agree with him that the airlines could could be looking, could be looking at this. And I hope the the Minister will will be able to consider it as well. Now I now want to move on to airport drop off charges.

I really do welcome the review, but I'd like to see the review go wider. Why do so many of our constituents at most of our airports feel that the only way to get to the airport reliably is to get a lift? You know how useful, reliable, and accessible is. Public transport to many airports, even Heathrow Airport, which in theory is has lots of public transport far more than any other airport in this country. But it's only public transport that is going between London and Heathrow, not from the south, west or north, unless you

**** Possible New Speaker ****

get a coach from reading. Yeah. Thank the hon. Lady for giving way. On that note of connectivity way. On that note of connectivity to airports, she will be aware, because we've discussed it in the past, that there is no rail link to Glasgow International Airport. In Glasgow International Airport. In fact, you can get a train from Glasgow Central Station to Glasgow Central Station to Manchester Airport, but you cannot get a train to Glasgow Airport from Glasgow Central Station. And does

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Glasgow Central Station. And does she have anything to comment on that matter? AM I right that you also, you have to walk some way to get to the bus, to go to, to to get the bus to the airport. I mean, talk about a lack of joined up thinking in terms of our public transport. And in this in this instance, I do include flying. I fear in this respect the UK is an embarrassment. And when we travel on holiday or for other reasons, we can see we can compare our airports with those that we travel to and and often the comparison is not very complimentary to the UK.

Yeah. Yes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Friend, for giving way to giving. An excellent, very thorough speech based on her and her speech based on her and her committee's work. I agree with everything she said. The one caveat I would say is that even for those I would say is that even for those living a stone's throw from the airport, there often aren't public transport links in in my own transport links in in my own constituency or my neighbour's constituency. Well, many people who work at the airport cannot get by work at the airport cannot get by public transport directly on one bus to the airport and so are forced to drive, are forced to pay drop off charges or park in questionable places, causing disruption to communities.

So it doesn't she agree. Much more needs to be done by airports around public transport.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Absolutely. And as I say, I lived for almost 40 years. We're dealing with Heathrow on on the issue of their lack of interest in issue of their lack of interest in in in transport. And as he is to the north of Heathrow, I know full the north of Heathrow, I know full well what he's saying. In fact, at terminal with the terminal five terminal with the terminal five planning decision that one of the section 106 conditions was that there should be a a direct bus there should be a a direct bus between Feltham station and the central terminal area not stopping.

That would then create. And that was long before the Elizabeth line. Create a fast link from Waterloo to. To Heathrow, but nobody marketed it and nobody told anybody about it. So funnily enough, when the funding gave out, there haven't been enough passengers to make it viable. So it didn't it didn't survive. And, you know, there are again and again, I can think of examples. I many I know that many tourists because I sometimes come in on the Piccadilly in the district line.

I know many tourists go to use that from Heathrow and might go to, say, South Kensington to stay in hotels. I've had to help an elderly couple up and down stairs who've come from Heathrow, and you have to go downstairs and then upstairs at South Kensington. You know, it's just not a welcoming environment for visitors to this country. I do, obviously, the Elizabeth line has transformed that and, you know, is is help, you know, but it was long

**** Possible New Speaker ****

overdue. I do need to look. Oh, yes. I thank the hon. Member and my neighbour for giving way as she neighbour for giving way as she mentions the Elizabeth line, which of course, we cannot miss out when we're talking about connectivity to we're talking about connectivity to Heathrow. And it has transformed my constituents life. But in line with my neighbour from Uxbridge and my neighbour from Uxbridge and South Ruislip, whose constituents appear to be throwing stones at the airport, mine aren't. Could I also airport, mine aren't.

Could I also raise the issue of overcrowding on the Elizabeth line? And I know that that is being looked at and there is potential for further trains, because I think, particularly in the rush hour and when lots of people have cases, it can be a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

constituents. Yes. The Elizabeth line, if anything, has been a product of its anything, has been a product of its own success and why it was right to fight for Crossrail all those years ago. So let me get and I will ago. So let me get and I will actually come back to this issue about the link between what about the link between what airports provide and what the actuality is. So as I say, compared actuality is. So as I say, compared to our international competitors, public transport to and from airports is woeful, non-existent at night or in the early morning.

And what there is, is impossible to often for those with heavy luggage. I find it frustrating that airport expansion proposals around. At the moment, Gatwick has got all its approvals. Heathrow is now in front of our committee. A national policy statement. It's frustrating that they're able to proceed without the rail access that everyone agrees is needed. Yet our desperately yet are desperately needed. Train services are just not there. I often I also find that compared to most other countries, access for taxis, private hire buses and coaches is generally an afterthought or an inconvenience.

And unless we address these wider issues, reviewing drop off charges is scratching the surface and passengers will continue to feel that they, or rather, the person who's giving them the lift, are being fleeced. And I want to quickly touch on airspace modernisation. It's long overdue. It will cut carbon emissions and time in the air, which will be good for passengers and will be good for the climate. I was concerned about the potential of what was called noise sewers of the corridors of of noise across parts of the country.

But if the paths are sufficiently wide, and that's told me, I think, that ten kilometres or even ten miles wide, I believe the noise implications will be much less than was feared. But I say the Transport Committee have not yet had a chance to look at the issue. I now want to cover what is not in the bill that I think should be. One is staff safety, unite, GMB and the other unions at the airports across across our civil airports are calling for a clear, national worker led approach to the and response to the increase in the abusive and disruptive passenger behaviour that they're facing.

And a recent survey by Unite the Union found that 90% of workers in one airport had faced abuse at work. We have certainly.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend, for giving way, GMB, the union that operate from GMB, the union that operate from East Midlands Airport and one of the members told me that it was unusual if she hadn't received her unusual if she hadn't received her first abusive customer by 5 a.m. So I think there is some real merit in actually seeing how we can make

**** Possible New Speaker ****

actually seeing how we can make sure our workers in our airports are treated appropriately. I thank my hon. Friend for that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for that. I mean, we have railway behaviour notices. So I wonder, will the government work with airlines, airports and the trade unions to consider a similar a similar type standard and process in the aviation sector on EU and UK standards, the UK risks being left behind by the failure to reach an agreement with the EU on a number of issues. But for instance, a faulty emergency services helicopter which needed a spare part, was unable to use the one stored at a local airport as it was from the EU, and there are probably other examples.

And in terms of. Recruitment and retention, the UK has long been an attractive place for pilots and engineers to come and work, and we want to continue that growth. But the industry is in real need for a mutual recognition agreement with the EU because it's impacting training, mobility of the workforce and recruitment, and I want to move on to noise for my constituents around Heathrow, those who have lived locally, those who've lived locally for some time, know what the noise patterns are.

Two thirds of my constituents are under one or other of the approach paths used for 70% of the time when the airport is operating on westerly operation, and the planes are coming from central London towards Heathrow, planes are overhead every 60 to 90s for half the day because we have daily alternation. So to some extent, residents can plan when to be in the garden, when to have friends around, etc. but for newcomers to the area, this information about where and when our aircraft noise.

They struggle to find the information they need. And of course, there'll be a whole host of further tens of thousands of more residents in in parts of Hillingdon, Ealing and Hounslow who will be underneath the new approach path and don't even know it at the moment. Should that expansion go ahead now, there is a noise insulation scheme at most airports, but as a constituency MP, I find it difficult to know which of my constituents are eligible for how much spend on works and by when, and due to the timing of schemes being approved for different airports as a condition of their planning permission, there is a lack of uniformity across the country around what what these schemes have in terms of sound insulation, ventilation and so on.

And the constituents are very unsure about who or what. Well, an MPs are as well, unsure of who or what the appropriate body is to regulate noise and noise. Insulation is only one example of the various mitigation measures that airports are required to implement, but for us MPs and our councils and councillors, they. There isn't a body with teeth that can can ensure that any mitigation measures are enforced, let alone whether or not they're adequate, particularly in terms of expansion.

This can include public transport. As I've touched on various community benefit schemes, environmental recovery and enhancement and so on. And this lack of teeth, this lack of ability to. Be clear of the delivery of the mitigation has come up again and again in evidence to the Transport Committee and our current inquiry on Heathrow expansion, expansion. And I do ask the Transport Secretary and the aviation Minister
18:58
18:59
Rupa Huq Portrait Dr Rupa Huq MP (Ealing Central and Acton, Labour)
-
-
Call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, Olly Glover. And can I start by joining the Secretary of State in thanking the House of Lords in their work developing this bill, and I'd like to pay particular thanks to the Liberal Democrat peer team led by the noble Baroness Grender. I'd also like to start by noting that it has been a season of reshuffles, and by congratulating the Secretary of State, the Minister for aviation and indeed the Shadow Secretary of State for their reconfirmed appointments in recent reshuffles.

It remains to be seen whether I survive the next Liberal Democrat one. Now there is much to be encouraged. There is much to be encouraged by in this bill. It necessarily fills some gaps in our aviation regulation resulting from our leaving the European Union. It brings potential for improving passenger rights, and it enables modernisation of our airspace, which has not been done for decades, which includes air traffic control, landing slots and optimising main routes to and from airports. Now, of course, the point about air traffic control is indeed very timely following yesterday's Nats holdings.

Air traffic control disruption, which is a fresh reminder of the need for reliability and perhaps the one thing I would agree with in the shadow Secretary of State speech is that this is a somewhat unorthodox way for the government to be accountable, using a Second Reading debate on a new bit of legislation, and I think it is a matter of regret that the government has not decided to grant a statement to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

House on that important disruption yesterday. Here. However, we do have some concerns about the bill. The bill, concerns about the bill. The bill, as drafted relies far too heavily on delegated powers and secondary legislation. By leaving critical legislation. By leaving critical details to future ministerial regulation, the government is bypassing meaningful parliamentary bypassing meaningful parliamentary oversight and leaving passengers and local communities without robust statutory safeguards. The robust statutory safeguards. The Bill, as it stands, also grants sweeping powers to the Civil Aviation Authority.

Consequently, the bill could be used to support more flights at any cost, and we will be looking to the government to possibly positively engage with amendments that would make all changes to airspace utilisation, subject to strict caps on noise, carbon emissions, night operations and accompanying improving service transport to and from airports to reduce their road congestion impact. Now, I note the assurances given by the Secretary of State that airport expansion is not something that is connected to this bill, but we will fight to ensure that new powers in this bill cannot be used to to facilitate airport expansion through the back door, and that Parliament is properly involved in any future proposals that impact our environment.

The Liberal Democrats will also be calling for the bill to go much further by adopting a genuinely passenger first approach, with a focus on passengers with disabilities who are so often let down by their experience of aviation travel. Critically, we want to see a statutory air passengers charter written onto the face of the bill to enshrine these rights in law, tackling issues such as inconsistent luggage rules, airport drop off charges and disruption and compensation arrangements. At this stage, we support the premise of the bill as modernisation is clearly needed.

However, our support at further stages will be conditional on positive engagement with our proposals for putting passengers first and environmental safeguards. Specifically, modernisation must be used to make the most of what we have rather than increase the noise, carbon emissions, night time and ground road congestion impacts of aviation. Only if the government gives gives assurances in subsequent stages that the Bill will do this and that it will properly commit to advancing passenger rights and protections. Will it retain our support?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Oh my apologies. Distracted by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Oh my apologies. Distracted by colleagues? My apologies. I turn to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Andrew Cooper. Your lucky day. It certainly is, Madam Deputy Speaker, and thank you. I'm pleased to speak in support of this bill to speak in support of this bill this afternoon. The UK has and continues to be a proud, open and continues to be a proud, open and outward looking nation a nation of traders, travellers, adventurers and explorers, and increasingly, a nation of people wondering why it costs so much to drop somebody off at an airport. For the 302 million passengers that pass through UK airports last year, whether for work or or a week in the sun.

They rely on an aviation sector that is safe, efficient and treats passengers fairly. And for everyone else who may not be regular aviators, it is important that we are in the best possible position to support economic growth. Hand in hand with efforts to decarbonise the sector, for my constituents in Northwich, Winsford and Middlewich, the aviation sector is a key source of employment as home to Jet2's Retail Operations Centre and close to two major international airports, the Airbus manufacturing site in Broughton and aviation fuel production facilities in Ellesmere Port.

Madam Deputy Speaker, we once again find ourselves in the unenviable position of having to legislate to mitigate against the haphazard and chaotic manner in haphazard and chaotic manner in which we the EU. Aviation is one of the clearest examples, but an absolute necessity. Rules governing safety, consumer rights and the operation of our airspace cannot sensibly be considered in isolation, regardless of individual views on Brexit. I hope there is an agreement across this House that Parliament has a duty to make the system work effectively, and that protecting the rights of travellers must be at the heart of that effort.

One area where the Bill is especially welcome is its focus on disabled passengers. The principle it establishes is an important one that disabled people should be able to access air travel on an equal basis with everyone else. But this is not simply a question of physical disability. It also concerns neurodiversity, mental health conditions and passengers whose needs may not always be immediately visible. I know as a parent of a neurodivergent child myself, that for many neurodivergent travellers, airports can be overwhelming environments.

And that's why facilities such as the Sunflower Room at the now closed terminal one at Manchester Airport were so valuable. Having used this space myself and ones like it at other airports, I know first hand that it provides a quiet space for passengers who find the main airport environment overstimulating. It's quite a good example of what thoughtful accessibility can look like. It's a relatively cheap and simple intervention, but for someone who might otherwise find the experience of travelling through an airport to be over so overstimulating that it becomes a barrier to flying at all, it can make an enormous difference.

Manchester Airport has done some genuinely good work in this area on terminal one, which I hope will be replicated in terminal two in due course, as well as the work many airports do. By recognising the sunflower lanyard and helping passengers with non-visible disabilities avoid some of the busiest and most overwhelming parts of the terminal. I would certainly like to see a similar approach adopted across the aviation sector, and for such innovations to become the norm as the government undertakes its consultation in this area, I hope Ministers will study examples of best practice of best practice and consider whether facilities of this kind could provide a blueprint for airports across the country.

I'm also pleased that the bill addresses practical issues that disabled people face all too often. Everyone in this House will have heard distressing stories of disabled travellers being left on aircraft long after other passengers have disembarked, because assistance was unavailable or because of wheelchairs and mobility aids being lost, damaged or mishandled. These are not minor inconveniences. They can severely affect a person's independence and, frankly, their dignity. For that reason, I particularly welcome the removal of the liability limit where wheelchairs, mobility aids and other medical devices are lost or damaged on domestic flights.

That is a sensible and necessary reform which recognises the essential nature of such devices and the impact that it can have on passengers who rely on them. The Bill also provides an opportunity to reflect on the wider passenger experience, including drop off charges and getting to the airport for those living in my constituency. The Manchester Airport Western link first proposed by British Rail in the 1990s, would represent an important opportunity to improve connectivity and make everyday journeys easier.

Better access to the airport would not only improve the experience of passengers and airport employees, but will also support local businesses, attract investment and strengthen strengthen links between Mid Cheshire and international markets. As members may know, Manchester Airport currently charges between £5.50 for five minutes and £25 for half an hour to drop off someone directly outside the terminal. I accept that airports need to manage congestion and we want people to use public transport where they can, but any charges must be fair and proportionate, particularly where passengers do not have a realistic alternative.

And for my constituents there is no alternative. Despite the airport being less than ten miles away. If a review is to take place, I would ask the Minister to ensure that it considers whether passengers genuinely have a realistic alternative to paying the charge, particularly disabled passengers and those with additional access needs. Drop off charges are one of the issues on which constituents have some of the strongest views, and it's important that any review reflects their experiences. I also welcome the provisions of the Bill relating to airspace modernisation and the potential benefits in terms of increased capacity, reduced delays and more efficient flight routes.

However, technology and redesigning airspace can only take us so far if there are not enough trained air traffic controllers to operate the system. There have been shortages of air traffic controllers across Europe, and because the aviation system is so interconnected, problems in one country can quickly cause disruption elsewhere. As we have unfortunately seen this week. From a passenger perspective, it makes little difference whether whether a delay is caused by an airline, an airport or air traffic control if they are still sitting in the departure lounge three hours later, the impact on their journey is exactly the same.

I therefore be grateful if the Minister could set out what the government is doing to address the talent pipeline for air traffic controllers, and whether there is sufficient workforce capacity to support the growth in aviation that the government wishes to see. Overall, I welcome this bill because it seeks to create a more effective and responsive regulatory framework while strengthening protections for disabled travellers represent a significant step forward in ensuring that air travel is more accessible, dignified and inclusive. I look forward to seeing the consultation process develop and working constructively to ensure the legislation delivers real improvements for passengers across the country.

Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Be seated. Order! Order! I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Be seated. Order! Order! I will now announce the result of today's deferred division on the draft. deferred division on the draft. Plant health seeds, seed potatoes and plant propagating material bracket amendment Bracket Northern bracket amendment Bracket Northern Ireland Regulations 2026. The eyes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Ireland Regulations 2026. The eyes were 371. The nose were 100. So the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Yes. Luke Taylor.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I hope to follow the excitement of I hope to follow the excitement of that result in the chamber. As an engineer, former aviation consultant, now chair of the APPG consultant, now chair of the APPG on the future of aviation, travel and aerospace. Hon. Members will have become accustomed to me calling for stronger growth in the aviation space, and a belief that technology and innovation can enable us to do that, whilst enable us to do that, whilst achieving our obligations to reach net zero and stop the climate crisis.

Aviation is the bedrock of our trade agreements. It enables high value cargo to move along supply chains in a way that no other form of transport can. It makes it feasible for businesses to operate across borders and make connections with other businesses that drive economic growth forward, and is meant that the last three generations of Brits have been able to take advantage of affordable foreign holidays, with massive benefits for them, their mental health and their ability to expand their horizons and make enriching memories in unfamiliar settings.

It's been so transformational for governments, businesses and individuals that it can be safely hailed as one of the most influential technologies in history. But it has come at a cost. Consumer and commercial aviation has, without a doubt, contributed to the climate crisis we face. Estimates suggest that annually, aviation accounts for 2.5% of global CO2 emissions. However, it has contributed around 4% to global warming to date and as the MP for a constituency halfway between Heathrow and Gatwick and from my former life in the aviation industry, I know that the politics of airports is fraught with complications.

The impact on communities, if not handled properly, can be deeply challenging. So it is my hope that the government will listen to engage with the points I make about how we upgrade and improve civil aviation in this country for consumers, communities and the planet, and that they will have understood that events like those we saw yesterday only serve to underline how crucially important this mission is, and how, following the third major failure of our airspace management in the last three years, it is
19:27
Ian Murray Portrait Rt Hon Ian Murray MP, Minister of State (Edinburgh South, Labour)
-
-
imperative that this bill is amended to include measures to stop that happening again. Nazis quite that happening again. Nazis quite clearly not fit for purpose. We cannot suffer a major air traffic cannot suffer a major air traffic outage once a year following the outage yesterday. I'm told by industry contacts that again, communications with airlines was poor and would gently suggest to the Minister that whoever it was that briefed the media that the that briefed the media that the disruption was akin to a bad a day with bad weather should be found.

Another position far away from the media team, rather sharply in the Lords amendment 65 was submitted by Lord young, which would would have required Nats to hold responsibility for compensation for disruption caused by their failure, rather than by airlines who were not at fault for these delays. The government declined to accept the amendment, and Lord Hendon responded in a letter to your Lord Young in July that he was satisfied that following the 2023 outage that, and I quote, the government was able to place considerable pressure on Nats and appointed the person who led the review into the outage.

This helped ensure that Nats took the necessary steps to prevent a recurrence of these particular circumstances, and for the benefit of hindsight, I raise my eyebrow and glanced at the Minister knowingly, and I would invite him to to address this issue directly in his response. And seriously consider the merits of that amendment. A change that is supported by IATA and by airlines. So that specific challenge aside, there are, I think, three broader challenges that this bill needs to address, and I hope to work with the government to ensure that it does.

The first challenge is the generational risk of decarbonising aviation, which will require short, medium and long term solutions. As we work with researchers and companies to develop the breakthrough fuels that could reshape the industry. This is how we enable sustainable growth to drive our economy. The second is the more procedural but equally important task of updating and upgrading our aerospace infrastructure to keep it competitive, whilst keeping communities impacted by these changes informed, engaged and fundamentally in control over what happens to them.

Here, we must secure our infrastructure at the same time as empowering communities. The third is in rebalancing the power mismatch between airlines and passengers giving power to people and not the big airlines giving power so that the passenger experience can be as positive as possible and not continue to allow airlines on some occasions to scam passengers like cheap fairground hucksters. So on decarbonisation, we need to see serious measures for the airline industry to decarbonise, and it will require collaborative working across the public and private sectors, something that informed last year's Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill, which I was grateful for the chance to work with the government in passing.

Enormous industrial transitions like this take a very long time, and moving existing fleets and fuel infrastructure to greener alternatives whilst they're still in use is outrageously difficult. But contrary to what some would like us to believe, it is not impossible. The interchangeability of SAF and fossil based aviation fuel being mixed and fed into the same pipelines and engines, makes this a transition that is actually unusually straightforward compared to other decarbonisation challenges. However, the sheer scale of that challenge and of the existing infrastructure is the real difficulty.

And this, as well as the laws of physics and breguet's range equations, which I've mentioned in this chamber before, is possible that the industry may be among the last to fully transition away from fossil fuels just by sheer necessity. Now, we shouldn't be afraid of that, because the reality of achieving the growth we need. But we cannot ground aerospace or regulate it into submission, because to do so would have catastrophic impact on our economy. We hear from Neo-luddite that we should effectively do this anyway, that we must.

We must constrain our horizons, put up with constraints and self-enforced recession, and tell families and businesses that they must put up with penalties and restrictions that their peers and competitors around the world do not. The intention of protecting our world from catastrophic climate change is absolutely right. But these solutions are utterly wrong. Aviation, like the internet and artificial intelligence, is a Pandora's box. Technology that, once invented and tested, cannot be put back into the box. And like those technologies, the only valid, pessimistic question ought to be about how we transform it to regulate the externalities and make sure it continues to serve people, communities, and the planet.

And the positive question concerns how we grasp the opportunities it offers to keep pushing progress forward. That means backing decarbonisation technology, which is the only way to achieve the future we need. There are great examples of this being done in practice, like Operation Blue Skies, which I spoke of as merely a concept in my speech for the SAF bill almost a year ago, and which is now funded and ready to be trialled this winter. This is concrete proof of the progress being made, but there are things we are failing to do as a state to remove roadblocks to this progress, and there is a need for real leadership from the government to continue to drive forward.

Yesterday, I chaired a roundtable discussion about sustainable aviation fuels to allow MPs to hear from the industry about the progress being made and what roadblocks remain. We heard how the pipeline of SAF production is not progressing at the rate needed to achieve the SAF mandate targets over the next few years, and that further government action is needed to ensure we don't plateau and then fall behind the 10% target by 2030 and 22% by 2040. At the Farnborough International Airshow earlier this summer, I was fortunate enough to witness the first flying demonstration by fully electric aircraft, and the exhibition hall showed the huge progress on hydrogen and electric aviation that will be the future of travel.

Last week we had the Hydrogen in Aviation Group released their report on hydrogen powered aviation, a pathway to growth and delivery, which set out a clear set of steps forward to harnessing this exciting new technology. Particularly interesting was news of trials led by the consortium to be based at Bristol Airport, hoping for the first hydrogen powered flight from a UK commercial airport by 2028. This is hugely ambitious and gives hope that solutions are available, but also remind us that the government needs to play its part in speeding up development and roll out even faster.

So whether aviation decarbonisation ends up being achieved by SAF, hydrogen, electric methane or some other pathway not yet discovered, it's a huge opportunity for us to grasp and to continue our great British global leadership in aviation technology. This bill does not bring forward specific measures on these decarbonisation goals, other than through improvements in efficiencies delivered by airspace modernisation. So I see this as a huge missed opportunity, and I look for chances to do so during the bill committee.

Turning to the second task on infrastructure, I greatly welcome the elements of this bill that help to deliver airspace modernisation, which will improve the efficiency of the UK's airspace, reduce nuisance noise pollution around airports and facilitate the decarbonisation I've just spoken about. Far from being change for change's sake, airspace modernisation is a vital step forward in upgrading our essential infrastructure, which has not been maintained and developed to keep up with changing and growing demands, and is at risk of periodic and then more consistent failure, as we all witnessed yesterday.

And it should be done as part of a wider project of renewal across our transport and otherwise critical infrastructure. It is visible in the chronic and consistent mismanagement of our roads and bridges of certain aspects of public services, and even in the political infrastructure that sits beneath everything else in this country. That is why, to unlock safe and sustainable growth and drag our infrastructure, not just in the 2020s, but into a state of readiness for the future. Airspace modernisation is utterly essential, but my support for this is not without reservations.

In particular, I am disappointed that this bill, in its current form, does not guarantee communities a meaningful say over the impact of these changes upon them. Progress and improvements in route efficiency will inevitably have negative impacts on many, with new flight paths and concentrations of disturbance taking shape over communities previously not impacted by noise, these impacts must be considered carefully in the communities impacted must have a genuine and meaningful say in the changes that will be delivered. As I've said before, my approach is a desire to get to yes on delivering these changes, but to do so requires buy in from the communities who live with these decisions for decades.

So my response to this bill has to be, once again, a yes. If yes, if we build a meaningful community involvement and actually changes options, yes, if we can make sure the scheme is able to benefit from public scrutiny. And yes, if it can be done in a way that is sustainable and not unlikely to be unpicked years later because it did not achieve some level of consensus. Because whilst the moving parts in aviation are aluminium, steel and carbon, these ultimately are human systems and it cannot be that changes are made that deliver what might look on a spreadsheet or on the maps that I used to draw in the aviation industry.

But actually how the human situation impacts with these changes. On Monday, I attended a meeting of the APPG for airport communities and we heard how the airport Noise Airport Night Noise Effects study has shown the huge impact of aviation noise on families living near to airports. Whilst aircraft types have become considerably quieter over the years. The more we learn of the health and psychological impacts of noise disruption, the more it is clear the science is consistent, the impact is real and that as such, we must demand programmes to mitigate these impacts be made available to all of those affected.

It is also true that as airline traffic approaches, capacity and demand continues to grow, airlines are likely to be up gauging their aircraft fleets, which typically then leads to higher noise signatures from larger, heavier aircraft. So we should also remember that the very constraints we put on air traffic are creating an increase in those disruptions. The parts of this bill that will make airspace modernisation easier to deliver must not be allowed to cut scrutiny of the impact of that modernisation on residents, or limit their voices over the options considered, and how those final flight routes are designed.

I'm particularly concerned about the impact on communities in my neck of the woods in southwest London, at Heathrow and further afield at Gatwick, who have already been sounding the alarm about the impact of night flights, particularly on their wellbeing. I know my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park and Twickenham have worked on this issue for many years on behalf of their constituents, and this bill needs to do more to protect the interests of their residents, and I expect to hear shortly from my hon.

Friend the Member for Horsham. On a similar issue, the Civil Aviation Authority and British Medical Journal of both demonstrated that living under night flights does not just harm mental health, but will inevitably damage a person's productivity the next day and also in extreme cases, increase the risk of stroke. Airspace modernisation can, if done properly, improve many of these issues. But where it cannot, we must insist on mitigations through soundproofing programmes or respite periods to be implemented. Airspace modernisation has the potential to shift flight paths to less densely populated areas to, and lower the noise impact on, takeoff and landing, with more efficient, steeper approach and departure paths.

The balanced emissions with noise reduction. But there is no guarantee it will do any of these things. If those living in the communities affected are denied a seat at the table, either through badly designed consultations or top down diktat. So turning to the third and final challenge, I'm sure you'll be glad to hear it's important to remember that first two will affect the planet and communities nearby airports, but the third, that of passenger rights, is the one that will hit passengers most directly in the Lords.

The Liberal Democrats tabled amendment 36 to implement a passenger's charter for air travel, with various targets for minimum service levels that an airline can deliver. Amendments 1011 that would prohibit airlines from separating passengers on the same booking to force them then to pay for assigned seating, or forcing other passengers to sit next to your unaccompanied minor. An amendment two and 20, which stopped the UK from implementing lower standards and diverging away from existing international standards. All of these are good things, and I hope to convince the government of their wisdom during the Bill committee.

My favourite amendment, however, and what I hope to push for and convince the government of the merits of the Bill Committee is amendment 13, which would. The Lords Amendment 13, which would require airlines to standardise the maximum dimensions for permitted cabin baggage across all air carriers in alignment with recognised industry standards. So who here has a Ryanair bag? 55 by 40 by 20cm, a Wizz Air bag, 55 by 40 by 23cm, an Easyjet and British Airways bag, 5645 by 25cm and an air bag 55 by 40 by 24cm, each one subtly different in size and each one liable to set you down for hefty penalty.

If the check in agent doesn't like the look of you. No, I didn't think so. We don't have a number of bags or we don't have all four. It's madness. Absolute madness. It's 2026. We have universal phone chargers. We have universal electric car chargers, and we've had standardised shipping containers for nearly half a century. And there are also universally sized overhead lockers on aircraft. So it is not correct, as asserted by Lord Hendy in the Lords, that aircraft have hugely different overhead and Under-seat storage capacities.

Setting a standard size would not necessitate using the smallest aircraft capacity, resulting in many passengers needing to use a smaller case or bag. This is incorrect, and frankly insulting to the intelligence of the passenger, who has just been stung for £75 by an overzealous Ryanair boarding agent for an oversized bag because you picked up the wrong one to pack that morning, and that five centimetres difference cannot possibly fit into the overhead bin on a Boeing 737, but could slip smoothly into that of an A320.

Passengers need protection from predatory practices. We need the BS, the British standard suitcase, and that's the well regulated market the Liberal Democrats believe in. And I hope I'm able to make the government see the benefit of that during the bill committee. So in summary, this bill really is a huge opportunity to take meaningful action to improve our airspace infrastructure, to reduce emissions, improve safety and reduce noise, and also to improve passenger experience and make flying less expensive and stressful. These are good aims, but they can only be achieved with careful and clear leadership that listens to the voices of industry, of communities, and those of us who believe they must be delivered in the context of a wider rethink in the way we maintain and upgrade our systems in this country.

So I thank the Minister for bringing forward to this bill. I congratulate him on making a strong, if incomplete, start, and I look forward to helping him fix the bill in committee. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As we now all reflect on the size of our baggage, I'll call Amanda Hack.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amanda Hack. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and you'll be pleased to know I have a wide variety of bags for my have a wide variety of bags for my air travel. I get a lot of correspondence on airport related correspondence on airport related issues with East Midlands Airport right at the top of my constituency. So the improvement on customer So the improvement on customer rights and protection is going to be key. Having an airport in my constituency also means I have an intimate understanding of the issues facing having a neighbour as an airport, and that can create East Midlands Airport have been good at engaging with me and complaints that arise from constituents, but there's always more to be done with the local community.

And whilst I appreciate unable to legislate for all in this space, I strongly welcome the measures in the Bill with regard to consultation, airports should be encouraged and to make sure that their airports are as friendly a neighbour as possible. In terms of East Midlands Airport, I think economically we can't ignore that they employ 8000 people. There is 3.75 tonnes, thousand tonnes of small airport freight that goes through East Midlands Airport every year. It's the largest small, small parcel freight in the UK with DHL, UPS, Fedex and Royal Mail all choosing to operate out of East Midlands Airport.

So what we can do about modernising, modernising airspace and was going to be just as key for passenger airport aircraft, but also freight to some 91% of travellers to East Midlands Airport, though travel by car, leaving just 9% travelling by public transport. It's actually the lowest percentage in the country. Why? Because there's not a single train station in my constituency and the one closest to the station. East Midlands Parkway, doesn't even offer a regular bus service. People have to rely on a demand responsive transport from the closest train station to the airport.

So understandably, one of the top pieces of correspondence regarding in my constituency is airport parking and actually people outside my constituency email in to because of the work my office has been doing on this drop off charges, in particular a regular feature of my casework. East Midlands Airport has recently been made barriers, like a lot of other individuals have said today, meaning that someone can only pay online or by using an automated phone line by midnight

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the following day. It can be really easy to forget to pay. The hon. Lady.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Of course. Thank. I thank the hon. Lady for giving me this hon. Lady. Agree that these excessive drop off charges can lead to dangerous behaviour around airports. I behaviour around airports. I observed a taxi dropping off passengers in one of the the lanes passengers in one of the the lanes on the one way system around Glasgow International Airport the other day, and I know that passengers are being dropped off further afield, leading to them to have to walk down the side of what can essentially be described as a one way system.

And I wonder if she's experienced difficulties like that at her in her own constituency.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that very important point. Around East Midlands Airport. We Around East Midlands Airport. We have a double red line zone and it actually does make it incredibly dangerous, particularly for dangerous, particularly for colleagues that work at the airport whose family might not be able to whose family might not be able to afford the drop off charges to get their their loved ones to to work their their loved ones to to work safely. I think, of course you most airports will offer the possibility of setting up an automatic payment account, but it's simply not accessible for all who maybe only use drop off services once or twice a year.

Airports are essentially operating a system where it's impossible to pay at the point of sale. I've repeatedly asked the airport to install a pay terminal inside the airport building, but that request has been repeatedly refused. The current drop off parking system is unfair, and I actually wrote to the parking management company a PCOA to request data about the number of parking charge notices issued prior to and following the installation of the barriers, the barrier system at East Midlands Airport. They didn't want to share that data, which I think answers my question.

So I think we also need to be looking at the infrastructure around airports. When we're looking at consumer protection, actually making sure people can get to and from the airport safely has to be part of those conversations, because travellers and those that work at the airport feel they have no choice but to drive or, or get a family member to drop them off at an additional cost to a holiday or to to work. It's something I've raised with the department before before.

And I welcome an update from the Minister on this in his closing speech. It does have to be said, though, that East Midlands Airport has been doing some really valuable work on supporting and encouraging travel for people with disabilities. Their assisted travel service won a national award last year, recognising their initiatives that make travellers travel more accessible and easier. And I know the Minister, when he visited my airport last week, will have experienced that that first hand. They also introduced the first UK WhatsApp based live chat system for assisted travel customers.

They've invested about £1.5 million in specialist vehicles, mobility aids and terminal accessibility features. I have travelled on one of these, but as somebody that's frightened of heights, it doesn't. It didn't really fill me with confidence. But for the reason. Not that it wasn't safe. Just because I don't like heights. They've also installed improved signage, refurbished toilets and provided quiet rooms, as well as having a changing places toilet. Accessibility should not be a big, long conversation. It just needs to be embedded and I do think it's shameful.

We're still having this conversation nationally, so I greatly welcome the government's commitment to strengthening the rights of passengers, particularly in this accessibility space, and removing compensation limits for wheelchairs and mobility aids and other assistive devices that are lost, damaged or destroyed by UK domestic flights. I think one of the things that's always interesting when you deal with a piece of casework is actually wheelchairs are incredibly expensive, but it's the time away from the wheelchair that is just as important to consider replacing something specially adapted for a person isn't an overnight job.

You can't order it from Amazon. It takes weeks to be delivered. There is, of course, more to be done, and I ask that the Minister, in his response, sets out the timetable for consultation on the accessibility issues. As a parent of a child who's multiple allergic conversations about how we treat those with allergies on flights is a really pressing, pressing issue for me, and I'm greatly pleased to see the government has committed to consult on a range of accessibility issues, including allergies, with 3 million people in the UK alone affected by food allergies, it's absolutely essential that these concerns are addressed.

The Natasha Foundation, the food allergy charity in the UK, has put together a really detailed briefing on the issues that people with food allergies face on planes, including some real life stories, and I don't think we can underestimate the dedicated work of Natasha's family and the personal impact that this has had on them. With this tragic loss of Natasha on a plane. But it just gives you I encourage the Minister to read the report that they've introduced. But just to give you some very brief highlights, around 10% of travellers with food allergies report having an allergic reaction during a flight, accounting for 2 to 4% of all medical issues that occur occur on board commercial airlines.

And I can genuinely say as a parent, with a child with with multiple allergies, sending her on a plane is absolutely terrifying. She travelled alone for the first time earlier in this year, and she she travelled about five hours on a flight and was not offered food because they couldn't manage her allergies. So I think this is something we do have to look at incredibly seriously. In light of the air traffic control issue that happened overnight. I think it's also poignant to talk about passenger and pilot and crew well-being in the event of a delay on our runways, and how this could be better managed in legislation.

In February of last year, I attended a roundtable discussion organised by the APPG on Occupational Safety and Health, and they were hosting a group of pilots representing the British Airline Pilots Association. We heard from the delegation about the ongoing challenges facing pilots, from regulatory failures to significant welfare concerns, particularly when boarding has already taken place. One of the situations described by the pilots access to toilets about the delegation informing us that pilots are frequently unable to use the toilet and sanitary items are often not provided for either pilots, crew or passengers in the event of a delay.

A key factor in the lack of access to facilities are that restaurants have been driven down to legal minimums, and it's something we need to consider. I welcome the bill's commitment to strengthen passenger protection and ensure the industry maintains the highest standards of safety for the Minister set out in his response. What actions will be taken to support pilots and airline staff during delays like we had overnight?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Graham Leadbitter thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Firstly.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker. Firstly. In relation to the Secretary of State's comments. On the extensive. And continued disruption of passenger and air freight services passenger and air freight services that has occurred as a consequence of the Naz Shah system falling over yesterday, and which will take into yesterday, and which will take into the weekend to fully resolve for people and businesses in Scotland and across the UK. This is deeply and across the UK. This is deeply concerning. It results in lost work time, impacting productivity.

It disrupts time critical services including medical flights and cold chain delivery mechanisms, and, as an example, around £1 million worth of Scottish salmon is exported through just Heathrow every single day. That's just one sector in one of the home nations. This level of disruption affecting all the home nations and indeed many other countries, cannot be allowed to happen again. There is a serious question over the clear lack of back up systems. When this incident lasted for several hours, with an estimated quarter of a million passengers disrupted, and I welcome the actions that the Secretary of State set out.

But in addition to that, there was action stated. I would urge the Minister to and the Department to publish an assessment of the cost to individuals and businesses of this episode as soon as practicable, and I am certain that Ministers will have cross-party backing to hold to account and ensure that in future they have in place far more robust

**** Possible New Speaker ****

backup systems. I thank the gentleman for taking intervention. I'm sorry my voice still hasn't come back, but can I thank him for raising the issues? Can I thank him for raising the issues around that? He will be aware that Stansted Airport is on a aware that Stansted Airport is on a very right next to my constituency of Harlow. So it's impacted a lot of people in my constituency, not just those that are travelling. But would he also agree it has an impact on those people working in the airport because of the the huge

**** Possible New Speaker ****

disruptions that it's caused? Yeah, absolutely. And that's people in airports up and down the country because they they are having to manage their delayed flights at their end. And that impacts on their pulling in people from around the airport adds cost. And some of these regional airports are operating on much smaller margins. And that cost of bringing in additional staff has a really significant impact on them. And this incident will have been not just frustrating for many, but quite distressing and for many very costly.

And moving on, Madam Deputy Speaker, to the Bill itself, the measures in this bill are predominantly very welcome, and the SNP government in Scotland are broadly supportive. I would, however, initially draw attention towards amendment 33 that introduced a review of airport parking charges that was not in the face of the original bill. I am absolutely not against that in principle, but as it stood, the original bill text would not have required the legislative consent motion. It looks like the introduction of Lords Amendment 33 will require such consent, and I would ask the Minister, in summing up, when we come to summing up, if they can address that specific point, and if a legislative consent motion is required from the Scottish Parliament, then it is essential that appropriate time is built in for proper scrutiny by MSPs of that element of the Bill.

Prior to the Report stage, and another specific issue that I want to raise. The issue being faced by many people with visas who have been refused boarding of aircraft coming to the UK, where they have a legitimate right to travel and gain entry, but where ground staff are not sufficiently trained and aware of how to check and scrutinise the documentation. In these circumstances, passengers incorrectly refuse. Boarding may not have a right to be compensated, which can be hugely costly and is inherently unfair.

Legislation currently provides for protection for adequately documented passengers who are denied boarding, but does not define what constitutes being adequately documented. The Prime Minister has talked about giving people agency, but many people in those circumstances clearly do not have such agency for digital documentation that it seems obvious that the onus should be on the carrier to check the documentation. A passenger in another country with potential language barriers and limited digital access is clearly disadvantaged if the onus is on them.

The campaigning group T3M have proposed a well considered amendment, which I am sure the Minister will be aware of. Will the Minister give consideration to tackling that particular issue through amendment of this Bill as a significant consumer issue for people who are entitled to travel, already have a visa but who are being refused boarding, and it is a very costly experience if they do not get compensation for an incorrectly being incorrectly refused boarding and moving on to a separate issue.

I have two. Significant airports in the constituency. One is a civilian airport, Inverness, and the other is the airbase, RAF Lossiemouth. Now, clearly military aircraft movements do not operate under civilian aircraft legislation, but people who live in the vicinity of a military base also experience noise issues and environmental issues. I am not suggesting for a minute that there should be constraints that would make operational flying difficult for the for the military. However, I think in the case of regular training exercises and regular training flights, which is predominantly what most of the flights are out of many military bases on a day to day basis, there could be more work done to improve how the how the military communicate with the with local community, and how something that's a bit closer to the expectations that we would have around a normal domestic airport.

Now, I would simply ask if the Minister has considered that and whether they would. The Department will have conversations with their colleagues in the Ministry of Defence to see how much room there is, not necessarily for legislation to say that they must do X, Y and Z because it would be wrong to constrain their ability to do their core work. However, it's I think it's something that could be explored a bit in the event of routine flights that to maybe reduce and minimise that environmental impact on people who live close to what can be very noisy bases.

They are very accepting of it because the bases create a huge amount of employment. People recognise the importance of them to the defence of the defence of the country. So they, you know, they are very accepting of that. But it doesn't mean that it it's it's not an issue. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed in the best possible way to try and to try and improve things, which should be looking at improvement. And finally, you know, as somebody who commutes to this place around 40 weeks a year, give or take, I use 80 flights a year for that commute.

I spend about seven hours a week either in airports or on earth. I, I would emphasise, as others have done, that that is a predominantly positive experience. It is a largely without significant delay. But when significant delays do occur and that. And people are missing connections, often on long haul flights elsewhere, that can become really quite distressing for people. So the consumer element of it and that protection of people is really absolutely critical. I have seen passengers regularly who have been distressed about circumstances that they're in.

Sometimes they're flying for for deeply personal reasons, bereavements and such like. And it is a, you know, it's a particularly it's a more stressful form of transport than maybe getting on and off a bus on a, when you're maybe taking a single, a single bus for a few miles and you're getting off at the other end, you've got to plan for security, you've got to plan for, for your baggage, you've got to do all of those things. So it requires a lot more thinking before you go on a plane.

And if you're there for difficult circumstances, it makes it all the more important that we ensure that that experience is as good as it possibly can be for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

people who are using it. Thank you. Tim Roca thank. You, Madam Deputy Speaker. And

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You, Madam Deputy Speaker. And can I start by thanking my right Honourable and hon. Friends in the ministerial team for their assiduous work in bringing this assiduous work in bringing this bill and preparing this bill and bringing it forward. I can also he's not in his seat anymore, but he's not in his seat anymore, but the Member for sale with Insurance Sale East for all the work he did as a Minister, both in government as a Minister, both in government and in opposition as well, and also for members of the Other place for their work scrutinising the bill ahead of it.

Coming to us here today. And it represents another example of how the government is on the side of consumers. And upon taking office, the new Prime Minister launched a series of very practical, everyday fixes to improve consumer rights in a number of areas lowering costs, empowering consumers to take action when they've been inconvenienced. And I see this in that tradition, it's another step on that path of improving consumer rights in aviation in this regard. So by giving the Civil Aviation Authority direct enforcement powers and increasing transparency to ensure that passengers are always told who's operating their flight and how they can find redress.

It's another example of the government rebalancing power back in favour of the consumer, and I applaud it. Now, Macclesfield, my constituency is well served by Manchester Airport. There are over 500 jobs in my constituency dependent on the airport. It's the third busiest in the UK. It's the busiest airport outside of London, I understand, and it's certainly the global gateway to the north of England. Like many people, I fly out of Manchester myself. It's a great airport and a great part of the economy of the North west, and perhaps not uniquely, I might be proved wrong, but its major shareholders as well are mainly the councils of Greater Manchester.

So a great example of sharing prosperity from an important economic asset. And I thank all the staff at the airport for helping 30 million people get through check in security and the departure lounge and fly to where they need to be mostly hassle free. And I think we should acknowledge that. But as I'm sure is common across all all airports, sometimes things do go wrong, whether it's a bag that doesn't make it or a flight that's significantly delayed. Disruption can occur at any moment.

And certainly we've seen that with the Nats events in the last 24 hours. So clauses 1 to 3 of this bill will give me and other passengers much greater confidence that when things do go wrong, things can be put right. But given the changing nature of air travel and global trends, it is right that the Bill empowers the Secretary of State to act on behalf of passengers without having to pass further primary legislation, whether it's on baggage damage liability for passenger insurance, ensuring price transparency or ensuring flights are accessible to all passengers, especially those who are disabled.

And I think colleagues have made a really powerful case about that earlier this afternoon. These new powers ensure that the Secretary of State is able to be a true advocate for passengers and quickly update the rules to ensure appropriate compensation when things go wrong. I was much taken by the comments by the Member for Cardiff West about exploring an auto delay repay system. I think that has great merit, and I certainly want to see the new British standard sized bag when it finally emerges.

It. It did sound for a moment like the Member for Sutton had a particularly traumatic summer with at least one airline, but. So I look forward to the consultation the Ministers will bring forward within 12 months, and I will urge my constituents, certainly, who have written to me about their own experiences, to respond to that consultation so Ministers can act on their behalf. I particularly welcome the changing clause for providing greater compensation on domestic flights for damaged or lost accessibility equipment.

A wheelchair, as has been said, is a precious and crucial asset for disabled people and sometimes, too often, disabled people have to fight to get mobility aid in the first place, and it can often be specialist and extremely expensive. So it's right that if an airline is careless enough to lose or damage an aid, that the compensation owed to that person that they've left inconvenienced in an incredible way is done properly and unable to navigate with the freedom they once have that that that compensation is, is appropriate.

I mean, I can't imagine myself the levels of inconvenience that it does cause to people in those in those circumstances. So I'm glad consumer rights in this area are being strengthened. And with the bill giving the CAA the same consumer protection enforcement powers as the CMA, passengers will now have a powerful new ally in the fight when it comes to compensation that is owed and is not as forthcoming as it should be. But beyond the consumer protections, I welcome the Bill introducing reforms to the antiquated Airspace management system, airport slot schedules, allocations.

It's particularly positive that the airspace changes will hopefully lead to reduced noise around airports for for residents and decreased emissions through more efficient flying. These are just sensible reforms, long overdue that help to make aviation more sustainable. And to anyone who's been held in a stack whilst waiting for a landing spot can attest a more efficient use of airspace to decrease the need for holding patterns is very welcome indeed, and it's good to see the government reforming those slots and those schedules.

We saw during Covid that the current system isn't flexible enough in giving Ministers the power to adjust those rules, either in an emergency like Covid, for example, or to encourage competition between airlines, which is so important. It's a welcome step that will improve things for passengers. I do want to finish with an issue that a couple of others on both sides of the House have raised this afternoon, and ask Ministers to think carefully about it in view of the scrutiny of the other House gave, which is airport drop off charges which a number of residents in Macclesfield have raised with me.

Manchester Airport operates a barrier less drop off, which is great for efficiency, but constituents have complained to me that the signage isn't adequate, the prices are too steep and the period to pay is not long enough, and certainly the fines, if you don't pay in the short period, are punishing Manchester Airport through Acpo levies £100 fine if the charge isn't paid within 24 hours of drop off or pick up. And I simply don't believe 24 hours is a long enough period for many people, including my constituents, who I say have written to me about this issue.

Many didn't realise they had to pay. Not seeing the signage was it was inadequate or they struggled with the online payment system, or they had the payment system reject their car registration number or in one case, Madam Deputy Speaker, Particularly egregious, a constituent of mine was fine because their bank didn't process the payment over a Sunday. There seems to be no reason why this payment period could not be increased. This window, and I don't see any reason why the third party provider couldn't issue a written notice of the requirement to pay before a fine was levied.

And you do get the impression, Madam Deputy Speaker, in these cases, that the policy is designed to cause people to incur fines in order to increase revenue, rather than to encourage people to pay for parking in an orderly and appropriate, to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank taking the intervention. I think the other thing that the idea of these drop off fines is to is to try and convince people to is to try and convince people to travel to airports via other means. And I would say that my airport stands is very accessible by train stands is very accessible by train and they've put on new bus routes. But in the example that friend gave, and we've discussed this before, and we've discussed this before, she hasn't got that option.

So it seems unfair that if there isn't good transport links to, to, to an airport, that these charges exist. airport, that these charges exist. As I say, in my case, it's not such an issue. But in the case of my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

problem. I completely agree with my hon. Friend and earlier in the debate, the Member for Mid Cheshire made the very powerful point that his constituents live within ten miles of the airport, but don't have decent public transport links to the airport. So that's certainly the airport. So that's certainly has to be part of the conversation as well. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, in closing, this is a practical

**** Possible New Speaker ****

bill. On the drop off charges point with the hon. Gentleman. Agree with with the hon. Gentleman. Agree with me that if there there are going to be drop off charges that at the very least, they should only be increased in line with inflation. At Glasgow Airport. The increases since 2019 have way outstripped, you know, the cost of living and the the the normal rate of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

increases in line with inflation. I. I totally agree with my hon. Friend. And, you know, every day is Friend. And, you know, every day is a school day in this place, and I was not aware that Glasgow Airport did not have a direct rail link to the centre of Glasgow, one of the the centre of Glasgow, one of the UK's most important cities. And you'd think, after however many aeons, the SNP had been in charge in Scotland, that that might have in Scotland, that that might have been a priority, that they might have looked at.

But it's not for not for me to say, but as as I was, not for me to say, but as as I was, as I was saying. In conclusion, I think this is a very practical bill. It's a very pragmatic bill. I welcome it thoroughly, and I thank Ministers for all their hard work, and I hope it progresses smoothly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in its further stages. Thank you, Madam John Milne. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. In my constituency of Horsham, people understand the importance of people understand the importance of Gatwick to the local economy, not least because many of them have a job there. But the way public job there. But the way public consultation has been handled over the last decade has created deep anxiety about what changes to anxiety about what changes to airports and airspace will mean for them, their families and the communities they live in.

So it's communities they live in. So it's on their behalf that I'm asking for the introduction of a dedicated aviation ombudsman, especially in the context of the need to lay out new flight paths. I am wholly supportive of the need for airspace modernisation, which of course is being carried out across the whole of Europe. It will bring very welcome improvements in both emissions and safety. As part of this process, Gatwick Airport Limited are looking for a change to a particular currently agreed flight path, such that planes leaving west and turning south to Europe will be able to do so almost immediately after takeoff.

Instead of building up height first. In doing so, they will inflict major noise pollution over North Horsham and three rural villages which are not currently overflown to a great extent. When this same route, known as admit, was trialled ten years ago, it provoked an explosion of public distress. The then CEO swiftly withdrew it and promised never to introduce it again. Yet, lo and behold, in the last round of public consultation subsequently cancelled, Gatwick gave Horsham people a choice of three airspace plans, all three of which contained this same identical route, less gatwick's choice, more Hobson's choice.

Why did they do that? Simply because it would enable Gatwick to increase the number of takeoff slots, and they, of course, are potentially worth millions. Now, this is a clear conflict of interest, and I have a great deal of difficulty believing that the financial incentive had no influence whatsoever on their thinking. Either way, it risks, at the very least, the perception of bias. What's particularly grieving is that this route isn't really necessary, given all the other changes going on. At the same time, it would make a negligible contribution to efficiency, to emissions reduction, or even to capacity.

Given that Gatwick is, in any case, heading for a huge increase in capacity owing to a second runway and other measures. Unfortunately, the voice of the consumer plays such a small part in this process that no one is is able to add up the pros and cons. It's all on the side of industry. I therefore asked, I therefore asked the then aviation Minister to include an independent manager member as standard on airspace review panels. He declined and now the whole process has been restarted anyway.

But we still have a situation where the citizen has no power to challenge major changes which will affect their lives. There's another CAA reform which further illustrates this point. The department's new air navigation guidance, published last month, lowers the altitude up to which noise must be prioritised over efficiency, from 7000ft to 5000ft, and I referred to this earlier in a question to the Secretary of State. So that means fewer people will be able to argue against such a route on noise grounds.

Now, this happened in the same year that the CAA's own new research, Aviation Noise Attitude Survey and the Aviation Noise Effects study found that the noise level at which people become accustomed become highly annoyed is 43dB rather than 54. As previously advised, communities are more sensitive to noise than the department's own evidence said a decade ago. Yet the response has been to shrink, not extend, the altitude band where noise takes priority. Where is the voice of the resident in this? It will have a material impact on decisions in my area as well as other airports.

So why is the CAA allowed to mark its own homework when no one else is? There already is an alternative dispute resolution available for consumer complaints, such as a refund or delayed bag, or for a cancelled flight, but this is not a usable tool for regulatory decisions, such as where a flight path goes, how the noise is distributed or which homes end up underneath it. The government's own written answers confirm that dissatisfaction with a CAA regulatory decision cannot be pursued through the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

It can only go to internal review or judicial review for the great majority of residents residents. Neither of these is a realistic option. And Madam Deputy Speaker, we've been here before. Water is another industry that touches growth, employment, the environment and people's daily lives and where trust has been totally destroyed. The government's answer is that there is a new to this issue is that there should be a new legally binding water Ombudsman. So I believe, and campaigners, campaigners.

The length and breadth of the country believe that aviation deserves the same treatment. Now, the Minister has written to me and argues that there is already a consultation process, but most residents will be left completely unaware of major changes and even if they were aware, they'd be unable to do anything significant about it. The process, as proposed, is so completely dominated by the industry voice that even a modest request, such as not repeating the same mistake on flight paths around Horsham, can never get any kind of hearing.

So I think the Minister is wrong to assume that the industry always knows what's best in all circumstances. Fairness and objectivity should be offered on CAA regulatory decisions and on consumer and passenger rights alike. I therefore ask the government to look again and to shore up this bill with an independent ombudsman, Aviation. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

John McDonnell. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Can I just say, with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Can I just say, with regard to yesterday, which because Heathrow is located which because Heathrow is located in my constituency and therefore they think I'm responsible for it. So I usually send apologetic replies back. But can I also say that actually, despite the suffering that people went through, behind that will be a large number of staff who are working incredibly hard at all levels of the organisation to put it right. And this happens on every occasion.

But however, nevertheless, Nats management needs to be held to account and Secretary of State has said that they should expect a report within six months. It would be helpful to have statements during that period to reassure people about exactly what did happen, and also the actions that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that need to be taken just. On that point. Certainly, certainly. I thank the hon. Gentleman for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. Does he agree with me that particular reference should be given to the previous failures, and given to the previous failures, and I think it was the 37 actions that should have been completed to resolve the previous incident, and resolve the previous incident, and explaining quite how this was allowed to occur again, because, as he says, it's critical that we get

**** Possible New Speaker ****

he says, it's critical that we get to the bottom of what happened, but also that we're able to hold them to account. I think that goes to the heart of the debate we're having, which is levels of accountability within our structures themselves. Nats is accountable to the CAA. The CAA becomes almost, I think, accountable to who, not the the element. The reason I raised with the Secretary of State, the references in the the legislation being proposed to new section 61 G.

This relates to the priorities and objectives of the Secretary of State in relation to aviation and is a document that is a directive to the CAA. The reason I asked about it, because the way it's drafted in the legislation, I thought we were going to eventually move towards a more expansive document, setting out in detail some of the issues, particularly around for my interest environment, but also service to the etc. In fact, the document at the moment is simply a couple of pages of a letter that sent on a regular basis, usually annually and late laid before Parliament.

And I thought what was useful in this legislation is that we would get something more substantial that was consulted on in more detail, and it would be a much, much more detailed direction to CAA about how it should implement its responsibilities and role. And as a result of that, the CAA will then become more accountable to the Secretary of State and therefore on to this House. So I that's my one of the points, really. And it isn't. We never.

Actions go. Things go wrong. Actions are then agreed. And then we never really get the substance of the follow up on those actions. That's the problem. And I just raise the other example that took place where people can remember at Heathrow, when the substation went up in flames, and we then discovered the fallback operations weren't working effectively as well. And there's a real vulnerability for the future. And I just, I just think we need a bit more of an authoritative role for this House in terms of how the Secretary of State can influence the AA and make it more accountable.

And that's that's the main point I want to make, really, I don't think people realise that the, the massive power that the CAA has that has implications for the lives and the health, as others have said, of literally millions of people with regard to the flight pass that that it determines and also the standards of performance that it determines. And I actually don't think as yet in the legislation, I think it needs further debate on other aspects. I don't think yet.

We've got much further in establishing an effective structure for airspace decision making. As I said, in the decision making itself, there's very little independent monitoring. And it becomes, as the hon. Gentleman from Horsham, I think has said, impossible to challenge because literally local communities haven't the resources then for judicial review, the decision, the decisions themselves, there doesn't seem to be that basic accountability mechanism that would expect of other bodies that are performing public duties like that in.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for giving way, and I do understand what he and other colleagues, other members across colleagues, other members across the House, are saying about the need for independent oversight, particularly on the sort of aviation side. But when it comes to the consumer side, does he agree the consumer side, does he agree with me that when the CAA works, it really does work, particularly in cases, as we've heard of from the members for Mid Dorset Constituent's case, it really can work and that it's absolutely the right thing for this government to bring that bring those powers forward for consumer protections.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

So I fully agree, I fully agree. And again, can I just also say, as part of the legislation as well, the issue with regard to wheelchair compensation is significant in this legislation as well, because most of us have dealt with case cases of us have dealt with case cases like this. But just just to go back to this process of accountability, but just looking at some of the notes that have been provided by different organisations, I just, hey, can provide us with a helpful hey, can provide us with a helpful note.

And I've worked with them now over 20 years and they set out the CAA. When it's sets out the air space changes, he can remind us that actually they oversee the progress of those stations. They approve whether the consultation, their own consultation has been adequate or not. And in addition to that, they decide on them whether the proposals may proceed. And yeah, they they operate their own complaints Lewes, which are on issues around airspace actually almost impenetrable. So it the CAA has immense power, and it seems to be a law unto itself in in many instances.

And as I say, the lack of the lack of consultation, I think is one of its main vulnerabilities. It's been said in the House today, new flight paths have already been prepared and discussed and considered. I look at Heathrow expansion and it won't be Heathrow that actually puts forward. When it puts forward its plans for third runway. It won't be Heathrow. That will then say what the flight paths will be. It can't be because it's now the the airport services that is been set at the service that's been set up on under Nats, and I've not.

And with all my experience from Heathrow, I've not known a thorough and adequate consultation process take place with regard to air airport routes and the development of them. So there is a. I was hoping the legislation. We might get more detail and that's why this. I'll come back to this issue with regard to the Secretary of State's document, I think that could be. If it's a real. That could be a really powerful mechanism in which we can determine. Through debates here and therefore, instructions to the Secretary of State how the CAA will operate in the future.

And again, on the environment. Can I just say again, I feel there's just insufficient lack. There's a real lack of firm duties and responsibilities set out in the legislation and set out in the guidance procedure that takes into account the health and the well-being of people and communities. And the reference has been made to to noise. I, I cannot believe that we're still in this same situation where we're having the use of different noise criteria used in different mechanisms and different decisions taking place.

And if you look at the decisions with with regard to Gatwick and Luton, in which the developments are based upon their use in two different criteria, two different levels to which they place the restrictions. And I, I've gone through in the different debates and discussions that we that we've had over the time. Some of you, some of the hon. Members, will know we've gone from 57 to 50 3 to 43. The 431 is the World Health Organization for like me, I don't understand why we don't expect respect their expertise in all of this.

And we apply the different measures for different decisions, which largely get by driven by other factors rather than the health and the consequences for people and the impact of noise. At this point. Can I just the hon. Gentleman has mentioned the APPG meeting that we had on Monday where we received the the latest piece of research can I put on record my thanks to Doctor Charlotte Clark. She's the professor of environmental epidemiology and population health, and she's done the latest.

Well, she's done research over the years on all she's she's the expert on it. And I think she. With an element of shock for for some of us. She then looked at some of the health implications that the, the lowest levels of noise that we'd been debating here today. And it is shocking the impact in terms of cardiovascular. We know, but we now know much more about the impact on. On mental health in particular. And one of the issues that's come out of our discussions is that particularly and this includes the Heathrow expansion consultation as well, the latest research on noise and health impacts has not been really sufficiently monetised in the discussions and consultations that have taken place.

So we could be in a situation now where decision making, particularly on the latest Heathrow expansion proposals, could be on the basis of health impact monetisation as a result of increased noise, which is well, and sometimes it's described as maybe four times the level it it should be four times more than the level that's been put forward by the government so far. And I think increasingly now, our our constituents themselves are becoming aware of the health impacts of noise in particular and are demanding greater protections.

And from the legislation that we're debating today, I can't see how those greater protections will be translated unless we have a stronger capacity in this House to determine the guidance that's given to CAA and the parameters that have been set for them on the in the decision making process. I just give this example just to run through for hon. Members, what we've the debates that have taken place in this House, the a p f we dealt with 57dB for the song.

We looked at 54. Then we went to 51 and as I say, 43 is in the Anas. And the latest analysis which relates to the World Health Organization. We can't keep on going on without, I think, a proper standard noise that is that will be applicable across our all our whole decision making process. And that actually does reflect now the latest research in terms of its health impacts. And I don't think we're there at the moment.

So again, just finally, I, I, I'm pleased with the legislation. There's some proposals that I think are meritorious. I think they will have a improvement in terms of the passenger experience, no doubt whatsoever. But this legislation really doesn't take into account the community experience and the impact it will have. And that's why the running theme of this, and I'll be bringing with others, I'll be bringing forward amendments. Somehow. We've got to get a greater level of accountability, greater level of transparency, transparency, and also a greater level of empowerment of those communities that are being impacted.

The proposal from the hon. Member, from Horsham, with regard to an ombudsman, I think is married to I think it's would is one mechanism that could be used and could be helpful, a bit of a long stop, because at the moment in my constituency, when people are faced with these, they don't know where to go. It's as simple as that. And as I say, just finally on the if it isn't Heathrow expansion, it's going to be interesting. The debate that we'll have on Heathrow expansion and the new policy statement when we actually don't know what the flight paths will be.

And if I was a constituent, my hon. Friend in Uxbridge, I would be extremely worried in my constituency. The bizarre situation is this because the flights are largely east, west, west, east. It affects Longford where when the aircraft go fly over, you feel like throwing yourself to the floor. It affects a number of the Heathrow villages but doesn't as yet impact on the centre of my constituency. But we are the risks now that the flight paths may well do that. So again, we're talking about maybe another million or so people coming into it being impacted by the the development of Heathrow itself.

And yet we will not have in the debate that we have in this House about the policy statement, we will not have the certainty of what those flight paths will be. That can't be right when you're making such a major decision like that. That's why I'm hoping when we come back in, when the committee meets and when we come back at Report stage, we can have a sensible debate about the sort of amendments that that can be brought forward on that theme of accountability.

Because if we can increase the accountability, I think we can increase the confidence in government decision making on this issue in the long term. And I agree, hon. Members have raised the issue about the importance of aviation to our economy. Of course it is. It employs a large number of my constituents, and we're trying to make sure that we create an aviation capacity, which actually, yes, is economically beneficial to the country. But this also protects our constituency in terms of their health and well-being.

Overall.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Noah Law Madam Deputy Speaker, I declare an interest as the newly declare an interest as the newly elected chair of the aviation APPG. I welcome the steps taken by our Labour Government today to improve accessibility and protections for accessibility and protections for disabled airline passengers, to bolster consumer protections and to simplify the legislative framework, and, in doing so, boost our economy and boost the aviation sector more broadly. So I think we've heard a lot today about the potential benefits of that.

I think there are benefits as much as there are increased obligations for for carriers, but I'd be keen to hear more from the Ministers in winding up perhaps, about some of those benefits that we can unlock at at the airport and infrastructure side as well, because we have heard today from colleagues with other small regional airports represented in this House about the compliance costs associated with that. So I'd be interested to hear from Ministers how this bill potentially addresses that, and what other support can be in place from there, from the department to help small regional airports like Cornwall Airport, Newquay, that is in my constituency and my neighbouring constituency.

We know in the case of Cornwall Airport, Newquay, that Cornwall Council has an administration that's chopped and changed in its approach. That's that, as Ministers have heard before, is is deeply unhelpful. But it's only by improving the passenger passenger experience, as this bill doubtless does, that we will be able to encourage improved packs, improved passenger footfall and boost revenues to support the sustainability of those airports such as such as Cornwall Airport, Newquay. But I and I thank the Minister for his steps already that we've.

That Cornish MPs have had in relation to the. So as well, the public service obligation I. I appreciate that Ministers have left the door open to Cornwall Council to. To continue those or restart those conversations, should they be able to bring eligible bids forward in the future? That's really important because as much as we can all work to promote commercial conversations with various airlines, and there have been new routes introduced on the back of that, it really is only through support for regional airports, through improving the passenger experience, as I know this bill will do today, that we will boost the usage of those airports.

We've also heard of the importance of transport, connectivity, integrated transport, and I know that this government's devolution programme, the extension of bus franchising, such as the work we're doing with again with Cornwall Council there, should prove fertile ground to improving, improving those links where councils choose to take up those powers and use them, use them in a constructive way. So I will use this opportunity, perhaps shamelessly so to to be an advocate for regional airports, the connectivity they provide to actually basket case situations, as we've, as we're seeing in Cornwall's current transport links, and I call on the Minister to go beyond these great steps that he's taking today to support regional

**** Possible New Speaker ****

airports like mine in Newquay. Samantha Dixon thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. The UK's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Deputy Speaker. The UK's aviation sector continues to grow year after year, breaking passenger records as they travel in their millions. This growth is undoubtedly good for the economy, for trade and for growth, but also for trade and for growth, but also for the everyday British air passenger, giving us more opportunities to travel for work, opportunities to travel for work, leisure and beyond. We are well served in Chester North and Neston by Manchester Airport, Liverpool, John Lennon and to a lesser extent, Hardin Airport.

Additionally, many constituents are employed in the sector, at the airports or at Airbus over the border in North Wales. Indeed, the company Xilam keeps aviation fuel flowing through my constituency. We must, however, make sure that as the expansion of the sector continues, we keep pace. Over recent days, we've seen what can happen when things go wrong as hundreds of flights flights have been cancelled or delays delayed across the country since last night. And I'm grateful to my hon.

Friend the Secretary of State for her update on the Naz Shah outage earlier this afternoon. We have a responsibility to improve the protections of air passengers, to give them the confidence that they need to continue supporting British aviation, and I believe this bill is the best way to do so. My own constituents have previously written to me to express their concerns about delays and disruptions to flights. In particular, one resident from Upton was deeply concerned about the cancellation of many flights worldwide earlier in March, triggered by rising oil prices.

In recent years, major disruptions seem to have become more commonplace from conflicts in Ukraine, in the Middle East, disrupting flight paths and the cost of jet fuel to global pandemics, shutting down almost all air traffic. Globally, these extraordinary events have had huge repercussions for Air Passenger and have highlighted the need for a more modern system that can adapt to a changing world. On a smaller level, we're all keenly aware of the many ways that the cost of living crisis has impacted us all.

People up and down the country work hard to save for holidays abroad, and the increasingly common choice to utilise short haul low fare flights benefits us all. Putting more money into a sector that employs tens of thousands of skilled, highly skilled workers and grows our economy up and down the country. But we must make sure that as we look to modernise and secure the aviation industry, we protect the consumer too and make sure their custom isn't taken for granted. It's right that we work to strengthen consumer rights for air passengers, including for flight delays and cancellations, and making sure price transparency for baggage and other costs that are often hidden through drip pricing.

I also welcome the attention to disabled passengers rights, ensuring that future regulation keeps all passengers in mind and keeps the access to the skies equitable. In our increasingly global world, securing our aviation sector is a vital aspect of our wider economic growth. But beyond that, the security for air passengers that the Civil Aviation Bill proposes will work to ensure that this economic strength is delivered hand in hand with consumers confidence that when

**** Possible New Speaker ****

things go wrong, they will be protected. Thank you. Danny Beales Madam Deputy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Danny Beales Madam Deputy Speaker and I'd like to thank the Secretary of State for the opening remarks and for the measures remarks and for the measures contained within this bill, which are broadly very welcome for passengers and for many in airport passengers and for many in airport communities such as my own. Sharing the Secretary of State's comments. the Secretary of State's comments. My thoughts are also with those individuals and families who face significant disruption this week through the failure of Nats.

It shows just how vital air traffic air travel is to people right across this country for business and for leisure, and what the impacts are when it goes wrong. There's been lots of discussion, although not directly related to this bill. Lots of discussion in this debate about the incident, about lessons that we can and should learn. And at Heathrow, particularly the major airport in my borough, we've unfortunately got somewhat used now to quite significant incidents. At Heathrow. We had a grid power outage recently which caused significant disruption.

There's been a number of incidents and quite clearly we do need to look at the resilience of our air travel system. We do need to look at planning for these incidents, which are increasingly common and can cause quite significant and harmful disruption to business and individuals. So I do hope that, as the Secretary of State said, there will be a thorough look at this. But more broadly than this instance, lessons can be learned by the sector and better resilience planning put into place.

This bill, however, I think is welcome news for for my constituents and travellers who come through my my my home borough of Hillingdon. We're a borough, not just one airport, but two. We are home to Heathrow, but also home to RAF Northolt, which has a significant and increasing civilian operation of private flights, which also come under civil aviation matters. So we're not kind of shy or kind of unknown to issues which arise around civil aviation, of flights, of disruption, of balancing some of the trade offs and challenges which come with air travel.

I think whilst there's much my friend, my neighbour from Hayes and Harlington, who's no longer in his place, has talked already about some of the concerns around potential Heathrow expansion and a third runway, which is a matter of this house, I'm sure will turn its attention to rightly very soon. But I think for those of us who believe in a a better but not necessarily bigger Heathrow, we do need to see measures to address the current challenges that Heathrow presents, regardless of expansion.

And that's why I think this bill is particularly welcome. We see much better consumer protections when things inevitably do sometimes go wrong. We see, I think, in this bill, action to come to tackle some of the Wild West kind of behaviours, the difference in approach of airlines that have contractors has been mentioned already. The difference in approach around hand baggage, hand luggage, but also we see around compensation, around delay payments. Such are different and and hard to navigate approach from different air providers.

Some of us, you know, who've experienced disruption, will often remember having to hunt out ER staff at 10:11 p.m. at night in airports when the desk is closed, trying to find anyone who seems to work for the airline concerned to find out what's going on, to find out what compensation you may be able to get to eventually get a a £5 paper voucher for refreshments, which will buy you about half a sandwich in a concession in an airport. So, you know, I think certainly support comments from members here around looking at best practice, upping the quality of provision and standardising it, and also learning from other sectors such as the rail sector, through, I think, comments been made about the auto delay repay of, of, of railways.

You know, having recently travelled Avanti for my sins, I've had to use that quite frequently. And it is quite actually a helpful tool. And at least there is a kind of very quick turnaround of the compensation you're owed. And notably, the compensation you get is a cash payment for the cash that you've paid for, the travel you've not gotten. Unfortunately, far too often, the disruption payments that we receive from airlines are an invitation to travel on their airline. Again, a voucher to travel again on Easyjet when you've not been able to travel the first time, which again seems quite perverse.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Very happy to give way. Will you. Give way? And just to kind of add to the grist of all of our experiences travelling, I've had a case raised with us where the customer had with us where the customer had chosen to pay for seat allocation to keep them together with their children. They got on the flight, children. They got on the flight, they'd then been moved and they then had to claim the compensation, then had to claim the compensation, claim the money back on an extra service that they'd paid for deliberately, otherwise they wouldn't have got a refund.

Does the hon. Member agree that these sorts of things have to be automated? They have to be quickened up to improve that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

passenger experience and improve our customer protection? I wholeheartedly agree, and I think this is a fantastic think this is a fantastic opportunity to address some of these issues, which have lingered for too long in the sector and for too long in the sector and boosting the enforcement powers of the Civil Aviation Authority as well, enabling faster enforcement well, enabling faster enforcement when those rights are not applied is also welcome. I think people here have already rightly raised here have already rightly raised the need to get a much tighter definition of extraordinary events and ensure that that is properly applied.

It can't be an opt in or opt out for airlines to get around these requirements, and I strongly welcome the removal of the cap around baggage specialist equipment, wheelchairs in the health committee and in other debates. We talk a lot about the challenge of people getting specialist adaptive equipment. It can take a long time to get this bespoke, personalised equipment, and then for that to be lost or damaged when you travel, and not to be able to reclaim the full costs is incredibly damaging and disruptive.

So strongly welcome that provision. I would just encourage the Minister that when that cap is removed and when this is applied, we must ensure that that doesn't lead to unintended consequences, that airlines are then unwilling to allow that equipment to be stowed, to be boarded, and they refuse to fly individuals because the insurance risk around that equipment. So I just hope that in the application of what is the right policy, we ensure there's no unintended consequences. I strongly support the provisions around modernising our airspace.

It has to be the case that, you know, these very outdated routes with modern flights, with different technology emerging, that is much less noise impacting. There are options, there are flexibilities which remove actually the very significant impact we do see on the very heavily trafficked flight paths that already exist. I agree that we must. The how we do this is just as important as if we do it, and it has to be done with a proper assessment and consultation of residents.

But it can't be the case that it's right that we see a few heavily trafficked routes that lead to a piling up of flights, the circling of flights, and the unnecessary additional burden on communities. I just would like to support the comments earlier around the the the value of this bill. Looking at abusive travellers and the impact that has on staff at both airport site and also cabin side of air travel. Air workers face an unacceptable amount of abuse of all forms, physical and verbal.

And it is increasing and that the stats from a recent unite survey of just 300 workers in Scottish airports showed that 90% had experienced verbal abuse on a regular basis, 75% intimidation and aggression, and almost a third some form of physical assault. And I think we're becoming a bit numb to this in our hospitals, our rail workers, our shop workers, we're becoming quite numb to this abuse and regular intimidation and violence that public sector and customer facing roles are experiencing. But we do have to take action.

We have on shop workers, and I hope that the provisions in this bill around clause 13, which give additional powers to create offences, we can explore and we can use those powers to properly regulate airline and airport abuse. And I think, crucially, and Unite the Union are right about this. It can't just be in the cabin. It has to be the whole journey from entry to the airport to your your, your your seat on the plane. Any abuse and intimidation has to be dealt with significantly, and it has to be a properly comprehensive system that ensures that when you are banned from one airline, this carries across the whole airport system.

It can't be at the expense of putting others at risk in other providers.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And just finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, on the issue of drop Charges, which has been much

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Charges, which has been much discussed. It's an issue. We had a very. Significantly busy Westminster Hall debate, which the Westminster Hall debate, which the Minister attended. And responded to. This is an issue of great concern This is an issue of great concern to my constituents. That the to my constituents. That the charges have gone up. At Heathrow and other airports we've heard of today, I think frustratingly for people locally, airports do not disclose what this revenue is used for.

It is not clear it is going to improve the situation, to invest in community transport, to avoid having to drive to the airport. There aren't the routes for staff and for visitors in the north or, or or in the right part of my borough to get to Heathrow directly on public transport. And it is. It is incredibly difficult, particularly for evening and night workers, to get there on public transport. So I hope in the provisions that have been added to the bill around looking at this, we will look significantly about increasing not just the transparency in drop off charges, making sure they are adequately advertised.

There's ways that are easy to pay them and they are fairly implemented, but also that the revenue genuinely goes to improve communities transport, that the transport impacts people. Don't drive to the airport directly, as has been said, but they do drive to the area around the drop off zone and local councils are made to pick up the parking enforcement costs of that, and of illegal car parks that are opened for commercial purposes without permission. So I hope that we can, through this review, properly address these issues, which significantly do lead to many concerns from my constituents and communities.

But I strongly welcome the provisions of this bill and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hope it makes swift progression to this place. Alistair Strathern thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a real pleasure to be able

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's a real pleasure to be able to speak in support of some really important measures in this bill that the government is bringing forward today, and I'd like to forward today, and I'd like to thank the Secretary of State for the way in which she set them out at the start of this debate, but also some of the updates and also some of the updates and assurances she was able to give about the further work that would be done after recent disruption to our travel over the last 48 hours.

our travel over the last 48 hours. I know my constituents who are affected by it, and many other constituents of other colleagues in this House will really be welcome to hear. To one measure, I think that's deeply important to me, and I know to many of my constituents, from correspondence with me, is making further progress to finally tackle some of the real accessibility issues that have affected far too many users of our airlines, who have those additional needs that are just not currently being met appropriately.

It's been heartbreaking hearing from correspondents over the last year since I was elected, the ways in which the dignity of some of my constituents have been failed from start to finish by the aviation sector, when they haven't been able to meet those needs appropriately. The removal of the compensation cap, I think, is a really important way of tackling some of the most egregious issues that affected my constituents. There's nothing more undignified than losing the very means you rely on to get around, and a lot of wheelchairs and other mobility equipment by airlines is an issue that needs far greater focus, and greater compensation is a useful tool to helping to drive that.

The dignity mine and others constituents have suffered as a result of these hasn't been capped, and nor too should the compensation they receive as a result. But as my friend the hon. Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip rightly pointed out, we must make sure in implementing this, we don't allow it to become an excuse for airlines to stand back from serving these constituents, too. So I'd welcome any clarification from the Minister when summing up of how we can make sure, when this important and long overdue action to remove the compensation cap is finally taking place, how we can ensure we do so in a way that ensures airlines aren't able to step back from providing services, but actually finally held to account for honouring the commitments they should be stepping up and delivering for those with accessibility needs.

We know, too, though, that accessibility needs don't stop, and just the need to ensure that their equipment is properly transported safely and securely, right from getting through airports to boarding planes to disembarking, there are many challenges that some of my constituents with additional needs continue to face airports, so I welcome the commitment to from the Minister and government to think about how we can start to go further to tackle some of these issues and this day and age, when so many of these issues just are resolvable.

It simply cannot be right that too many people do suffer indignity, do suffer impacts on their wellbeing, do suffer things that impact their willingness to fly and travel in the future as a result of a failure to meet these needs appropriately through airport, right the way to carrier. And so I look forward to hearing more from the Minister about how the government will be consulting on important measures to put these right, and I'm sure many colleagues will be taking the ability to intervene on him, potentially to hear at great length about some of these considerations to as as an MP of a constituency that neighbours an airport, Luton, to I'd be remiss not to touch as well on some of the really important potential measures that could be unlocked by the government's focus on modernising flight paths.

Now, there are, you know, well rehearsed arguments about the numbers of planes that should be flying in and out of airports, but there can be no excuse for using flight paths that don't minimise their disruption and impact on the communities around them, and minimise their environmental impact, too. It beggars belief that for decades, many of these flight paths right across the country have not been updated. And I'm glad that this government is determined to put that right. Taking a grip of the issue, taking the powers needed to drive this forward and to ensure that we can properly now consider how we manage and capitalise on the best use of new flight technology to significantly, hopefully reduce the impact of airline disruption, take off and landing, both in terms of the noise and the wider environmental impact to my constituents near the airport, deserve to know that everything is being done.

That could be done to reduce the impact of flight trajectories on their day to day lives, and I know a robust approach to modernising flight paths can play an important part in helping to deliver that. I know me and the Minister spoke about that at great length before, and I look forward to him hopefully being able to share a bit more detail today about specifically how we consider using these new powers, potentially in the context of Luton Airport, to improve the lives of my constituents in the neighbouring villages.

Alongside that, I know we've also had quite a bit of discussion today about how we support people to get to our airports, better. Luton Airport and the pathways to it are often running through my constituency, so it's one that a lot of my constituents, both those who use the airport and those who have to put up with some of the traffic from people travelling to the airport, have a really strong interest in. It was really encouraging to see the airport operator introduce a pilot scheme over August, where it would refund free buses to create free bus travel for anyone travelling to the airport for their holidays.

This seems like a great initiative to me supporting public transport, improving the viability of our vital bus networks at a time when they've never been more important to so many in my community. Cutting emissions of those travelling journeys by needing to use public transport, but also, crucially, reducing some of the impact of that travel to the airport on my constituents by taking traffic off the roads and onto those buses. It is at this stage, though, only a pilot, so I'd welcome the government's consideration both through national legislation but also direct engagement with the airport.

How we can consider to continue to encourage them to actively incentivise this type of active travel. I know as part of recent consent orders, strong active travel requirements have been put in place for Luton Airport. I'd note they are not currently meeting those, and I would urge the Minister and the government, in their conversations with the airport, to ensure they are meeting those, to consider how this pilot could be extended, ensuring that my constituents travelling to the airport can continue to benefit from free bus travel, but that also everything that can be done is being done to minimise the number of cars on the road travelling to the airport, reducing pollution but also, crucially, reducing some of those congestion impacts on my communities.

It sounds like a win and I'm sure with the Minister and the airports cooperation, we can deliver that big, bold win for my community as well. A number of other issues have been brought up in the debate that don't currently take part in the bill, but I'm sure the Minister would want to come back on, and we would want to echo to a particular one I want to touch on is the impact on those of who work in the airline industry, of the real rise we've seen in abuse and misbehaviour at times on planes being near to the airport, a number of my constituents are very proud to work for airlines.

They take great joy in the work they do. They take great privilege in being able to do it, and they feel lucky to have the opportunity to do so on their doorstep. But year after year, we've seen worrying trends of abusive behaviour from passengers, making that dream become, on occasions, a bit more of a daily nightmare. Unite the Unions survey shows some pretty damning statistics about the increasing incidence of abuse of airline staff, and I think it's open to all of us in this House to make sure we're taking note of them and acting accordingly.

It simply cannot be right that 75% of airline staff surveyed were subject to verbal abuse recently. It cannot be right that a third of them have been subject to physical intimidation or assault. That is something that is in our power to start to put right. Others have alluded to the fact that it is a worrying trend we're seeing across public facing services, but it's a worrying trend. It's happened to all of us in this House not to accept, but to act on, to step up, to protect our aviation workers, to protect their rights, to live and work in a safe, secure workplace and to make sure they know not just their employer, but we have their backs when they're subject to abuse that they shouldn't be, shouldn't be.

So can I thank the Minister and the government for everything they've already done in this bill, particularly the grip they're taking to modernise flight paths in a way that I truly hope can be utilised to improve the well-being of my community and reduce the polluting impact of flights taking off and landing at Luton Airport. But I look forward to further discussions, both in this debate and beyond, about how we can continue to improve the bill to protect workers and make sure we're doing everything we can to improve accessibility for passengers,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

airports. Shadow Minister Alison Griffiths. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It has been a positive debate today, It has been a positive debate today, but before I move on, I would just like to reiterate the point that like to reiterate the point that the Shadow Secretary of State and the Lib Dem Liberal Democrat spokesperson have made in calling spokesperson have made in calling for the government to make a statement on the third catastrophic systems failure of Nats. It is simply not good enough to come only to a Second Reading and not to allow members from across the House to question the Secretary of State.

I'm also deeply concerned that she thinks that six months is an acceptable period of time to return. A report on this subject, but moving on, Madam Deputy Speaker, on this side of the House, our ambition is to foster the conditions for safe, competitive and world leading aviation industry. This appears to be an uncontroversial aim, but as my right hon. Friend the Shadow Secretary of State has said, whilst this is an important administrative bill, the soaring ambition this sector deserves is sadly missing.

But I'd like to thank the right Honourable and hon. Members for their contributions today. The Member for Sutton and Cheam has provided significant support for Lord Young's amendment in the Lords, but I particularly enjoyed hearing about his British standard suitcase. But the the wider consensus has been on airport drop off charges. We have heard right across the House members endorsing a review and keeping clause seven in this bill. The chairman of the Transport Select Committee, the right hon.

Member for Brentford and Isleworth. The Member for Didcot and Wantage. For Mid Cheshire. For Hitchin. Macclesfield, North West Leicestershire and St Austell and Newquay have all mentioned and spoken at length in some cases on this subject, and I would endorse their thoughts on this. On these benches, we believe in the world leading potential of our aviation sector. We want to encourage the enterprise, innovation and competition, which will help it to thrive. But on the searing cost to consumers of drop off charges at airports, we urge the government to keep clause seven in this bill.

The government's surface access strategies and targets incentivise these whilst penalising drivers, airports openly use these charges to discourage people from travelling to the airport by car. At Gatwick, an airport heavily used by my own constituents in Bognor Regis and Littlehampton. It now costs £10 for ten minutes, £1 a minute to drop off a loved one. This cost is felt disproportionately by disabled and elderly passengers and others, with limited mobility for them, using public transport to get to the airport may not be an option.

On this side of the House. We welcome that this bill will provide greater protections to disabled passengers at the airport, yet this bill must not make it more expensive for them to get there. The government must address this contradiction and it should accept clause seven. Madam Deputy Speaker, yesterday we saw the limits of the consumer protections put in place by this bill. A national air traffic control systems failure that has resulted in 900 flights so far being disrupted.

The knock on disruptions are likely to last for days. In the Lords, the government voted down Lord Young's amendment. This would have mandated a scheme to reimburse airlines and passengers for failures outside of their control. The government assured peers a reimbursement scheme was unnecessary. Yet now airlines and passengers will be forced to pick up the tab for cancellations over which they have no control. Is that fair? May I close by expressing my thanks to Conservative and Lib Dem colleagues in the other place, led by Lord Moylan, after their hard work, this.

This bill now delivers the necessary continuity of regulation that keeps our aviation industry safe. Following our departure from the European Union, and it has enhanced the safeguards around travel arrangements for disabled passengers on this side of the House. Despite the concerns that we have outlined, His Majesty's loyal opposition will support this bill's progress through the House, together with its aims of driving economic growth, strengthening aviation security and enhancing consumer protections.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call Minister Keir Mather. Yes. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is great to be back at the despatch box, and let me begin by thanking all members for their thanking all members for their participation in today's debate. But before I begin, I too would like to acknowledge the significant like to acknowledge the significant disruption caused by yesterday's air traffic control faults and apologise to all passengers whose travel plans were affected. Civil aviation, as those events have shown, is a cornerstone of our national prosperity.

Supporting jobs, investment and connectivity across the United Kingdom. This is an important piece of legislation and one that is rightly regarded as an opportunity to strengthen a critical sector for the United Kingdom. But the aviation sector has evolved significantly in recent years, both as a result of rapid technological developments, new aircraft capabilities, and the emergence of new airspace users, including drones. The current regulatory framework requires modernisation to adapt to these developments. At the same time, the UK's departure from the European Union has limited our ability to update certain areas of aviation regulation.

The sector has also had to respond to major external shocks from the unprecedented disruption caused by Covid-19 to, more recently, instability in the Middle East. And to meet these challenges, we need a framework that is flexible enough to adapt to change, to support innovation and to keep passengers at its heart. This bill will help deliver that framework. The government has also listened carefully to the scrutiny that the Bill has received in the House of Lords. We made a number of significant changes during its passage through the Other place, particularly to strengthen accessibility provisions, passenger protections, accountability and parliamentary oversight, and I would like to thank peers from across political parties and the Minister, the noble Lord Hendy, for their efforts to achieve this.

As a result, the bill before the House today is stronger than the one first produced. Now, I've paid close attention to the points raised across the house this evening, and I would now like to address them in turn, starting with the remarks by the Shadow Secretary of State and the Shadow Minister. And may I warmly welcome her to her place. It's great to be working alongside her. They have made an impassioned defence of the aviation sector and aviation businesses. I only wish that there were more conservative backbenchers here to listen to their impassioned pleas.

May I, may I just make two two points? One, in regard to the shadow Secretary of State's point around making a statement, I would say to him, through my experience as a government whip, that it is never wise to question the speaker's decisions around what is allocated or not allocated. I'll just finish my point allocated in this House. But I would just say to him on a genuine point, I am more than welcome to come and answer any questions that he may have in this place.

And I know that the shadow Minister also raised a really important point, too, about the fact that the Secretary of State has asked the CAA to report within six months. May I just say that when we had the major outage in 2023, it took two years for the CAA to make a similar report, of which they made 32 recommended 34 recommendations, of which 32 have been implemented. So a six month time frame is a much shorter, sharper window in which to get definitive answers to these questions.

Alongside the fact that Nats is required to provide a report to the CAA within a week of the incident taking place to fully explain the implications of what

**** Possible New Speaker ****

has happened. And I'll now give way to the Shadow Secretary of State. And I thank the Minister for that. I just want to make it very that. I just want to make it very clear that in no way. Questioning what the speaker decided, the speaker made it very clear to me speaker made it very clear to me when he spoke to me that he is his understanding that the government were going to put forward a statement. That's what he that's statement. That's what he that's what the Speaker The government frontbencher can shake their heads, but that's what I was told by by the speaker.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

the speaker. Order, order! I understand the points that have been raised here, but the hon. Gentleman might well be advised to not relate private conversations with the speaker to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the chamber. Richard Holden well, OK, thank

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Richard Holden well, OK, thank you very much. But I think the the point I was making is that I was basically being accused by the basically being accused by the government, by the government Minister of of saying something which I hadn't said. And I just want to make it incredibly clear what was said. And because the real the real question is here is for parliamentary scrutiny, for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

parliamentary scrutiny, for parliamentary scrutiny. Minister. Well, well, of course, if the Shadow Secretary of State is of the opinion that I've mischaracterised what he said, I will, of course, withdraw it. But I suppose we should should let the usual channels take their course and figure this one out. I would also just like to add that I was slightly remiss in what I said previously, because it's not 32, it's all 34 of the recommendations have been implemented. I would like to turn to a very serious point that the shadow Secretary of State raised about drop off charges, and about the amendment that was made in the House of Lords.

I would like to confirm to the House that the government does not have an objection to conducting a review into this matter. I do think that we need to think carefully about the terms of such review, about the length of time that such review takes to ensure that we can engage with the range of issues that backbenchers have brought up today around transparency, around charging, about ability to pay, about free drop off points. And I do understand people's frustrations when public transport challenges prevent people from accessing airports.

And the hon. Member for Macclesfield made that point very powerfully. I do want to acknowledge. At the same time, though, Madam Deputy Speaker, that airport drop off charges do operate as part of a wider framework. They're often used to manage congestion, a point made by the hon. Member for Harlow, and to meet Madam Chair targets and to fund infrastructure improvements. But this could all be part of the conversation that could take place through a review. And our approach will, of course, always be to protect passengers while supporting our airports.

As businesses. Point oh, I am spoilt. I'll give way to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire Alison Taylor. I thank. You for for giving way. And he

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You for for giving way. And he would have heard me probably great, great length in my speech for purely good reasons. Talking about purely good reasons. Talking about the importance of the subsidised bus travel that Luton Airport had offered over the summer holidays to offered over the summer holidays to not just my constituents, but anyone looking to travel from their airport this August might this way. airport this August might this way. And might these subsidies be a really positive way, rather than just increasing the cost of drop offs, but a positive way to encourage people to make that modal shift, to travel sustainably and to take people out of cars and onto

**** Possible New Speaker ****

buses. Getting to Luton Airport into the future. Well, my hon. Friend raises a very intriguing idea, and I'd be very intriguing idea, and I'd be very glad to meet with him to discuss it further. We, of course, want to be promoting as many people using public transport to reach our using public transport to reach our airline and our airports as possible. And I will also just give way to my friend from the Transport Select Committee.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Select Committee. And I do thank. Him for giving way. Of course, none of us wants to see the roads approaching, our airports more congested than they already are. But on drop off charges we heard about Gatwick Airport. I checked their website. It seems that if you're a blue badge holder, it is free to use the drop off service. But can I just ask that irrespective of when this review takes place or even if it takes place, I am sure the Minister agree that all airports in the UK, if they're charging drop off charges, they should not be applied to people who are blue badge holders, and it should be easy for those

**** Possible New Speaker ****

people to access the airport. My hon. Friend makes a powerful point because he is, of course, right that people with disabilities are disproportionately more likely to use drop off services at to use drop off services at airports than other customers. That means that it is incredibly important that airports facilitate that wherever possible. And I'm that wherever possible. And I'm pleased to say that more often than not, robust procedures are in place to ensure that passengers with to ensure that passengers with disabilities do have free drop off at airports.

But that, of course, needs to be something that is adopted widely across the across

**** Possible New Speaker ****

our airports sector. May I turn? Oh, really briefly. I'm very, very grateful for the. Minister, who's been very

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister, who's been very generous. He will know on this point of getting more people to be able to access airports on public able to access airports on public transport. I've raised concerns with him that the Heathrow expansion National Policy Framework expansion National Policy Framework Draft isn't strong enough on making sure that if we are to have a third runway at Heathrow, we also get the runway at Heathrow, we also get the improved rail links, including a southern rail link, which could well benefit my constituents.

Can I urge him, as the government looks at the responses to that consultation, to think again and really strengthen that so we can make sure we get not only the third runway, but the infrastructure that would be needed to support it.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He is, of course, right to say that that should be our focus, because in the four tests that we have set out upon which a have set out upon which a development consent order for Heathrow expansion would be granted, all of them are dependent on ensuring that we have adequate surface access to the airport, both for his constituents and people across the country and the people across the country and the people who work at the airport too, and that is around air quality and also around carbon impacts.

So that must be a focus, and it will be be a focus, and it will be considered. Now that the consultation has closed, may I turn to the remarks by the chair of the Transport Select Committee and start by sharing her anger and frustration for passengers who have been affected over the last two days, but also to thank the staff, the aircrew aboard planes, for the difficult work that they have undertaken, to make sure that people are ultimately safe and that their welfare is protected, and I understand that that will be many of the constituents for the right hon.

Member for Hayes and Harlington doing that important work. She asks if passenger rights are fit for purpose at present. Well, this bill gives us the power to update passenger rights where we do not feel that they go far enough. This taking place through secondary legislation, can ensure that all members can feed their experiences into this process. Clause three of the bill also means that the Secretary of State must have particular regard to those who are most adversely affected when things go wrong and when disruption does occur.

And she spoke powerfully about whether we need to have proper resilience and contingency planning for airports in relation to people with disabilities, but also parents and having baby food. All these considerations need to be part of that process, and I also thank her for championing the work for the hon. Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford, who speaks incredibly powerfully about his family's experience of travelling and using a wheelchair to travel and fly. And I hope that he is reassured that the measures in this bill to lift the compensation cap for domestic flights for damage to wheelchairs goes far enough.

I just want to turn next to another point raised by the chair of the Transport Select Committee. She made the point that there needs to be a single standard of treatment for everybody who uses our airports. Building on the commitments in her committee's fantastic report, Access Denied, I can confirm to her that the department is looking at this issue very closely through an accessible travel charter spearheaded by my hon. Friend the Minister and the Member of Parliament for Wakefield. It will have key expectations, pledges, commitments and make sure that treatment is consistent for passengers with disabilities from the train that they board to get to the airport, to the aeroplane door.

That is incredibly important. She makes a broader point as well about public transport access in relation to airport drop off charges, and the point around taxi access is also something that I'd be glad to discuss with her. Further, I know that it can cause unintended consequences around community disruption, particularly around unlicensed taxis, and I know that's an issue for the hon. Member for Uxbridge as well. She is also right, and multiple members are right to point to the issue around staff safety.

We should all be clear in this House that any form of abuse or intimidation of those who work at our airports is totally unacceptable, and the government will work with airports and airlines to stamp it out wherever we can and work on this issue should be forthcoming shortly. I'm very pleased to be meeting with Unite the Union on this matter tomorrow, and I thank them for their consistent campaigning on this work. Next, I would like to turn to the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage.

He raised a really important point about scrutiny and delegated powers as part of this bill, and whether or not there has been overreach when it comes to the provisions in the bill that relate to CAA rule making and the need to have those safety making powers within the CAA, I do believe this is critically necessary because aviation safety rule making is highly technical. It's fast moving, yet the current system forces every change through a process that's very duplicative and resource intensive.

There are strong safeguards to that process. Ministers are going to be able to set the CAA's priorities through a published framework, and during Lords passage, the government also introduced amendments to strengthen parliamentary scrutiny of the new aviation rule making framework and actually implemented all of the associated associated recommendations from the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, who he will know are very assiduous in their efforts to ensure that Parliament is robustly consulted on these issues. But I'm glad, more broadly, that him and his colleagues are supporting the bill at Second Reading, and I look forward to engaging constructively with him on his amendments.

The hon. Member for Mid Cheshire spoke very powerfully about his experiences at Manchester Airport, both in regards to the use of sunflower lanyards, but also the sunflower room that they have. This bill is about making sure that consumer standards are upheld and giving the CAA the ability to do that, about strengthening people's rights through the Secretary of State having the power to do so. But we also can't omit the excellent work that is already happening at airports up and down the country, carried out by the staff who make those places positive areas to travel from for people across our country.

And I think that also needs to be recognised apart as part of this debate. The hon. Members for Mid Bedfordshire and Uxbridge both raised a concern that when the compensation cap is lifted for damage to wheelchairs on domestic flights, airports or airlines might withdraw from their willingness to be able to take these these wheelchairs onto their planes. I can assure them that I do think airports will work hard to comply with these measures and airlines also. But this bill contains provisions for the CAA to enforce consumer rights, and I'm sure that that will be part of any process that takes place in this space.

I should also say, more broadly, that although this extends to domestic flights and there is an issue with us extending any further due to the Montreal Convention, I was pleased to speak to the United Kingdom's Permanent representative to ICAO this morning about this very issue and how we might raise it more robustly in international fora. The hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam raises our common obligation to think about all questions affecting aviation, with a simultaneous consideration of their effect upon the planet.

I'm glad that he thinks that we're engaging on some of these questions adequately, and I'm always happy for him to push me further when he thinks we're not. We are developing a world leading SAF mandate and RCM. The changes to airspace modernisation can mean that flights are more efficient and they burn less fuel. The jet zero strategy is pushing us much further in this direction. More broadly, the future of flight industry group the DFT is undertaking pioneering work on aviation sustainability, electric and hydrogen as forms of propulsion in aviation, as well as promoting higher standards through Corsia at ICAO.

So I hope he feels that we're moving in the right direction. I'm always happy for him to push me further, but he does ask me a valid question around oversight of the CAA and Nats, a view shared by the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington. He shares my view that we need to do everything possible to minimise the chance of what happened yesterday happening again. He will know that the CAA, as a regulator, can put mechanisms on Nats for delay related targets, alongside penalties that reduce airline charges when targets are missed.

But we know that we need to go further than that. We know that more needs to be done and as the Secretary of State said, the the CAA will undertake an independent investigation to understand what happened and by asking the CAA to review immediately, we can ensure, as Ministers that there is strong oversight for passengers and if he believes that this should lead to further enhancements for air passenger rights, it is clause one of this bill that will allow us to do so. So I think that's a point very well made by the hon.

Gentleman. Now, my hon. Friend the Member for North West Leicestershire. It was a pleasure to visit East Midlands Airport the other week, and she raises an opportunity that presents itself in this Bill through its measures on slot regulation, to think about how we can help our air freight sector to perform in a more agile way, to move more goods through our airports and to boost growth for UK plc. She also raised questions about allergies and how we can protect passengers travelling with allergies.

That is incredibly important and that is why it is on the face of the bill and will form part of the consultation as formed under clause two. She also asked me when the consultation on these issues should take place, and that will take place within 12 months of the passage of this act, and I thank her and the Member for St Austell and Newquay for making powerful arguments in defence of our regional airports. To turn to the questions from the hon. Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey, I thank him for his offer to work on a cross-party basis to ensure that we learn the lessons from what happened yesterday and ensure effective oversight of Nats.

I also want to say to him that we're in the early stages of understanding what the impact is on consumers and on the aviation sector, but I will, of course, do my very best to keep the house informed as we get more information. He raises issues to do with the Ministry of Defence and RAF Lossiemouth, which I will pass on to the Ministry of Defence around regular training exercises there, noise impacts and how that intersects with civil aviation, and I'll write to him on that issue.

Yeah, I'd be glad to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving way has given an excellent speech. way has given an excellent speech. To take up this fantastic. Other people have seen the landing. But people have seen the landing. But what. Was the point? Raised by the Strangford Hayes and Harlington when he spoke about the recent issue with the fire at electrical issue with the fire at electrical substation in his constituency airport? I'm just very aware that airport? I'm just very aware that we're seeing increasingly.

Looking for extreme weather. We've seen the heat over the summer. I suspect we'll see extreme cold during the winter. I wonder if he's considered the challenges that he's going to face our our, our aviation sector and whether he's considered what he

**** Possible New Speaker ****

thinks the government can do to mitigate those issues. Well, I thank him for my speech is fantastic. It certainly detailed, is fantastic. It certainly detailed, and I know we've been cruising at altitude for some time, so I'll do my best to to get on with it. He my best to to get on with it. He raises a broader point about climate resilience at our airports. I can assure him that the DFT takes this matter incredibly seriously this matter incredibly seriously and is progressing work across government to think about how we can become more adaptive in can become more adaptive in partnership with the private sector, to deal with these issues.

And turning back to the matter of the legislative consent motion as it relates to clause seven, I can confirm to him that it does engage the legislative consent process for both Scotland and Northern Ireland, and my officials are engaging with their counterparts on this matter, and I'll be sure to keep him informed. The hon. Member for Horsham asks me about the subject of this private member's bill on creating an ombudsman for the CAA. It is my view that the costs of setting up a potential ombudsman outweigh what the benefits of it would bring.

Complex CAA decisions, such as changes to flight paths, are already subject to very extensive consultation. I'm of the view that the CAA has robust remedies for persons who are dissatisfied with issues to do with customer service, including consideration by the Independent Complaints Assessor and the work of the CAA, is also subject to oversight by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. And that's before we get into a broader conversation about the Cap 161616 process, but I'm happy to discuss this with him after today's debate ahead of Committee stage, to think about what more we can do to address his concerns, and to turn to the comments by the right hon.

Member for Hayes and Harlington. He also raised a concern about the CAA reporting within six months. And it's not dealing with this with the immediacy that it requires. I can assure him that that report will be coming through from Nats to the CAA within a week, which will provide their initial assessment of what has taken place, and we will shortly have more to say on what the impacts are, and I will endeavour to keep the House informed. He raises that point about whether there will be sufficient follow up actions.

It's a fair challenge, but I would just say that when the outage occurred in 2023, 34 recommendations were proposed to mitigate reoccurrences by the CAA, all of which has been implemented on the question of CAA oversight, I do agree with him that this is massively important. I would just say that we have a robust system that exists currently for CAA oversight, although we can, of course, debate whether to take it further. There's an independent complaints assessor. The CAA's work is subject to oversight by the FPS.

Oh, economic regulation decisions can be appealed to the CMA and there is, of course, the cap 616 process for airspace modernisation, but I'd be glad to engage with him about where we can take these matters further. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, to begin to draw my remarks to a close, this bill is about modernising the UK's aviation framework so that it remains fit for the future, supporting growth, strengthening passenger protections, particularly for those who find travelling through our airports most challenging and maintaining the highest standards of aviation safety and the UK's formidable reputation in this space.

Our ambition is to build a competitive aviation system that delivers for passengers and keeps pace with technological and operational change. Today's debate has been wide ranging and a useful opportunity to discuss important issues with hon. Members. I thank all of those who have contributed, and I look forward to continuing the discussion at Committee stage.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And with that, I beg to move. The question is that the bill be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the bill be now read a second time, as many as are of that opinion say aye. of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

contrary, no. I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. Programme motion to be moved formally. I beg to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move. The question is, as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that opinion, say I. I.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I. Of the contrary, no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. formally.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move. The question is, as on the Order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is, as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that opinion say aye. Of the contrary, no. I think the ayes have it. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it, whereas a means motion to be moved formally. I beg to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is, as on the Order Paper, as many as are of that Paper, as many as are of that opinion say aye. Of the contrary, no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Motion number six on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

trade union and labour relations consolidation Minister to move. Not moved.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Not moved. Not moved. Point of order Richard Holden. Thank you very much indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker. Members have Madam Deputy Speaker. Members have not had the chance today to properly raise the issue of the Nats blackout, affecting Nats blackout, affecting 100/100,000 passengers, costing UK aviation tens of millions of pounds. The Secretary of State has not The Secretary of State has not indicated that the government will provide a statement today in the chamber. Could you tell me what this side of the House and all members who might be interested in raising issues around this affecting their constituents can do

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in order to get answers from the government? That is not a matter for the chair, but the Treasury Benches will have heard his remarks, and he will be aware of other parliamentary mechanisms open to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

parliamentary mechanisms open to him. To raise this matter further. I beg. adjourn.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

adjourn. The question is that this House do now adjourn, doctor Rupa Huq. Thank you, Madam. Deputy Speaker. I want.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I want. To flash back. To the summer of 2020 for Labour back in power and with echoes of 90s Britpop, an Oasis reunion. Alas, the latter is only remembered now for the ticket price rip off that happened. Endless online queues, tickets ever inflating during the transaction process, and then our pioneering manifesto commitment to stamp it out. But two years on, legislation hasn't yet hit the statute book. One top manager told me I was really encouraged by the government's public commitment to stop profiteering on the resale market, but my optimism has taken a dent through stalling and prevarication.

I'm just pointing this out to the Minister today. We know our PM is famously a music fan. He's unafraid to take action where needed. For example, yesterday on Palestine. So I say to the Minister, let's get rid of this once and for all, and I have my own sale of tickets, cultural and sporting events already made to do the job. Our live music industry is part of a sector that's worth 8 billion to the national coffers every year. We're the second biggest exporter of recorded music soft power, but

**** Possible New Speaker ****

touts are costing the UK. I beg to you that this House do now adjourn. The question is that this House

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this House do now adjourn. Doctor Rupa Huq. Thank you so much, Madam Deputy Speaker. No, no.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

No, no. I think I'll carry on where I was. Shall I? Look? We know that was. Shall I? Look? We know that the UK music industry is a major player in our national economy, but £145 million a year is being lost to touts in a cost of living crisis. And these towns aren't like the old fashioned. The man in a flashy Mac with sort of tickets in his pocket saying, oh, do you want the ticket? They're online bots doing it through a very sophisticated way.

And as Lord Brennan, the artist formerly known as Kevin, says so wisely in his fan led review, everyone's life is enriched when they gather with others to enjoy live music. It shouldn't be unobtainable, and it shouldn't be out of reach because of profiteering by the opportunistic. There's two issues here rip off resale and dynamic pricing. So the first, it happens when minutes after gigs are sold out, resale tickets appear on sale online for thousands of pounds. All arts ought to be accessible to all so real fans can get tickets.

Not that they're hoovered up by these bots. Yes, I certainly would.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend agree that community owned venues are actually better protected against this kind of touting. If live music belonged to the people who watched it and to the people who watched it and used it, that would be the way it would be protected most through community ownership. Through cooperative ownership.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

cooperative ownership. Yeah, yeah yeah. My friend makes such a brilliant point. The mutualisation of our point. The mutualisation of our venues is an important thing. We know that we now have a Prime Minister who's a Labour and Co-op MP, I believe. So we hope to see those things in practice. But actually I've got an example of the co-op arena I will come to. So even sadly, it doesn't seem to be. I think until we have proper legislation to get rid of this once and for all, then we can have certainty.

I give way to the hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Member for Strangford Tottenham. Jim Shannon, congratulate the hon. Lady for Ealing Central and Acton for bringing this. I'm always Acton for bringing this. I'm always encouraged by the hon. Lady's energy and enthusiasm for the subject matter that she's brought subject matter that she's brought forward. The hon. Lady is aware of action taken against a company, StarHub, in 2024, following concerns that customers were concerns that customers were initially showing artificially low headline prices only for mandatory fees to be added later on in the fees to be added later on in the purchasing process.

That meant that 5000 UK customers were eligible for refunds, but delaying the disclosure of unavoidable fees can exploit customers attention. Given that transparency is key and I think that's what the hon. Lady is seeking, does the hon. Lady agree that current protections should be made sufficient to ensure that customers are shown the full and accurate price of a ticket before

**** Possible New Speaker ****

committing themselves to a purchase? I certainly do agree with that, and that is one of the provisions in my excellent bill. Yes, transparency. People should know what they're getting into. And this what they're getting into. And this doesn't really just apply to theatre football. Sorry, to music, football, theatre, all sorts of other things are becoming subject other things are becoming subject to these processes. In July, which magazine found that seats for Lewis Capaldi's current O2 run in London, tickets for those were on resale sites for £1,400, when they should have been originally between 32 and 111, and even a ticket for the All Points East Festival with Ray 114,666 on Viagogo, which he mentioned.

The original price was only meant to be 80, so this surge gouge dynamic pricing where things fluctuate, we're used to it. We're used to variability with planes, trains, Uber, Amazon, but it's creeping into all of our lives. And it's made easier with data mining because this algorithmic calculation can factor in demand willingness to pay availability. So Oasis actually claimed that it wasn't surge pricing with them. It was tiered pricing. There were different levels of ticket. So that's why by the time people were at the front of the queue, the £100 ones had gone and it was £300.

But I do feel the array of these

**** Possible New Speaker ****

different premium standing can be a bit confusing. Yeah. I'm grateful.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful. To her for giving way to making a typically entertaining and informative speech. I wonder if informative speech. I wonder if you'd agree with me from the customer's point of view. There doesn't appear to be that much difference between tiered pricing difference between tiered pricing and dynamic pricing. It's just when when the cheap seats have gone, you have to pay the premium and there's have to pay the premium and there's something, at best, unedifying about the whole concept of tiered pricing.

And and is that something

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that she thinks that the government should be looking at when they bring forward the bill? Yeah. I mean, I think if there's transparency, if you're getting a sort of fan package and you get your dinner in it as well, and there's other extras on top, you could maybe understand why, but could maybe understand why, but this mysterious tiered pricing, when there's no difference between the two one is called premium. One is not. It is quite baffling. And is not. It is quite baffling.

And in my bill it actually says that on the site all the way through, there the site all the way through, there should be in real time the amount of tickets at which price. So you don't get a nasty surprise when

**** Possible New Speaker ****

you're at the front. Yes. Well, I. Do. Think the hon. Lady for giving way and she, she's touching on something that's really important because the other part of this is that length of time that people have to sit in front of a screen to have to sit in front of a screen to get to the front of the queue. That's fine. If you can afford to take a day off work, that's fine. take a day off work, that's fine. If you are flexible in your work, that allows you to sit and do that.

But if you work shifts, if you work But if you work shifts, if you work in a job that takes you out of your home, actually it means that there is a structural barrier to lower paid people, mainly from working class communities being able to access the theatre, the arts, the sports. That is the enrichment that we are saying they should have. And I do wonder whether, as part of her bill, she might consider looking at

**** Possible New Speaker ****

how we remedy that bill. He is so right. And actually, we've seen this happening with things like the Royal Opera House, things like the Royal Opera House, with the ballet, and these are perceived as elitist correctly or incorrectly. So you don't want to incorrectly. So you don't want to make an elitist system more elitist. And again, people that have the time luxury of spending time to time luxury of spending time to refresh all day. In fact, I found a times article from January 2025.

times article from January 2025. His remark reminded me of that. It says touts are loathed as parasitic, but they provide a valuable service, sorting the hassle and risk of finding new buyers and reselling tickets. What I think there's an important bit missing from that sentence at a vastly inflated mark up price. So he's completely right. So yeah, these practices do have their defenders. And when I was trying to get signatures for my bill, there was resistance from some Tories, some might say, and they were kind of saying that this is the free market.

You can't have interference in all of our lives, but our constituents want this. They deserve transparency. They shouldn't be at the mercy of predatory touts, exploiting fan loyalty to, secondarily, sell off these astronomical marked up prices and shutting out the masses, as everyone said, from accessing cultural events that enrich us all. So I also said in this bill that there should be a maximum price cap and and tickets should have the prices on them printed as far as possible.

Because, as my friend from Stoke said, after the adrenaline rush of the virtual queue, there's pressure when you're at the front to snap up what's left. If you've had the time to be there and then you have the buyer's remorse afterwards, how much? How many thousands did I display? And it's too late. And again, the same times article says while I might struggle to justify paying thousands to see England play, it is about the World Cup. The truth is, others will. It is the harsh reality of the market.

It doesn't need to be like that. I found an interview with Robert Smith where he says that he's had longevity because he prices his things affordability affordably. He wants people to come back. He wants people to wear the t shirts. He still makes a profit, but it doesn't have to be the maximum price point that the market allows. And with Viagogo StubHub, in terms of multiples, there's no there's no limits. And, you know, children were left in tears recently at the Co-op Arena in Manchester because they wanted to see the girl group Cat's Eye and another of these horrible sites, Harlow tickets, because within seconds the real thing sold out.

So their parents were forced onto their three £568 for four tickets. These kids got to the venue and it was for 16 year olds only. No notification of that, no recourse. Awful. Look, not all resellers are baddies. So Twickets is an ethical resale site and the Albert Hall, the roundhouse, LW theatres, Ed Sheeran and Adele all use this as a partner and they only allow tickets to be sold at below all the original price original face value price and they actually prohibit any increase.

Every listing is checked manually to ensure there is a real ticket behind it, and you wouldn't necessarily have to do that. You could put a maximum multiple in, you could put a maximum percentage because there might be genuine reasons why you have to. You can't make the date. You might need to resell it. The other one that caught my eye, the tickets for good app from Sheffield. They've distributed 1.4 million surplus unsold music, theatre, comedy and sport tickets and they donate and heavily discount these tickets for key workers and low income individuals.

And that, again, all my friends who've joined in have said opens up live arts and opportunities. Because let's not forget, for many, even the face value price is a stretch. And music is so important for wellbeing, for social connection, all those things. And I have to say, Madam Deputy Speaker, actually it's ten past, so I will throw this in because we're not as late as we would have been. Yeah, I do remember when these tickets weren't so expensive. The first ones I bought was for blur at the time of Modern Life is Rubbish.

A pair of them. They were £8 each from the Kentish Town Forum. I went to a window. A lady, I think the cleaner said, I'll have to get the right person. They came along. I handed over the cash money, got the change, I think. I haven't done the calculation, but we have done actually for my constituent. I haven't done the calculation factoring in current inflation. But my constituent, Ross Cowan, told me that she saw the Smiths at the Hammersmith Palais in my own borough.

I've actually seen Rick Astley and Bros in the same venue. But anyway, she saw them there in 1984 and the price was £3.50. And she actually said in those days, a student like me could go have a few drinks at the bar, could afford to get home. All these things now, given if you put in the Bank of England multiple of inflation, guess what that is in today's money. Three £5,012 so I think these things have gone up here and I have the same age we remember when things weren't so maybe same bracket.

Anyway, the elasticity of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

demand. Madam Deputy Speaker Oh, don't you love it? Yes, I. Would very much. I think one of the things that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think one of the things that has changed over time is the fact that there's now so much emphasis on live performance for musicians to be able, be able to make an income, perhaps you would agree with me that also the streaming services, we need to look really closely at that because the market closely at that because the market has become distorted. So there is such a great emphasis on making money through touring.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

money through touring. Rupa Huq yeah, he is correct. I think the most accessed site is YouTube and they got get not a penny from that. I'm sorry. I'm guilty of looking at music on YouTube as well. The old The Pops appearances from the 80s or whatever, but and Run Around that was a good programme. Swap shop, all of them. But anyway, no, he's right. We need to remunerate. In fact, in Scotland they've just introduced a universal basic income for musicians or something, or they're talking about it anyway.

We don't like that Scottish Government. Boo! They're not even here today. Where are they? Oh, that's them for you anyway. Look, Viagogo actually welcomed the delay of the legislation. And they're notorious for selling these fake tickets that when you turn up to the venue, don't even work. Anyway, they did a briefing for MPs where they said that they're stopping piracy. I mean, it's just nonsense, but they're very sinisterly. Their CEO, Eric Baker, at an on stage event at JP Morgan, boasted how he has the governments here.

I hope my good friend the Minister can put the dampener on this. He said that he's been five times to DSIT and DCMS between November and May, and he's got the government in the palm of his hand. They're listening to him. He's educating them on the complexities of the drawbacks. Please don't listen to these people. Listen to the constituents. The Guardian, in fact, before the last election, found some footage of a secret meeting of touts, they they were near London Bridge somewhere, establishing a lobbying group and saying they would sabotage Guardians words.

The proposals. One of them even is seen from the stage saying, look, we can all chip in. We'll get a good lobbyist, because if this happens, we are sorry, I'm parliamentary language, Madam Speaker. We are f star, star, star e d, if you know what I mean. So look, surely that's the point we want to do those people over because they've been screwing the public something chronic for ages. The power needs to rebalance towards the fans so that we can have arts for all.

But these guys at the moment are continuing, unperturbed, undisturbed. So I urge my hon. Friend, be bold, stand up to the StubHub, the Viagogo see all these nasty people. Zoran Mamdani, he had a campaign at the World Cup called greed over good, because obviously the tickets there were sky high and dynamically priced, and as a result, $1,050 tickets were ring fenced for residents of New York's boroughs. And he even managed to negotiate free bus travel. Because in the Brennan review, it does say that transport is prohibited.

So I worry that we risk falling behind other advanced economies on this. The US Justice Department sued Live Nation, Ticketmaster's parent company, and they had to pay up to $280 million after a lawsuit in damages. And this was for a sort of scandal, a bit like the Oasis one, but it was Taylor Swift and the Eras Tour. Ireland had all but banned secondary ticketing since 2021. Australia this year they're one includes resale, dynamic pricing and drip pricing. These hidden fees, what are those for? It shouldn't be you know, if you go down to the web tonight you're sure of a nasty surprise because that's what's happening now.

And there's a million US sorry. Australian dollar fines 100,000,100 million fines for offenders. So you know, you scare them with something stiff like that. Please, Minister. And look, just as we speak in Wembley, Bon Jovi are taking to the stage. Tickets. Yesterday, if you looked were £80. But then there was this service charge fee £17. Oh six making the whole thing. 9706 21.3% that's a huge mark-up. And not just then the Pope, Jay-Z all around that 20% mark for processing, handling, administration Y also per and not per transaction.

We've just got rid of the hated two child limit in recognition of families. These things can add up per person. And sadly, it's happening with, as I say, the Royal Opera House, the National Theatre, which is publicly funded. It's not a charity. They're now introducing an element of these fees and dynamic pricing. I long for the days you could see in the queue who was in front of you. It wasn't, you know, there was some predictability there. So I'm not against dynamic or surge pricing per se, seen as exploitative, but it could go down.

I once saw Elvis Costello at Hyde Park. The real headliner was meant to be Elton John, but he cancelled, so it was good for me. I'm not announcing fan, so saw him for free. And, you know, people can understand those sort of demand factors, like the price of the pumps at Acton affected by the Straits of Hormuz. But it's just when we don't know why they're doing this, it annoys us. So in conclusion, I would say, yeah, we need to bear in mind these ethical considerations.

We need transparency. We need certainty. The draft bill in the King's Speech. Welcome. I love the minister's article in the Daily Record that says touts your time is up, but government does seem to be taking its time on actually introducing a bill to Parliament. So I say hurry up, do it today. Look, this government already has fixed many things on the cost of living crisis. So today, can I ask the Minister, can he please confirm when this is happening? I know we've been told when parliamentary time allows, but it would be an easy win.

As I say, there's a ready made bill up here to do it. We could just make that law. You know, where there's a will, there's a way. We've done it with driving tests. And the Prime Minister is a music fan. The Ukraine war, tragic war for prime Ministers. He's the only one who's strummed a guitar with the troops.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

So let's do this. Let's not look back in anger. Let's make it happen. Minister Minister. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Can I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton on what was a very dramatic speech. I don't know if she's hankering after her youth if she's hankering after her youth by going after the places in which she's seen concerts before and wishing she could go back there, particularly with my hon. Friend particularly with my hon. Friend from Manchester. But it was a tremendous speech and I think we would agree with every word that she has said.

And she did mention Bon Jovi in her speech. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would have been there this evening, actually, as they took the stage had I not been here answering my hon. Friend's question, and it had particular relevance for me because I'm not new to this industry. When I had my own business when I left university, the very first thing that I organised was a Scotland wide tour of a tribute band, and if I give you the tribute band's name, you'll never guess which artist they were a tribute to.

But it was Non Jovi and those tickets were dynamically priced so. And they would only ever go down because nobody ever came to see them. But never mind. That's my own hankering after the good old days. Madam Deputy Speaker, the UK live events sector is, of course, as my hon. Friend has said, a jewel in our national crown. From world class sporting matches to unforgettable concerts, many of which have not been forgotten tonight in places, these events, of course, enrich our lives, strengthen community bonds and inspire future generations.

But crucially, they provide us with our stories of the future that we tell for years and years ahead. The greatly benefit our economy, generating billions annually. And they support a dynamic, creative and sporting ecosystem. This government understands this, and we have put the creative industries front and centre of our modern industrial strategy, committing to boost investment in the sector from £17 billion to £31 billion by 2035. For too long, however, as highlighted by the Lord Brennan of Canton's report following the independent fan led music review, the joy of attending live events has been marred by unfair practices in the ticketing market, most notably the systematic activities of ticket touts.

As we have heard from my hon. Friend, who crowd out fans from the primary market and resell extortionate prices, ticket touts and this is a remarkable figure. Take £400,000 a day from

**** Possible New Speaker ****

fans pockets that is nearly £150 million a year. That is money that Should be going into the industry. The government is committed to tackling industrial scale territory once and for all, improving transparency around improving transparency around pricing practices and putting money in pockets. And as my friend has demonstrated, far too often, fans are being crowded out of the primary market by touts who are only interested in making a quick only interested in making a quick and exorbitant profit at expense.

The government has been clear that this has to stop. And my hon. Friend is correct. As I say in the Daily Record, their time is up and the time is up. We want to improve transparency, consumer protection and fans access to live events. We also want to make sure that they have a safe and secure means of selling or reselling their tickets, or transferring tickets, and ensuring money flows back into live events sector and to fans pockets. This is why we are committed in our manifesto and a recently published plan for music to introduce new consumer protections for live event ticket resale.

And it is why my department, alongside the Department for business, Innovation, Science and Trade, undertook a consultation last year on the best ways of tackling this, alongside a call for evidence on pricing practices across the wider sector. We received Madam Deputy Speaker over 500 responses from right across the live events sector, with some clear themes for us to address, and those themes have been highlighted this evening already. Firstly, genuine fans should be able to recoup the costs of their ticket when they are no longer able to attend.

Enforcement needs to be effective. If our measures are to have impact, secondary platforms need to play their part in ensuring new rules are implemented and complied with, and primary and secondary platforms are part of the ticketing ecosystem, and the former could do more to protect their sales and, where appropriate, share information more seamlessly with resale platforms. As a result, we are taking action. Last November, we announced a robust package of measures to tackle exploitative touting, including a resale price cap, a separate service fee cap, limits on the number of tickets able to be resold, and obligations on platforms, all reinforced by the CMA's new powers.

Under the Digital Markets and Competition Consumers Act of 2024. And in the King's Speech briefing earlier this year, we announced that the government will publish a draft ticket tout ban Bill in this session for pre-legislative scrutiny by the DCMs Select Committee, of which my hon. Friend is a member. I look forward to working with my hon. Friend and the committee through that process. Following Pre-legislative scrutiny. The government will introduce the Bill when parliamentary time allows and as the Secretary of State said in Parliament last week, we are coming to it.

The Prime Minister feels particularly passionate about this issue, and we will give the legislative legislation the priority it deserves and needs. We

**** Possible New Speaker ****

all want to see this on the statute book as quickly and as soon as possible. I am happy to give. I am grateful to him and I am

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am grateful to him and I am sorry that he missed one because of me. I just wondered, is there any indication because with all the indication because with all the things that are draft Bill brings all the hoops of more consultation. all the hoops of more consultation. Is this going to be 2028 now? I just feel that every day people are being ripped off. You know the clock. We've just missed another

**** Possible New Speaker ****

clock. We've just missed another summer festival season. Can you give us a time? Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think as a reply to my hon. Friend at the Select Committee that I attended last week, there was 39 bills in the first session of this new government, 39 very important bills that took us nearly two years to get through in this session in the King's Speech. Of course, we have introduced a number of bills of this being a draft bill, and I can I can only reassure my hon.

Friend and the House that we want to get this done as quickly as possible, and that means we need to find the parliamentary time when the draft bill is prepared and ready, which should be imminent. Not too many sleeps left. It depends how many days you want to sleep for, and we will have a draft bill that will be able to take forward. But there is a commitment from the Department, from both departments, both DB and ourselves, to get this done as quickly as possible.

And the reason we are doing that, I know that the hon. Lady has had her private member's bill that she's waving around on this topic in the last parliamentary session. I share her concerns for fans in that regard. It is worth noting her bill was drafted before the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, which imposes new requirements around price transparency, and they came into effect in April last year. Our legislation will be focussed on ending the scourge of Tooting, thereby improving access to live events, tackling, touting, ensuring the fans are at the heart of live events cannot be done by government alone.

Of course, industry needs to play its part. It is industry led action, innovation and best practice, alongside the government's new measures that will truly transform the fan experience. The government recognises that many ticketing platforms, event organisers and venues have devoted a lot of time, energy and resources to this issue in recent years. We know that significant money has been spent combating ticket fraud touts and bot use, as well as educating fans on what to look out for when they're buying tickets online.

All to ensure that buying tickets is as safe and seamless for fans as possible. Nevertheless, the strength of feeling from respondents to our consultation and the call for evidence was clear, in fact, that shares our strength of feeling with regards to this touting issue. Industry must build on existing guidance to do more to tackle exploitative practices, and this is why we strongly welcome the Society of Ticket Agents and Retailers staff for short commitment to convene the sector. They will establish new best practice that ensures pricing information is clear and up front, and that fans are empowered to make informed purchasing decisions free from undue pressure.

This work is already under way and I attended the inaugural meeting in March this year. The work is organised under four headings to address some of the key issues in the ticketing sector. Firstly, it will look at pricing transparency. Secondly, the industry will look at how the primary market can continue to be healthy and other workstream will look at accessibility issues. And finally the industry will look at consumer education. Let us have a look, if I may, Madam Deputy Speaker at dynamic pricing just looking at the time.

Firstly, we know that dynamic pricing is a subject that many people are concerned about. Businesses should feel free to use whatever pricing strategy meets their needs, but they must comply with the law where it appears that this is not happening. The CMA has the powers to enforce that and act upon it. And when businesses fall short of what is expected of them under the law, the CMA has powerful enforcement tools to ensure that businesses can be penalised and brought into line. Drip pricing is another one my friend mentioned.

It is not right when fans are shown a price for a product, only to find that it has increased by mandatory charges that are added as the transaction proceeds, particularly if they have been waiting all day on a front screen waiting to join the front of the queue. I do not know if my hon. Friend from Stoke has sat in his parliamentary office at any point. He nodded and then changed his mind and waiting on getting to the front of the queue to try and buy tickets.

But it is a real problem. In June this year, the Competition and Markets Pounds in order to issue refunds to more than 50,000 fans, exceeding £590,000 for using this illegal practice. The CMA is also investigating Viagogo for similar practices and related. Madam Deputy Speaker, can I continue again to encourage the industry to adopt the £1 ticket levy, the voluntary £1 ticket levy for live events to support our grassroots music and grassroots music venues. They are doing the levy, but are they doing enough? Is a big question mark, and we just keep encouraging them to do as much as they possibly can.

Can I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate on such an important issue, which affects the dedicated fans that sustain our live events sector. I would like to reassure the House that this government is tackling industrial scale ticket touting with urgency, and will bring forth the legislation to ensure that fans are not priced out of major cultural and sporting events. It is something that is a priority for this government and we will do that. I look forward to returning to this House with the draft bill for Pre-legislative scrutiny, and welcome further engagement with my hon.

Friend and many other hon. Friends who have had a deep interest in this issue

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to help tackle ticket touting once and for all. The question is this House do

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is this House do now adjourn. As many as are of. That being said, I. The ayes have That being said, I. The ayes have
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page