Transport

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

Monday 23rd June 2025 Written Corrections

[Ruth Cadbury]

I also thank the Secretary of State for the decisive action she has taken to address the causes of HS2’s cost overruns. We look forward to having Mark Wild and the Rail Minister at our Committee very shortly.

I actually want to celebrate something that HS2’s leadership should be proud of: the work they have done on skills and workforce innovation. They have provided best-practice work that the construction industry and transport projects can learn from, and in fact are learning from. However, I urge the Secretary of State to get her Department to learn from countries such as France and Spain, which have managed to deliver extensive high-speed rail projects to time and at a fraction of the cost of HS2 here in the UK.

[Heidi Alexander]

I thank the Chair of the Transport Committee for her comments. She is right to recognise the excellent work that HS2 has done on skills and the workforce. We have over 300,000 people working on this project at the moment, and I think that HS2 has done good work on opening up opportunities, whether through apprenticeships for the next generation or through the supply chain. I will heed my hon. Friend’s advice about learning from the speed and ease with which other countries deliver infrastructure projects.

[Official Report, 18 June 2025; Vol. 769, c. 382.]

Written correction submitted by the Secretary of State for Transport, the right hon. Member for Swindon South (Heidi Alexander):

[Heidi Alexander]

I thank the Chair of the Transport Committee for her comments. She is right to recognise the excellent work that HS2 has done on skills and the workforce. We have over 30,000 people working on this project at the moment, and I think that HS2 has done good work on opening up opportunities, whether through apprenticeships for the next generation or through the supply chain. I will heed my hon. Friend’s advice about learning from the speed and ease with which other countries deliver infrastructure projects.

HS2 Reset

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

Wednesday 18th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

With permission, Mr Speaker, I shall make a statement on HS2.

As a London councillor over 15 years ago, I remember hearing the then Labour Government’s bold plans for high-speed rail to link our major cities, address the capacity needs of the future and, in the words of then Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, to join

“the high-speed revolution sweeping the world.”

It was a vision of a confident nation and a clear signal: our great towns and cities in the midlands and the north, with potential that had been untapped at best and ignored at worst, could be places of opportunity and aspiration again. That was the promise of HS2.

But after a decade and a half of Tory timelines planned then delayed, routes drawn up then cancelled, budgets calculated then blown and promises made then broken, we inherited a project that had lost the trust of the public, that created an image of a Britain woefully unable to deliver big infrastructure projects and that had been axed from swathes of the country it was originally meant to serve. Phase 1 could end up becoming one of the most expensive railway lines in the world, with projected costs soaring by £37 billion under previous Conservative Governments, and £2 billion of taxpayers’ money was sunk into phase 2 work before it was cancelled by the previous Government.

There was also clear evidence of poor management. Despite the 2020 Oakervee review advising that Government halt construction contracts pending improvements in price and simpler engineering, they pressed ahead regardless. It has been no less than a litany of failure and today I am drawing a line in the sand, calling time on years of mismanagement, flawed reporting and ineffective oversight. It means this Government will get the job done between Birmingham and London. We will not reinstate cancelled sections we cannot afford, but we will do the hard but necessary work to rebuild public trust, and we have not wasted any time.

Since July we have appointed new leadership of HS2 Ltd to turn this project around. We have made clear to the new chief executive, Mark Wild, that the priority is building the rest of the railway safely at the lowest reasonable cost even if this takes longer. We have started the year-long task of fundamentally resetting the project, including commissioning infrastructure expert James Stewart to lead a review into governance and oversight. As part of that reset, we have reduced financial delegations to HS2 Ltd, placing a lid on spiralling costs until the reset is complete and we regain confidence, and we have supported Mark Wild’s review of the size and cost of HS2 as an organisation.

But today we are going further. I can confirm we have published the landmark James Stewart review and the Department’s response. The review, commissioned in October last year by my predecessor, was a tough, independent look at how the Department for Transport and Government deliver major projects. The Government not only welcome the review, but have accepted all the recommendations, and my Department is already delivering on these, specifically across five key areas.

First, on the lack of oversight and scrutiny, quite simply there have been too many dark corners for failure to hide in. The ministerial taskforce set up to provide oversight of HS2 had inconsistent attendance from key Ministers, including the then Transport Secretary and the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury. The Government have re-established the taskforce with full senior attendance per the review’s recommendations. A new performance programme and shareholder boards will offer much-needed oversight and accountability.

Secondly, the report highlights HS2 could cost the taxpayer millions more than planned. We will stop this spiralling any further by delivering all the recommendations on cost control. That starts with HS2 fundamentally changing its approach to estimating costs. It includes certainty over funding, which the spending review has given. It also means HS2 working with suppliers so that their contracts incentivise saving costs for taxpayers; as far as I am concerned, suppliers should make a better return the more taxpayer money they save.

Thirdly, the review identified a deficit in capability and skills, with a fundamental lack of trust between my Department and HS2 Ltd. I am clear that both capability and cultural issues within HS2 must be addressed. The new chief executive is already strengthening the organisation, including by filling critical gaps in areas such as commercial expertise, and he will be backed by Mike Brown, announced today as the new chair. This is a new era of leadership that the project desperately needs, with Mike bringing significant experience as a former Transport for London commissioner. Mark and Mike were part of the team, with me, that turned Crossrail into the Elizabeth line; we have done it before and we will do it again.

Fourthly, between 2019 and 2023 HS2 Ltd provided initial designs for Euston station coming in almost £2 billion over budget. When asked for a more affordable option, it offered one costing £400 million more than the first attempt. The word “affordable” was clearly not part of the HS2 lexicon. The combined cost for those two failed designs, which has now been written off, was more than a quarter of a billion pounds.

What is more, the previous Government announced a Euston ministerial taskforce. Unbelievably, the taskforce never met. This Government recognise Euston’s huge potential. We have already committed funding to start the tunnelling from Old Oak Common to Euston, and we will set out more details in our 10-year infrastructure strategy.

We will use James Stewart’s findings to transform infrastructure delivery across Government. Implementing real change in how we deliver infrastructure is not just for the Department for Transport. This Government are committed to implementing these recommendations and adopting a new approach to delivering infrastructure, as will be set out in our upcoming 10-year infrastructure strategy. In that spirit, the Prime Minister has also asked the Cabinet Secretary to consider the implications for the civil service and the wider public sector of the issues raised in the report, including whether further action or investigation is warranted.

We are wasting no time in delivering on this review. I will update Parliament on our progress through my six-monthly reports, even if the information is uncomfortable, because for a Government who last week pledged billions in capital investment for new major projects, and who believe in the power of transport infrastructure to improve lives and deliver on our plan for change, that level of failure cannot stand. We will learn the lessons of the past 15 years and restore our reputation for delivering world-class infrastructure projects.

I have spoken about our inheritance and James Stewart’s review, so let me finally turn to Mark Wild’s initial assessment, which lays bare the shocking mismanagement of the project under previous Governments—I will place a copy of his interim findings in the Library. He stated, in no uncertain terms, that the overall project, with respect to cost, schedule and scope, is unsustainable. Based on his advice, I see no route by which trains can be running by 2033 as planned. He reveals that costs will continue to increase if not taken in hand, further outstripping the budget set by the previous Government, and he cannot be certain that all cost pressures have yet been identified.

It gives me no pleasure to deliver news like this. Billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money has been wasted by constant scope changes, ineffective contracts and bad management. There are also allegations that parts of the supply chain have been defrauding taxpayers, and I have been clear that those need to be investigated rapidly and rigorously. If fraud is proven, the consequences will be felt by all involved.

I have to be honest: this is an appalling mess, but it is one that we will sort out. We need to set targets that we can confidently deliver and that the public can trust, and that will take time, but rest assured that where there are inefficiencies, we will root them out; and where further ministerial interventions are needed, I will make them without fear or favour. HS2 will finally start delivering on our watch.

Years of mismanagement and neglect have turned HS2 into a shadow of that vision put forward 15 years ago, but this Government were elected on a mandate to restore trust to our politics, and that is why we will not shirk away from this challenge and why today we turn the page on infrastructure failures. I can think of no better mission than delivering new economic opportunities, new homes, commercial regeneration and an upskilled supply chain, all of which HS2 can still unlock, but no one should underestimate the scale of the reset required. Passengers and taxpayers deserve new railways that the country can be proud of. The work to get HS2 back on track is firmly under way under this Government, and I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and for updating the House on the initial findings of the HS2 reviews. I also thank her for advance notice and a copy of her statement.

On the substance of the Secretary of State’s statement, I believe there is a broad consensus in this House on the central point that mistakes were made in the delivery of HS2. As she noted, costs more than doubled, the project has been repeatedly delayed, and the pandemic completely changed travel patterns. It undercut the assumptions that guided the original plans and caused construction costs to rise sharply across the world—by up to 40% in some cases—as a result of supply chain shortages as the world emerged from the crisis.

It has long been apparent that HS2 was not going according to plan. In my first two years as a Member of this House, I sat on the Public Accounts Committee, then chaired by the hon. Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier). In the summer of 2021, we published a report on HS2 that raised serious concerns in a number of areas and contained recommendations for how to improve the project.

In 2023, the previous Government conceded that HS2 was not going to plan and made fundamental changes to it. The result was the cancellation of the northern leg of HS2 and the creation of the Network North plan. Under that plan, £36 billion was to be diverted from the northern leg of HS2 to a multitude of transport projects that would benefit more people in more places and more quickly than the then Government believed the delivery of HS2 could. However, we also recognise that the path we took to reach that point was not perfect—far from it. I will not today pretend that the Network North plan was not a product of mistakes we made in the handling of HS2, because it clearly was. As a country, we must learn from those mistakes and we must not repeat them.

On that note, and with your permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to express my gratitude to Mark Wild, the chief executive officer of HS2, for his continued efforts to support the delivery of the project. Recognising his leadership in rescuing the Crossrail project in London, it was the noble Lord Harper—then Secretary of State for Transport—who appointed him to lead HS2 in May 2024. We are all encouraged to see him playing a leading role in overseeing the correction and completion of the project, because his experience will be invaluable in helping to get it back on track. I also welcome the appointment of Mike Brown as the new chairman of HS2 Ltd. Like the Secretary of State, I know him from my years in London politics, when he was commissioner of Transport for London. He is a very capable man, and I wish him well in his new role.

The Secretary of State has informed the House of her intention to accept 89 recommendations of the independent review into HS2. I have not yet seen a copy of that report, which I believe is being released today. Although we will need to study those proposals carefully before confirming our support for them, I can assure the Secretary of State if they offer better value for taxpayers, we will back them. The Secretary of State has also raised very serious concerns that taxpayers may have been defrauded by subcontractors. I assure her that if that proves to be the case, I will share her anger, and will support whatever action is necessary to get to the bottom of those allegations. I would request that she keeps the House informed as the investigations by HS2 and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs progress.

Before I close, I would like to press the Secretary of State on a number of matters. In recent weeks the Government have announced several projects that either are funded by Network North or align with its commitments. However, we have yet to see a clear Government commitment to either fully support the Network North plan or scale it back. Can the Secretary of State now provide a definitive update on which elements will proceed and which will be abandoned? It has been reported that officials are considering a plan, backed by the Mayor of Greater Manchester, to build an “HS2-lite” track between Birmingham and Crewe. Will she confirm whether those reports are true?

I will conclude by turning to the planning system more generally. The whole House will recall that HS2 grappled with legal challenges, High Court proceedings and judicial reviews, all of which added delay and cost. What assessment has the Secretary of State made of the extent to which legal challenges and judicial reviews delayed the delivery of HS2? How can future infrastructure projects be protected from excessive or politically motivated litigation, and does the Secretary of State believe that sufficient action has been taken to prevent some of the more spurious concerns about such things as bats and newts obstructing future vital infrastructure projects?

[Heidi Alexander]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his response, and indeed for the tone with which he made his comments. I was pleased to hear him acknowledge that mistakes had been made on HS2 by the previous Government. I think he described the path as not having been perfect—I would go so far as to say that it has been a shambolic mess. He struck a sombre note in his remarks, and I would ask him to consider going further, once he has had the opportunity to read the full James Stewart report, because an apology on the part of the Conservative party for the mess in which it left this infrastructure scheme is undoubtedly warranted. I also thank him for his comments on the action that HS2 is taking with regard to alleged fraud within the supply chain. I can assure him that I will provide appropriate updates to the House on the progress of the HMRC investigation that is now under way.

The hon. Gentleman asked me to set out our plans for investment in transport in the midlands and the north. The Conservative party took the decision to cancel HS2 north of Birmingham, and made wild promises about what it would do with the money it claimed it was saving. He is kidding himself if he thinks that that money ever existed. In last week’s spending review, this Government set out £15.6 billion to be invested in local transport schemes across the country, whether in Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds or Newcastle. The hon. Gentleman’s approach was a fantasy—he promised the moon on a stick and had absolutely no means to deliver. He asked me to set out the Government’s plans for further enhancing rail connectivity in the midlands and the north. I can assure him that further announcements will be made, both as part of the Government’s 10-year national infrastructure strategy and beyond that in the weeks and months ahead.

The hon. Gentleman also asked me to opine on the extent to which litigation has caused delays in the delivery of infrastructure projects. He will know that, through this Government’s Planning and Infrastructure Bill, we are tackling this issue by limiting the number of judicial reviews and legal challenges that can be brought. Unlike his party, this Government are serious about delivering infrastructure, and about providing the stable leadership that this country needs when it comes to infrastructure.

Before coming to the Chamber today, I looked up the number of Rail Ministers in the Department under his Government—it was 18 in 12 years. It is no wonder that projects such as HS2 were left in such a state of disarray. Just as this Government have returned stability to the nation’s economy, so will we return common sense and stable leadership to the delivery of the nation’s infrastructure.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)]

I also thank the Secretary of State for the decisive action she has taken to address the causes of HS2’s cost overruns. We look forward to having Mark Wild and the Rail Minister at our Committee very shortly.

I actually want to celebrate something that HS2’s leadership should be proud of: the work they have done on skills and workforce innovation. They have provided best-practice work that the construction industry and transport projects can learn from, and in fact are learning from. However, I urge the Secretary of State to get her Department to learn from countries such as France and Spain, which have managed to deliver extensive high-speed rail projects to time and at a fraction of the cost of HS2 here in the UK.

[Heidi Alexander]

I thank the Chair of the Transport Committee for her comments. She is right to recognise the excellent work that HS2 has done on skills and the workforce. We have over 300,000 people working on this project at the moment, and I think that HS2 has done good work on opening up opportunities, whether through apprenticeships for the next generation or through the supply chain. I will heed my hon. Friend’s advice about learning from the speed and ease with which other countries deliver infrastructure projects.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and for advance sight of it. What we have heard today is clearly a damning indictment of Conservative mismanagement. Connecting our largest cities with high-speed rail was meant to help boost economic growth and spread opportunity. The original idea—a high-speed rail network connecting London to Manchester and Leeds—was clearly the right one, but what we have ended up with is years of delay and billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money being poured down the drain, with no end in sight. The litany of errors that the Secretary of State has outlined is truly shocking and shows that the Conservatives were comatose at the wheel. A lack of oversight, trust and planning has left us with a high-speed railway drastically reduced in scale and inflated in price. The shocking allegations of fraud by a subcontractor are emblematic of the Tories’ lack of oversight and interest in properly safeguarding the public interest and public money, as we saw with the scandal of personal protective equipment procurement during covid. We must now make sure that any money lost to fraud is clawed back as soon as possible.

May I ask the Secretary of State three things? First, can she guarantee that, if any fraud has taken place, any money lost will be returned to the Government and her Department as soon as possible, and that the police will be provided with the necessary resources to investigate the matter fully? Secondly, the Secretary of State has said that the ministerial taskforce set up to provide oversight on HS2 had inconsistent attendance from the then Transport Secretary and Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Does the Secretary of State agree that those right hon. Members should apologise for those particularly damning lapses? Thirdly, we share the Secretary of State’s confidence in Mark Wild and Mike Brown, but can she say when she expects to be able to give the House an accurate assessment of the scheme’s full costs and of when HS2 will finally be up and running?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Gentleman raises three fair issues, and I agree with his assessment that the previous Government were not just asleep but comatose at the wheel. He asks whether the alleged fraud in the supply chain will be fully investigated, and whether moneys will be returned to the taxpayer. I can assure him that no stone will be left unturned in getting to the bottom of this matter. He is also right to highlight the question of poor and inconsistent attendance by individuals who held my role, the Rail Minister’s role and Treasury roles. It is imperative that politicians who have oversight of these infrastructure schemes stay close to the detail of what is happening, both through their own officials and directly with the executive and non-executive leadership of the project. That is certainly what I intend to do. I know the Rail Minister has a monthly meeting with the new chief executive. We have already held a meeting of the ministerial taskforce, and there is another one due soon. I have had multiple one-to-one conversations with the leadership team at HS2.

The hon. Gentleman asks when I will be in a position to provide a full update on costs and schedule. Mark Wild has told me that he will require until the end of this year to do that full piece of work. I am not prepared to get ahead of that, because that is how we have got into problems previously. The hon. Gentleman can rest assured that as soon as I have more information, in addition to the six-monthly report that I provide to Parliament, I will come back to this House.

[Graham Stringer (Blackley and Middleton South) (Lab)]

This is the latest national scandal to arise in our attempts to bring in infrastructure schemes on budget and on time, but the taxpayer is not the only victim of the failure of this project so far; there are also the people of the north of England. HS2 was originally a scheme intended to help the economies of the north-west and Yorkshire and those communities on the way, so there is a complete failure there. What we will be left with is an extension to the London underground system, and that will not help people in Leeds, Bradford, Manchester, Sheffield and elsewhere. Will the Secretary of State consider safeguarding the original routes so that when we get our infrastructure plans in place, we can build something that this country can be proud of?

[Heidi Alexander]

I gently say to my hon. Friend that the Mayor of the West Midlands might have something to say about his great city being seen as the end of an extension to the London underground line. It is completely right that our two great cities—Birmingham and London—are connected with high-quality rail services. Although this is a difficult day in exposing the state of the project, I have no doubt that in time it will be a railway we can be proud of.

I also say to my hon. Friend that I am aware of forecast capacity constraints between Birmingham and Manchester and in other parts of the country. We are investing, through things such as the trans-Pennine route upgrade, in improving connectivity to other great cities in the north of England. We are determined to ensure that everyone, no matter where they live in the country, has an excellent public transport system that they can rely upon.

[Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)]

My constituency has been devastated by roughly 26 miles of HS2, and I have consistently warned this House—during the previous Parliament and this—through the lens of the miserable experience on the ground in Buckinghamshire, about the reasons for the cost overruns, poor governance and everything else that the Secretary of State has highlighted in her statement today. If she must persist with this wrong project with a new delay, will she give a commitment to my constituents and the rest of the county of Buckinghamshire on how much longer they will have to live in misery as part of a building site? More importantly, will she look urgently at unlocking some of the mitigation funds that we are finding incredibly hard to access and get spent on the ground? That would be of some small, tiny comfort to my constituents who are living in misery.

[Heidi Alexander]

It is essential that we proceed as quickly as possible with the remaining civil engineering works that will have affected the hon. Member’s constituents to date. If he wishes to write to me with details of the problem he has experienced with accessing mitigation funds, I will raise that for him with the chief executive of HS2.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

The Conservatives announced that they were scrapping the northern leg of HS2 in a former railway station, summing up their attitude to the railway and sending shockwaves through the industry, including in Derby, a rail city that will be building the HS2 trains. Will the Transport Secretary ensure certainty and timeliness going forward, so that the industry can have confidence that we will not see further delays, which have already been so damaging for the supply chain?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend is right that certainty is critical for the rail supply chain. It will be a number of months before I am in a position to confirm with any certainty the schedule and estimated final cost. As soon as the new chief executive, Mark Wild, has provided that information to me and my Department, I will be updating the House.

[Sir Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con)]

The Secretary of State knows that HS2 runs through my constituency, and she will accept that what makes my constituents particularly angry about what she has described is that HS2 has pinched every penny in compensating someone unfortunate enough to find themselves in the path of this railway, yet wasted millions elsewhere. Can she assure us that as part of the reset, line-drawing or page-turning—however she describes it—she will look at how people are compensated when affected by such major infrastructure projects? Does she accept that it would be sensible to consider how Parliament could look again at this project, whose budget and timescale have ballooned, and decide whether we still think it is a worthwhile use of taxpayers’ money?

[Heidi Alexander]

The right hon. and learned Gentleman is right to point out that we have some form as a country in seeking to gold-plate infrastructure projects. The last Government talked about this railway being the fastest and the best in the world. Frankly, I would like this country to do things well and properly. The point he raises about compensation is one that any Government should keep under review, while bearing in mind the need to provide value for money to the taxpayer. I can assure him that I will make sure on any infrastructure project I oversee in this role that the House is appropriately updated and that we proceed with transparency on the costs and benefits of the schemes.

[Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and the candidness with which she has delivered it. The villages I represent in north Buckinghamshire, be they Turweston, Westbury, Quainton or North Marston—I know the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith) will be familiar with those communities—have for too long faced chaos and disruption from HS2 and its contractors. News that there will be yet more delay will cause them significant distress. Will the Secretary of State update the House and explain what additional practical support, financial or otherwise, her Department plans to give rural communities such as mine over the years ahead?

[Heidi Alexander]

I think the biggest reassurance that I could give my hon. Friend is my cast-iron commitment to ensure that we proceed as rapidly as possible with the completion of the remaining construction works, which I know will have had an impact on his constituents. While I cannot commit myself to the provision of further compensation from the Dispatch Box today, if they are experiencing particular problems he should not hesitate to bring them to my attention and that of my Department.

[Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (North Cotswolds) (Con)]

I welcome the statement, and I do not disagree with a word of the Secretary of State’s analysis of what has gone wrong in the past.

The Public Accounts Committee, which I have the honour of chairing, has produced eight comprehensive reports over the 13 years of this project, and there are some common themes throughout those reports. First, the Secretary of State’s Department—I am not in any way blaming her, because this is what went on in the past—did not have the right mix of skills to be able to challenge the assertions of those in HS2 Ltd: project managers, engineers, people who really know how to build a railway. Secondly, as we said in our report published on 28 February, we found that there was considerable disagreement between HS2 and the Department about the cost of the railway—the highest estimate was the top range of HS2, which was £66 billion in 2019 prices and more than £80 billion in today’s prices—and I think we need an assurance fairly soon about what it is going to cost. Thirdly, I am not at all surprised that the Secretary of State has had to delay the completion date, but this is the second reset in five years, so we really want to see it work. I think that the people of this country will be very keen to know, when her half-yearly report is published and if possible before, when the project is likely to be completed.

[Heidi Alexander]

I thank the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues on the Public Accounts Committee for the work that they have done on this over so many years. He is right to highlight the need for skills within the Government so that they can act as a strong client of HS2 Ltd. We also need to ensure that we have the right commercial acumen in HS2, and I know that the chief executive officer is working on that. I must, however, disappoint the hon. Gentleman, because I think it unlikely that in my next report to Parliament, which I believe is due before the summer recess, I will be able to provide any concrete information about a new schedule window and a new cost envelope. I think that the work will take the chief executive towards the end of the year before we are in a position to make that information public.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

My constituents know more than most about the daily misery of HS2 construction, particularly in the villages of Water Orton and Kingsbury and the town of Coleshill, and they will welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. I met the new chief executive officer, Mark Wild, on Monday to discuss the reset, and I am delighted that he accepted my invitation to come to the Spud Club in Water Orton and talk to residents there. Does my right hon. Friend agree, however, that it is time we ended the failures of oversight, the scandalous overspends and the suggested fraud, and it is time the dust settled on this project rather than settling on my constituents’ clean washing, clean cars and clean windows?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend has painted a graphic picture. I understand that when large infrastructure works are taking place those who live closest to them will often experience disruption in their daily lives, and I want to put on record my thanks to the residents of Kingsbury, Coleshill and Water Orton for their patience. I agree wholeheartedly with my hon. Friend that we need, once and for all, to put an end to this cycle of overspends, delays and waste, and get on and build a railway that is fit for the 21st century.

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

The disastrous decision by the last Conservative Government to stop the works at Euston station dented investor and commuter confidence in our railways and in major infrastructure delivery. Their failure to keep costs under control and to manage the basics of the project—simple things such as turning up to meetings—has created the quagmire in which HS2 finds itself today, and I do not envy the Secretary of State the task that confronts her. I am glad to hear that the Government see the huge potential of a comprehensive redevelopment of Euston station, but can the Secretary of State reassure me that we will not end up with a cut-price station that does not realise the potential of the project?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity not only to re-provide the existing Euston station—which, I am sure, will frustrate many Members and their constituents at times—but to provide the new HS2 station there and to unlock land around it. That will enable new homes to be delivered, but is also a massive commercial opportunity for regeneration in the heart of London. It is a very exciting opportunity—one that we will be saying more about in the coming weeks.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

Delays to HS2 have blighted parts of west London around the main site at Old Oak Common. Benefits, when they finally arrive, will include a major interchange with Great Western Railway and the Elizabeth line. Will the Secretary of State consider opening the Elizabeth line station at Old Oak Common as soon as is feasible rather than waiting for HS2 to begin operating, and will she reclaim some of the good will of the people of west London by directing a tiny fraction of the costs of HS2 to the repair of Hammersmith bridge?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend has asked about the possibility of opening an Elizabeth line station at Old Oak Common before the opening of the HS2 station. I will certainly speak to the Rail Minister, in the other place, and explore what the opportunities might be. If I may, I will then write to my hon. Friend. He may have heard the Chancellor announce last week, during her statement on the spending review, that we are opening and financing a structures fund to enable local authorities with assets that are costly to repair to bid to the Government for help with repairing dilapidated bridges, tunnels and so on. I will say more in due course about how the fund will operate, and I am sure that we will be talking about Hammersmith bridge again, as we have for many years.

[Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)]

I thank the Secretary of State for the clarity of her statement. Vast swathes of Staffordshire are currently owned by HS2—a third of the village of Hopton is under HS2 ownership—and this has an enormous impact on farmers and people who live along the route where so many empty houses sit. Can the Secretary of State reassure my constituents that that farmland and those houses will be returned to the farmers and to the people who actually want to live in those communities?

[Heidi Alexander]

I will be saying more about the safeguarded land and the directions that apply to it in due course.

[Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)]

I thank the Secretary of State for the actions that she has taken today. They were clearly necessary, and it sounds like we are on a better track. However, HS2 provides little or nothing for rail users in the south-west, other than ongoing delays during the construction and operation of Old Oak Common. Will the Secretary of State consider funding, or prioritising the funding for, the critical final phase of the Dawlish rail resilience work that will help businesses and rail users in Devon and Cornwall—and perhaps even in Swindon?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Gentleman tempts me to talk about the Dawlish scheme. I must admit that it is a topic I will need to take up with the Rail Minister, and I will be happy to give the hon. Gentleman a response in writing in respect of the merits of the scheme.

[Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for her honesty as she set out this latest reset, necessitated by the mess that the Tories left. Old Oak Common is part of my constituency, and this week eight associations across two boroughs have banded together to create the Old Oak Alliance, with the purpose of fighting for compensation and mitigation in the current circumstances. They will be bitterly disappointed by the news of even more prolonged disruption. Will my right hon. Friend meet me—or, better still, come on a site visit to meet them and see what they are putting up with? We are dealing with a company whose idea of engagement is jam tomorrow and death by PowerPoint.

[Heidi Alexander]

I am sure the leadership of HS2 would be very concerned to hear that description of the way that the project is engaging with local people. That is not what I expect of an infrastructure company, and I am sure it is not what the chief executive of HS2 Ltd would want either. I would be very happy to meet my hon. Friend.

[Esther McVey (Tatton) (Con)]

The previous Government cancelled phase 2 of HS2, and from what the Secretary of State has said today, my understanding is that it remains cancelled and that phase 2 will not be reinstated. That being the case, can she let me know when the HS2’s safeguarding of land, particularly in the mid-Cheshire section, will be lifted?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am afraid I cannot give the right hon. Lady a date today, but I can assure her that I am fully cognisant of this issue. We need to look at whether there is any requirement for any future schemes. As soon as we are in a position to provide updates, I will come back to this House and be sure to provide hon. Members will all the relevant information.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

The HS2 line runs down the west side of Aylesbury. It will bring no benefits at all to my constituency, yet my residents have suffered years of noise, disruption, flooding, loss of access to the countryside and the destruction of their natural environment as a result of its construction. I am pleased that the Government are getting a grip on this issue, and I commend the Secretary of State for her honesty and focus, but my constituents will understandably be concerned by the news of further delays and potential further disruption. Can the Secretary of State confirm that she will do everything in her power to hold HS2 and its contractors to account in order to minimise the ongoing disruption for my long-suffering residents?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can assure my hon. Friend that we are determined to see the main works civil engineering contracts completed as soon as possible. That is the element of construction that generally creates most disturbance for local communities, and we are pretty much at peak construction now. I thank her constituents for their patience while we continue to deliver this vital new piece of rail infrastructure.

[Nigel Farage (Clacton) (Reform)]

I have campaigned against this HS2 project ever since 2010, up and down the line. I never believed the original £35 billion price tag. Furthermore, it would have benefited only rich businessmen and driven businesses from the north of England to London—it would have had the opposite of the intended effect. Rather than having another reset, has the moment not come to recognise that this is a failure? Let us scrap HS2, use the tens of billions of pounds that we can save in the next decade to upgrade railway lines across the entirety of the United Kingdom to the benefit of many millions, and spend the rest on other national priorities in these financially straitened times. Surely the time has come to scrap the entirety of the project and to recognise that we have got it wrong.

--- Later in debate ---

[Heidi Alexander]

We are not going to be a country that spends over £30 billion on rail infrastructure but then never sees a train running on it. We have already seen too much waste, and I am interested to hear that the hon. Gentleman is advocating more. We also have significant capacity constraints between Birmingham and London. He seems not to want to do anything about that, but I think those two great cities deserve a railway that is fit for the 21st century; I am just sorry that he does not.

[Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)]

My constituency is the only one in the country that has HS2 phase 1, phase 2a and phase 2b. It is not true to say that the line will not continue north of Birmingham, because it will cut through miles of Staffordshire, through my constituency, until it rejoins the main line at Handsacre. The failings of HS2 Ltd have been clear to my constituents for years and, frankly, it is shocking to hear about the dereliction of oversight by the previous Government, although it is what we have always suspected. People across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages will, quite rightly, be furious.

Farmers, landowners and businesses in my constituency have been fighting tooth and nail with HS2 for years to get it to do the job right. We have seen compulsory purchases that have never been paid, temporary possessions that come with a multitude of exchanges—back and forth, and back and forth again—with land agents taking massive fees for things that should have been sorted years ago, crop loss payments that never come and many, many more issues. People in Streethay have had to deal with ongoing roadworks around a junction that has become far too overcomplicated by HS2 trying to put a railway underneath it, and that has seen the village almost cut off at times.

People are absolutely sick of HS2. The failings of that organisation are multitudinous, and the failings of the Conservatives to fully hold it to account should be an embarrassment to them and an embarrassment to this country. I really do welcome a reset, but it has to lead to meaningful change. Can the Secretary of State give me and my constituents any assurances that it will be delivered as quickly as it possibly can be, and with as little disruption as we can get away with? Can she finally give us a timeline for when the safeguarded land will be returned to landowners? This has been going on for far too long.

[Heidi Alexander]

I share my hon. Friend’s anger. He is a powerful advocate for his constituents, who have endured disruption, and I agree entirely that the way this project was handled was a dereliction of duty on the part of the previous Government. That is why we have appointed new leadership, why we are accepting all the recommendations of the James Stewart review, and why we are going through this fundamental reset. As soon as I have received advice from the new chief executive about the revised cost and schedule, I will update my hon. Friend and other hon. Members.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

As a south-west region MP, does the Secretary of State agree that the west country has for decades been the poor country cousin of our rail network, and that money spent on HS2 is money not spent elsewhere? Will she do all in her power to ensure that the relatively small changes that are necessary on the network in the south-west to make life a lot easier go ahead, and will she look particularly at the absolutely woeful west of England line?

[Heidi Alexander]

There are challenges across the rail network, and I readily accept that improvements are needed in many parts of the country. I do not necessarily accept that the south-west is the poor cousin of the rail network, but I can assure the right hon. Gentleman of my determination to make sure that everyone, no matter where they live in this country, has a better rail service at the end of this Parliament than they did at the beginning of it.

[Jacob Collier (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)]

The Transport Secretary will know that my constituents have endured years of disruption, and of drawn-out and poorly managed roadworks, as they drive past Lichfield on the A38. Given that billions of pounds were squandered by the previous Government and the disruption continues, can she say more about how she will get a grip on this project to ensure that we have vigorous oversight, and that it is delivered effectively and on time for our constituents?

[Heidi Alexander]

We have appointed new leadership. We are establishing new governance. We are looking at the incentives contained in the contracts on the civil engineering works. We will make sure that no stone is left unturned in providing value for money for the taxpayer on HS2, because this country is making a very significant investment and we need to ensure that every penny is wisely spent.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

The cost of HS2 has now spiralled to over £100 billion. Welsh taxpayers are paying dearly for this appalling mess, even though we get no benefits whatsoever. Wales is now owed at least £5 billion. This is not going to go away—so when will we get our fair share?

[Heidi Alexander]

The right hon. Lady may have heard the Chancellor announce in the spending review over £400 million of investment in the Welsh railways over 10 years. That will enable work to take place on the Burns stations in south Wales, and at Padeswood sidings on the north Wales line. It is a significant investment in Welsh railways, the like of which has not been seen for many, many years.

[Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) (Lab)]

As shadow Transport Secretary for four years, I was wholly supportive of this concept. I just want to correct the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), who completely misunderstands its basis. As I am sure the Secretary of State agrees, the purpose was to deliver capacity for the north of England—“speed” was a misnomer—but that opportunity has now been lost. Can she give me some assurance that through the trans-Pennine upgrade, skills and expertise will be rolled out across the entire north of England—not just to the north-west and Yorkshire, but to the north-east, including through the continuing rolling programme of electrification? I am thinking specifically of the stretch from Northallerton to Middlesbrough and beyond, because that is where we get the gross value added and the economic growth from. Can we have some assurance that those ambitions will not be fettered one jot by this damning indictment of the past 15 years of failure?

--- Later in debate ---

[Heidi Alexander]

I can assure my hon. Friend that the Government 100% recognise the need to improve rail connectivity in the midlands and the north. He is also right to highlight the need for a stable pipeline of investment, so that the supply chain can plan, and so that we do not lose skills. The Government have an ambitious rail programme; there is East West Rail, the trans-Pennine route upgrade and HS2. I am determined to build on this country’s proud railway heritage and ensure that we have railways fit for the modern day.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

The Devon and Cornwall rail network is only one severe storm away from being decapitated at Dawlish. Phase 5 of the south-west rail resilience network is desperately needed. When will the Minister visit the line to see how desperately needed it is?

[Heidi Alexander]

Dawlish is a very beautiful part of the country, so I am very tempted to take the hon. Gentleman up on his invitation. This is the second time in this statement that the Dawlish programme has been raised. I gave the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) an undertaking that I would speak to the Rail Minister on that subject and then write to him; I will come back to the hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling) in writing at the same time.

[Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. HS2 has been an abject failure when it comes to the political accountability of the previous Administration. On transport efficiencies, will she press on with reforms to the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency, so that we can fix the driving test system and keep our country moving?

[Heidi Alexander]

We have a really important programme of work across all arms-length bodies of the Department for Transport, including the DVSA. It is really important that we provide public services in an efficient and effective way. I am conscious that my hon. Friend’s constituents and others may be very keen for rapid progress on driving test wait times. I can assure him that the issue is a focus of discussions that I am having with the DVSA.

[Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. I too served on the Public Accounts Committee, so I know that while HS2 is by far the largest civil infrastructure programme in the United Kingdom, the second largest is the lower Thames crossing from Tilbury to Gravesend, for which about £10 billion is currently budgeted. If her tighter approach to HS2 produces savings, is there any way that some of them might be vired to pay for the lower Thames crossing? If not, exactly which private-sector companies will pay for it? So far, I am afraid the Government have been rather vague on that point.

[Heidi Alexander]

We are exploring finance options for the lower Thames crossing. On Monday we announced that there would be £590 million of public funding this year to take forward utility works and some land purchases. I will say more to this House in future about the private finance arrangements that we are exploring.

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

I commend my right hon. Friend for the swift actions she has taken to try to put right this disastrous situation, created by the previous Government. The parallels with the fast-track contracts for personal protective equipment cannot be ignored. I understand that contracts were signed when appropriate decisions had not been made. Will the people who signed those contracts be interviewed? Will they have to explain why they decided to take those decisions, against advice? Will we get any of that money back?

[Heidi Alexander]

As I said in my statement, the Prime Minister has asked the Cabinet Secretary to investigate whether the James Stewart report raises any questions for the civil service or the wider public sector. My hon. Friend is completely right to highlight the point about contracts being signed with construction companies even before the scope of the works had been agreed. It is little wonder that the country has ended up paying more. We signed a contract with a company to deliver works, yet there was no clarity whatever about what work the Government wanted them to do. This is a dreadful and woeful failure of oversight by previous Government Ministers, and I will not allow that to happen on my watch.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

Before I was elected to this place, I was a member of HS2’s independent panel for the community and environment fund and business and local economy fund. The Secretary of State’s statement makes for pretty shocking reading. There is talk of fraud and shambolic mismanagement—things that should bring shame on everybody involved.

One of the problems with HS2 was always the name, which put the focus on speed, rather than capacity. My Hazel Grove constituents use the west coast main line, and they talk to me about the capacity problems that remain. Indeed, I see them every week when I come up and down to work. The Secretary of State says that she is not reinstating the line north of Birmingham. She also says that trans-Pennine work is under way. What specific work is being undertaken by her Department on capacity on the west coast main line north of Birmingham?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am aware that the Mayor of the West Midlands and the Mayor of Greater Manchester have put proposals to the Government on this issue. In the mid-2030s, we are likely to see severe capacity constraints between Birmingham and Manchester. We are reviewing those proposals, and I hope to be able to say more on them in the months ahead.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for the honesty with which she has addressed these very difficult issues. May I ask her to say a little more about the lessons that can be learned from the success of the Elizabeth line—both the far superior leadership and management of the programme, and the economic benefits generated? The £18 billion invested in capital yielded £42 billion in benefits in just the first three years of this amazing piece of infrastructure.

[Heidi Alexander]

While the delivery of the Elizabeth line was one of my proudest achievements as deputy mayor for transport in London, I must admit that it was not without its challenges. The trust between Transport for London and the delivery project, and the transparency and honesty between different parts of the system, were among the finer aspects of how we got the project over the line. It was one of my proudest days when Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth opened the Elizabeth line at Paddington shortly before she passed away. There is a lot of learning that we need to take from Crossrail. We are doing that, and we are determined to get on and see this railway opened.

[Blake Stephenson (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)]

East West Rail is due to travel through my constituency, on the historic Marston Vale line. How will the Secretary of State ensure that the mistakes made on HS2—we have heard some shocking stories today—will not also be made on East West Rail? I am afraid that there is very little confidence in the East West Rail Company. It is important that my communities are listened to, that we deliver this infrastructure faster and at lower cost, and that people who are impacted are properly compensated.

[Heidi Alexander]

East West Rail is fundamentally different from the construction of HS2. The hon. Gentleman will know that it is being delivered in three phases, and that it is only the latter phase, between Bedford and Cambridge, that will necessitate the construction of new track. The chief executive of East West Rail, David Hughes, is determined to deliver the scheme rapidly, offer good value for money to the taxpayer, and properly engage with communities. If there are any particular issues the hon. Gentleman is concerned about, he should raise them with me, and I will gladly speak with the leadership there.

[Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)]

On the Public Accounts Committee, I asked HS2 bosses what I thought was a relatively simple question: how much are they spending on newt mitigation? However, they could not give an answer. Similarly, I can confirm to the House that I have information suggesting that the cost of the so-called bat tunnel is well north of the purported £100 million. I commend the Secretary of State for the leadership that she has shown today. Will she hold HS2 accountable for some of these bat-shed crazy costs?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can assure my hon. Friend that the estimated cost of the bat structure is £95 million in 2019 prices. I agree that we cannot have an environmental mitigations regime that allows this sort of thing to happen. The Government have put forward significant reforms in this space, and we will continue to monitor the need for further changes, so that we can deliver infrastructure in a better way.

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

I thank the Secretary of State for giving a candid and transparent statement to this House. On Birmingham—I am the only Birmingham MP present, which surprises me—it is disappointing that there will be delay and additional costs, but every cloud has a silver lining. My constituency has one of the highest levels of unemployment at 17%—four times the national average. In addition, we have seen the closure of a number of local stations; it would improve the network if they were reopened. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss how we can get my constituents into jobs, and the possibility of opening three stations: Handsworth Wood, Soho Road and City Health Campus?

--- Later in debate ---

[Heidi Alexander]

I would be very happy to ask the Rail Minister to meet the hon. Gentleman to talk about the stations in Birmingham that he mentions.

[Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)]

I welcome the statement from the Secretary of State. May I speak today of the east of England? The right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak) famously promised a dividend when he cancelled HS2 North, so might we expect some of that to be used to replace the crucial Haughley and Ely junctions, in order to finally sort out the rail connections in the east of England?

[Heidi Alexander]

I understand the importance of the Ely area scheme in terms of rail infrastructure, and I hope to say more about rail investment in the weeks before the summer recess.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State set out the steps she is taking to ensure that infrastructure like the £100 million bat tunnel will not be included in future projects, such as East West Rail?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can tell the hon. Gentleman that the Planning and Infrastructure Bill includes proposals to reform species and habitats protection. The proposals for environmental delivery plans and the nature restoration fund enable a shift to protecting the whole population of a species, rather than focusing on purely local considerations. That will ensure better outcomes for nature, without causing us to incur unreasonable costs, as happened with the HS2 bat mitigation structure.

[Mr Tom Morrison (Cheadle) (LD)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) on capacity on the west coast main line. Stockport is the one place where it is at full capacity, and HS2 was meant to solve that; however, because of the cancellation of the northern leg of HS2, we face HS2 trains going through Stockport’s already packed lines. I welcome the response to the plan put forward by the Mayors of the West Midlands and Greater Manchester, but will the Secretary of State commit to engaging with Stockport council on those plans? We need to find a solution to this capacity issue, because it could hold my borough back for decades.

[Heidi Alexander]

I am very conscious of the need to invest in and improve public transport in Stockport, and if the council would like to write to me with any relevant information, I will gladly consider it. I also point out that our investment in transport for city regions, announced a couple of weeks, is good news for Stockport; Metrolink will be extended to the town. I hope the hon. Gentleman will welcome that as good news for his constituents.

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

It may surprise the Secretary of State, but I actually have some sympathy for her for inheriting the HS2 nightmare. When she receives the updated budget and timeframe, will there be a cost and a timeline at which point she will say, “Enough is enough—it’s better to stop,” or is it an open-ended cheque book?

--- Later in debate ---

[Heidi Alexander]

If the hon. Gentleman had bothered to read the spending review last week, he would have seen that the Government have committed £25 billion over the next four years, which enables work to be taken forward. As I have said a number of times today, I will be updating the House when I have further information available about both the overall cost envelope, the estimated final cost at completion and the anticipated schedule.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

With a decade of delay, costs spiralling to eye-watering sums of anywhere between £60 billion and £100 billion and now credible allegations of fraud in the supply chain, will the Secretary of State say what steps the Government will take to recover hard-working taxpayers’ money from fraudsters, hold those responsible to account and announce a final stop to wasting money?

[Heidi Alexander]

I have said on a number of occasions that billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money has been wasted by constant scope changes, ineffective contracts and bad management. That is what this reset of HS2 is all about—it is why we have appointed the new leadership, and it is why we are fundamentally changing the governance structures. As I said in answer to previous questions, the matter of potential fraud in the supply chain is being investigated by HMRC, and we will be providing updates to the House as and when further information is available.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

2nd reading
Wednesday 11th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

On the day when the Chancellor has set out this Government’s determination to deliver a decade of national renewal, I am proud to stand before this House to make good on our promise to deliver a sustainable aviation sector. If we are once again to be an outward, confident trading nation that is connected to the world and leading the way on innovation, we must run as fast as we can towards a greener, cleaner future for flying. The Bill before us today will enable us to do precisely that. We do not have time to waste.

[Siân Berry (Brighton Pavilion) (Green)]

Does the Secretary of State agree that this Bill has a missing half, which could cut aviation emissions by demand management, and that at the very least, if there is to be public money spent setting up this system, it should be raised from the most frequent flyers and private jets?

[Heidi Alexander]

I think the hon. Lady and I fundamentally differ on the issue of demand management, because demand for air travel is only going one way, and it is therefore our moral responsibility, if we are going to have more people in the skies, to reduce the carbon emissions associated with that.

As I said, we have no time to waste. That is why, when it comes to aviation, this Government have rolled up their sleeves and got on with the job, putting an end to the dither and delay of the past. In less than a year, we have approved the expansion of Luton airport and invited plans for a new runway at Heathrow, and I will be making a final decision on Gatwick expansion as soon as possible. We have invested in the future of aviation, not just with the help we have given to reopen Doncaster Sheffield airport or the work we are doing to strengthen connectivity around Liverpool John Lennon, but also by putting £1 billion towards aerospace technology. We have introduced the sustainable aviation fuel mandate and provided £63 million to the advanced fuels fund, helping the industry prepare for a sustainable future. Just last week, we kick-started the largest redesign of UK airspace since the 1950s, paving the way for cleaner flights, fewer delays and more direct routes. This is what governing for growth looks like.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

I really welcome the Bill and the creation of a mechanism to increase the supply of sustainable aviation fuel. Can I add that, as we look towards airspace modernisation, we will have not only cleaner and quicker but quieter flights?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend is completely right to highlight the benefits of cracking on and delivering airspace modernisation. It could mean not only more direct flights and therefore less use of carbon, but noise benefits for communities close to airports.

We are determined to make rapid progress on this issue because we have an iron-clad belief that our success as an island nation rests on our international connectivity. The flow of trade, exporting British expertise and the movement of people for business and leisure all depend on aviation continuing to grow and thrive. We could put our head in the sand and pretend that people do not want to fly, that the sector does not support hundreds of thousands of jobs, that people do not look forward to foreign holidays or family reunions and that air freight is not a significant part of our trade by value, but we would be on the wrong side of both reality and public aspiration.

The truth is that demand for flight is only going in one direction. According to the Civil Aviation Authority, passenger levels were 7% higher in 2024 than in the previous year. If we do not respond and if we do not set aviation up for long-term success, we do not just make ourselves poorer today, we kiss goodbye to the growth and opportunity this country needs in the decades to come.

I want a future where more passengers can take to the skies, not fewer. But like the rest of our economy, that must mean emitting less carbon, not more. This Bill will help secure that future. It builds on the fantastic work across Government and industry, led by my hon. Friend the Aviation Minister, which saw the SAF mandate come into effect earlier this year. As we run towards a future of green flight, we know that sustainable aviation fuel is one of the biggest levers we can pull. It emits 70% less greenhouse gases on average than fossil fuels. It can be used in existing infrastructure and aircraft engines, and it is now backed by a mandate that is rightly ambitious: 10% SAF in the fuel mix by 2030 and 22% by 2040. I want as much as possible to be made in the UK.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

The mandate, which we welcome, calls for only 22% sustainable jet fuel usage by 2040, while the Chancellor has said that she wants a third runway in use at Heathrow by 2035. That would mean more aviation-related health hazards to my constituents. Does the Minister agree that we should not pursue Heathrow expansion until we can turbocharge the SAF mandate and bring non-sustainable fuel usage down further?

[Heidi Alexander]

The Government have been clear that we will permit airport expansion only when it is consistent with our legally binding climate change targets. SAF is one way in which we can clean up aviation, but the work we are doing on the development of new aircraft technologies, alongside the work we are doing on airspace modernisation, is all connected to how we bring those emissions down. I point out to the hon. Lady that the expansion of Heathrow has already been modelled in relation to the sixth carbon budget.

We have been clear that the mandate alone is not enough. Creating the demand for SAF but not the supply does not get us where we want to be. We have heard the industry’s concerns around risk and uncertainty for investment, and that is why we are acting today. The Bill creates a revenue certainty mechanism that will boost SAF production by giving investors confidence to choose the UK.

[David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)]

I declare an interest as a pilot. In this context, I spoke to one of the would-be producers—I think it is called Zero—and its primary concern with respect to the strike price mechanism that the right hon. Lady talks about is how that will be set and what input producers will have. Will she address that when she talks through the mechanism?

[Heidi Alexander]

There is more detailed design work to do on all that, and we will work alongside industry to ensure that we have a workable proposition.

The mechanism boosts SAF production and gives investors confidence in the UK by addressing one of the biggest barriers to investment: the lack of a clear, predictable market price for SAF. That starts with a guaranteed strike price agreed between a Government-owned counterparty and the SAF producer. If SAF is sold for under that price, the counterparty will pay the difference to the producer. If SAF is sold for above that price, the producer will pay the difference to the counterparty.

The revenue certainty mechanism will be funded by industry, specifically through a levy on aviation fuel suppliers. That makes sense for two reasons. First, it is the industry that will benefit from more and cheaper SAF production, so it is only right that industry, and not the taxpayer, should fund it. Secondly, placing the levy higher up the supply chain spreads costs across the sector and is the least burdensome option. It is important to note that the revenue certainty mechanism will not be indefinite. It will be targeted and time-limited, helping to get first-of-a-kind UK projects off the ground. The Bill’s sunset clause means that we can offer contracts only for 10 years, unless it is extended via the affirmative procedure. We will have a firm grip on costs throughout. We will decide the number and duration of contracts, limit support to a predetermined volume of SAF and negotiate acceptable strike prices. There is no obligation on the Government to enter into a defined number of contracts or to agree contracts at any cost.

I know that some hon. Members may be concerned about the impact on passengers, so let me reassure them: none of this will limit people’s ability to fly. We expect minimal changes to fares, with an average ticket increasing or decreasing by up to £1.50 a year. I am pleased to say that this is a product of many months of consultation with the industry. Airlines are calling for it, airports are calling for it, SAF producers are calling for it, environmental organisations are calling for it, and the Government are therefore getting on with delivering it.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

I am sure that we wish the Government well in what they are trying to do. I gather that the International Air Transport Association highlighted only last week that, at the moment, sustainable aviation fuels cost approximately five times as much as conventional jet fuel. Will she explain how the measures in the Bill will bridge that gap to make it economical?

[Heidi Alexander]

Supply is constrained at the moment; the UK has one commercial production facility, in Immingham. We need to build investor confidence to commercialise some of the sustainable aviation fuel demonstration projects around the country. More supply and lower prices are good for the aviation sector and, ultimately, good for those who wish to fly.

I think it is worth taking a moment to reiterate what is at stake. When UK production of low-carbon fuels is up and running, it could support up to 15,000 green jobs, contribute £5 billion a year to our economy, and deliver clean and secure energy. What is more, fulfilling the SAF mandate could save up to 2.7 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent a year by 2030. Seizing those opportunities will ensure that we deliver on our bold plan for change and that the UK and our world-class aviation sector are leading the way in the race towards sustainable flight.

This country cannot be open for business, open to investment and open to growth yet have a closed mind when it comes to international connectivity. The Bill is a clear signal that we will not accept false trade-offs that pit aviation’s growth against our commitments to net zero. We can and must do both. We have the opportunity of a lifetime and, I believe, a moral mission to future-proof aviation. When the sector succeeds, it is not only a source of growth, through trade, business and tourism, but a source of joy, aspiration and opportunity. It is as vital today as it will be for future generations. Their need to fly, explore the world and do business requires us to act now. That is what the Bill does, and I commend it to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords]

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

2nd reading
Monday 2nd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

I start by thanking my friend, the Minister of State for Rail, for being an excellent advocate and custodian of the Bill as it made its way through the other place. As someone who started his career on London’s world-famous red buses, there was no better person in the country than the noble Lord Hendy to kick-start the Government’s bus reform journey. I am proud to call him my friend, and I am grateful every day for his wise counsel, frank advice and gentle good humour.

What we saw in the other place, and what I hope we may be able to secure in this House, is constructive cross-party support. We all recognise how buses connect us to the things that matter most: work and school, friends and family, essential services and the weekly shop. The billions of bus journeys each year—equivalent to over 100 every second of every day—are the difference between vibrant communities and boarded up high streets, between aspiration and isolation, and between getting on and being forced to give up.

The Bill represents years of work in opposition and now in government to discard the failed 40-year model of deregulation in favour of putting passenger needs, reliable services and local accountability at the heart of the industry.

[Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)]

I wholeheartedly agree with the Secretary of State on the importance of buses for connectivity. I note that the Bill talks about “socially necessary” services, but it would be helpful to have a better understanding of the definition of what they are beyond my own interpretation. For example, if a constituency does not have a train station, can we therefore have a greater assurance that we will see no loss in our bus services?

[Heidi Alexander]

Through the Bill, we will be giving local transport authorities the power to determine socially necessary local services. That relates to access to employment, jobs, things like health facilities, and education. That power will lie with local authorities and it will be for them to determine.

[Wendy Morton]

rose—

[Heidi Alexander]

I will make some progress.

Before I come to the Bill’s key measures, I will briefly set out the context. Although it may be tempting for me to lay the blame for the current state of buses entirely at the feet of the last Government, that would be neither right nor fair. They too inherited a broken, deregulated system that forced passengers to navigate multiple operators on similar routes, but with different tickets. They, too, faced declining patronage, with 1.8 billion fewer journeys outside London last year than in 1986, and, to their credit, they tried to fix that. The national bus strategy, bus service improvement plans and greater powers for mayors were all steps in the right direction to improve services for passengers.

[Wendy Morton]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am going to make some progress.

However, in some areas such as franchising, the last Government did not go far enough, so this Bill will not only build on previous reforms but go further—much further—in fixing the faults that are still holding the industry back from meeting the needs of local people. I hope that Members in all parts of the House will see the merits of the approach that we are taking. After all, we have all heard from constituents about jobs not taken and opportunities missed because bus services are too unreliable, or do not operate on Sundays, or do not cater for night-time shifts.

[Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)]

In London we have benefited for a long time from bus services that are better than those in the rest of the country, and I wholeheartedly welcome my right hon. Friend’s desire to level that up, but in London we also have floating bus stops. I know that matching the needs of cyclists, of whom I am one, with those of others involves a delicate balance, but for someone who is blind, visually impaired or encumbered by, for instance, a buggy, getting off a bus at a floating bus stop is very dangerous. What plans has my right hon. Friend to tackle the issue across the country?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend may know that in the Bill we commit ourselves to producing design guidance for local authorities so that they can look at what is best practice. She may also know that in the other place the Rail Minister said we were committing ourselves to a non-statutory pause on the type of floating bus stop that requires a passenger to alight directly on a cycle lane. I hope that that gives her some reassurance.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for the work that she is doing in this regard. I am pleased to hear that the Bill requires guidance to be produced to enable authorities to make floating bus stops safe and accessible, but many blind and partially sighted people, including me, have experienced problems with them. Could a proper assessment of their safety be carried out to ensure that no passenger who uses a bus, whether it is to go to work or to attend a health appointment, will experience the challenges that so many people currently experience when trying to navigate them?

[Heidi Alexander]

We will be looking carefully at this issue. I am very conscious of the needs of the visually impaired community, but I am also very conscious of the need to protect cyclists and pedestrians on our roads, so I am keen for us to look at the issue in the round.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

Will my right hon. Friend give way?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am going to make a little more progress, but I shall be happy to take interventions later.

I was talking about the problems caused by bus services that are unreliable, do not operate at weekends or, perhaps, do not cater for individuals working night shifts. We all know that each of those stories is the story of a life frustrated, but, taken together, they constitute an anthology of wasted potential, of living standards and growth held back. That is why improving bus services underpins our plan for change, and it is why, despite difficult choices made across Government, we confirmed more than £1 billion in funding in the last Budget to protect vital routes and keep fares down.

[Wendy Morton]

rose—

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

rose—

[Heidi Alexander]

I am not going to give way again to the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton). I will give way to the hon. Member for North Herefordshire.

[Ellie Chowns]

Does the Secretary of State recognise that rural constituencies such as mine have particular needs, and that the funding needs to reflect the extra costs associated with rurality, as well as the demographic demands? Young people, older people and people on low incomes rely on buses more than others. Will those factors be taken into account in the funding mechanisms for bus services?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can reassure the hon. Lady that we have taken those issues into account in our allocation of this year’s funding.

Let me now explain our approach. Funding, even record funding, without reform means throwing good money after bad, and that brings me to the Bill. Our reforms are not ideological. Regardless of what some may say, this is not about public ownership versus private enterprise. It is about enabling more people to use buses, about ensuring that those services are safer, more reliable and more accessible, and about harnessing the best of devolution.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. Friend for introducing the Bill. Sarah, one of my constituents, is here today. Her work with the National Federation of the Blind of the UK and its street access campaign has demonstrated the difficulty that blind and partially sighted people experience in accessing buses. They cannot make the choice that others make to pass their driving tests as soon as they reach the age of 17 so that they can travel to their local colleges, schools or hospital appointments. I want to draw attention to that fantastic campaign, and to ask for the Bill to make clear to local authorities that they must work to ensure that all buses are accessible—not just to people with sight impairments but to those who need to access a bus in a wheelchair, like my friends who cannot travel together and are often whizzed past by the driver, and have to wait longer than the rest of us.

[Heidi Alexander]

I thank my hon. Friend for making that point so powerfully. I can reassure her that the Bill will introduce a duty for local transport authorities to consult disabled passengers and disability organisations before initiating a franchise scheme. It will standardise the current disability training requirements that operators will need to fulfil, and it will give the Government new powers to require operators to record data on that training. I think that, taken together, those measures should represent a positive improvement in the way in which the bus network is designed to ensure that everyone can use it.

As I was saying, the Bill was designed to harness the best of devolution. That means transferring power away from central Government and operators, and towards local leaders—those who know their areas best—and giving them the tools to deliver buses on which communities can rely. Whether we are talking about the franchising that has worked so well in London or Jersey, about the local authority bus companies that have thrived in Nottingham and Reading or about the excellent examples of enhanced partnerships in Brighton and Norfolk, it is clear to me that one size does not fit all. The Bill will expand the options available to local authorities so that each area has the bus service that is right for it, while also safeguarding the needs of passengers, particularly the most vulnerable.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I know that the Secretary of State is committed to ensuring that buses are environmentally friendly and meet the net zero targets that we all want to be met. Wrightbus in Ballymena, in Northern Ireland, is a leading producer of hydrogen buses, which provide safe, reliable, cost-effective transport. Has the Secretary of State been able to have any discussions with Wrightbus—which supplies buses in London and elsewhere in the UK—with a view to ensuring that everyone in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland can take advantage of that innovative technology?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Gentleman is right to highlight the innovative technology developed by Wrightbus. I know that the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood), has not only met representatives of Wrightbus but visited its facility.

Let me now explain how we are going about fixing the broken franchising process.

It cannot be right that it took Mayor Andy Burnham years to bring just one bus under public control, after being frustrated at every turn. With bus services in Greater Manchester now part of the Bee Network, usage is up by 14%, and revenues and punctuality are also moving in the right direction. However, franchising remains too complex. Proposed schemes need to jump through myriad hoops, and they still require my consent to proceed—which is odd, to say the least. The idea that I understand what passengers in Leicestershire or Cornwall need better than their local leaders do is for the birds. In December, we opened up franchising to every local authority. Through this Bill, we will further streamline the process, making it simpler for franchise schemes to be granted and assessed.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

The Secretary of State referred earlier to placing certain statutory duties on county councils. When she considers that, will she consider including in those duties the maintenance of companion bus passes for people with learning difficulties who cannot travel on their own? It is not much good for them to have a free bus pass if they cannot take a companion with them.

Will the Secretary of State join me in expressing our sadness and commiseration over the recent passing of Mr Andrew Wickham, who spent more than 40 years in the transport industry and over a decade as managing director of Go South Coast, which operates Bluestar buses in New Forest East? I always found him to be a marvellously attentive correspondent, and he was someone who worked until almost the very end.

[Heidi Alexander]

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention, and he gives me the opportunity to place on record my thanks to Andrew Wickham. I have the privilege of representing the constituency of Swindon South, and he ran Swindon’s Bus Company. He was the epitome of professionalism and kindness to me—not only as a Member of a Parliament, but when I was a candidate—and I pass on my condolences to his family, his friends and his colleagues.

The right hon. Gentleman raises a fair point about the importance of companion travel for individuals with disabilities. He will know that the decision to add extras to the English national concessionary fare scheme is taken by local authorities.

I was talking about our desire to make the franchising system simpler. Of course, the model will not work everywhere, which is why this Bill also strengthens enhanced partnerships and removes the ideological ban on establishing new local authority bus companies. Furthermore, by giving local authorities the power to design and pay bus operator grants in their area, the Bill gives greater protections for socially necessary local services, securing the lifeline routes that keep communities connected.

[Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)]

In our communities we have nearly full employment, but a lot of people are on extremely low wages. Before the bus fare cap came in, the bus fare from Kendal to Ambleside was the second highest in the entire country, costing people a quarter of their salary to get to work. As the Secretary of State makes sure that devolution happens and that franchising is done in a way that is fit for purpose in each different area, will she ensure that she does not abdicate her responsibility to fully fund the bus fare cap, so that people like my constituents can actually afford to get to work?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that there is a spending review under way, but I can confirm that I fully appreciate the importance of having an affordable and accessible bus route. He will be aware that zero funding was allocated to fund the bus fare cap beyond the end of last year, and this Government stepped in with our commitment to the £3 fare. Although it applies to only one in six journeys—because a number of people who travel regularly will use a travelcard for a week or a month—I am aware of the importance that his constituents and others attach to the cap.

[Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)]

I congratulate the Secretary of State and her team, including the Minister in the other place, on bringing this Bill before the House. Since 2010, we have seen 2 million fewer bus miles ridden in Hampshire. In Oakley, Chineham, Black Dam and South Ham, I have heard stories of missed appointments, work shifts and social engagements as a result of poor service. Can she confirm that this Bill will give every part of England the opportunity to take back control of its bus services? Can she explain what will happen with the devolution process and whether the powers will pass to the new unitary authorities or mayoral authorities, or has that yet to be decided?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend is a fearsome advocate for his constituents, and I know the importance that he places on local bus services. Under the new devolution arrangements, local transport authorities will be the part of local government where the new powers lie. It is for local transport authorities to decide whether franchising or an enhanced partnership is the route for them to deliver the services that their communities need.

Running buses should always be about serving passengers, and I want to say something about safety and what we are doing, through this Bill, to put the needs of passengers first. We want to keep passengers safe at any time of day or night, and at any point in their journey, be it waiting at bus stops or when on board. That is why this Bill includes powers for local transport authorities to crack down on fare dodgers and tackle antisocial behaviour; requirements for drivers of school services to pass enhanced criminal record checks, closing an existing loophole; and mandatory training for bus staff to help tackle crime where it is safe for them to do so.

[Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole) (Lab)]

I want to return briefly to the socially necessary services that the Secretary of State mentioned. Two issues in my constituency are of great importance: the first relates to the fact that school-only buses are often more expensive than regular services; and the second relates to operators, who tell me that the current SEND transport model is unsustainable and that children with special educational needs and disabilities are being left with a poorer service. Will the Bill seek to address those concerns?

[Heidi Alexander]

There are not specific criteria and provisions in this Bill, but I can assure my hon. Friend that my ministerial colleagues and I are very aware of those issues. Although school-only bus provision is provided in a slightly different way, I would be happy to talk to him about the particular issues in his constituency.

I want to say something about accessibility. For many, buses are a route to a better, more independent life, yet the current patchwork quilt of standards and regulations can further disable passengers, rather than enable them. That will change through this Bill, because local authorities will be required to produce a bus network accessibility plan and to consult disability organisations on changes to services, as I said earlier. New statutory guidance will make stopping places more accessible, including floating bus stops, which came up earlier. However, after listening to concerns, we will press pause on those that are perceived to be poorly designed.

[Chris Vince]

Part of the issue with bus stops in Harlow has been caused by the redevelopment of sustainable transport corridors, which we absolutely welcome. Bus stops are being forced to move, making them less accessible. Is that something that the Bill takes into account? Even if it is a temporary bus stop or bus station, we need to ensure that it fits the criteria.

--- Later in debate ---

[Heidi Alexander]

The Bill will improve the ability of local transport authorities to deal with precisely that sort of situation.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Heidi Alexander]

I will make some progress. I am conscious that a number of Members want to speak, and I would like to allow as many people as possible to make contributions.

I want to say something about our commitment to meeting our net zero targets. This Bill will restrict new non-zero emission buses on most local services in England from no earlier than January 2030, and I know that my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Transport is already speaking to the industry—not just about securing an orderly transition, but about the opportunity for British bus manufacturers to meet new demand both at home and abroad.

Finally, several non-Government amendments were added to the Bill during its passage in the other place, which is why I was unable to make a statement of compatibility with the European convention on human rights. That was the result of clause 40, which was not tabled by the Government. It requires recording violent behaviour on buses and sharing that data with the local transport authority, and it also requires consulting trade unions on staff safety. The personal data requirements are incompatible with ECHR obligations; as such, the Government will seek to address this matter as the Bill progresses.

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

The Secretary of State mentioned that the Minister for Local Transport is taking responsibility for the net zero side, and I was delighted to welcome him to my constituency to see the work of Wrightbus, which is repurposing diesel buses with its new powertrains. Could she provide reassurance that buses repurposed as net zero buses will also be eligible for Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government funding for decarbonisation of the bus fleet in the future?

[Heidi Alexander]

If I may, I will write to the hon. Gentleman to confirm that point, but I understand why he is keen to raise it.

In conclusion, I would say that for too long and in too many places a degraded bus network has been symbolic of wider national decline, with each poor service reinforcing a sense of things not working as they should. That ends now. This Bill represents a brighter future for bus travel. For the first time in 40 years, we are taking back control of our buses, transferring power from operators to local leaders and from Whitehall to the town hall, where it belongs. I truly believe that the transport needs of my constituents in Swindon are different from those of passengers in Scunthorpe or Southend. That is why buses will rightly look and feel different across the country, reflecting the identity and priorities of local areas.

This Bill is just the start of the journey. Throughout its passage and following Royal Assent, we will continue to work with the bus industry, passenger groups and colleagues in both Houses as we set out further regulations on the standards that we and millions of daily passengers expect. Better buses are around the corner, with increased reliability, greater accountability and services that passengers can finally depend on. I commend this Bill to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

South Western Railway: Transfer to Public Ownership

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

Thursday 22nd May 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

Following my statement in December last year, I can confirm to the House that on Sunday 25 May 2025, South Western Railway’s services will transfer into public ownership.

South Western Railway’s services are the first to transfer to public ownership under the Passenger Railways Services (Public Ownership) Act 2024, a landmark piece of legislation passed by Parliament in November. From Sunday, operations will be run by a new public sector operator—South Western Railway Ltd. For now, this will be a subsidiary of the public corporation DfT Operator Ltd, which will eventually transfer into Great British Railways, once established.

C2C’s services will be next to transfer into public ownership on 20 July 2025, and as previously announced, I have issued an expiry notice to Greater Anglia, confirming that their contract with the Department will now expire on 12 October 2025. Greater Anglia’s services will transfer into public ownership on this date.

Sunday marks a watershed moment in the Government’s plan to return the railways to the service of passengers and reform our broken railways, ending 30 years of fragmentation. It delivers on our manifesto commitment to bring passenger services back into public control and put passengers firmly at the heart of the railways.

Public ownership will ensure services are run in the interests of passengers, not shareholders, and is a vital step in enabling the Government to bring track and train together. But public ownership alone is not a silver bullet and will not fix the structural problems hindering the railways currently. That will take time.

Under this Government’s plan to unify track and train under one organisation, GBR will be the single “directing mind” for the railway, putting passengers and customers first, rebuilding trust in the railway and simplifying the industry.

In February, the Government’s consultation on the Railways Bill outlined plans to establish GBR, which will consolidate the 14 different train operating companies, Network Rail and DfTO into a single organisation. The Railways Bill will be laid before Parliament in this parliamentary Session, and I expect GBR to be operational around 12 months after the Bill receives Royal Assent.

[HCWS666]

Oral Answers to Questions

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

Thursday 15th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)]

2. What steps she is taking to help ensure the transport system supports economic growth.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

Economic growth is this Government’s top priority, and a reliable, well-connected transport network is critical to driving prosperity. That means delivering local priorities in places such as Huddersfield and Hyndburn, including through West Yorkshire’s £830 million city region sustainable transport settlement and the local transport grant for Lancashire combined county authority.

[Sarah Smith]

The Government have rightly prioritised rail as a key factor in the future viability of our transport infrastructure. There exists in Hyndburn an outstanding opportunity to create a freight rail terminal that would fit with the Department for Transport’s targets for increasing rail freight capacity by 75%. The proposal also adds value in increasing east-west rail freight capacity, which must currently pass through Manchester. Sadly, no progress was made on this under the last Government. Does the Secretary of State agree that a north-west freight strategy should be a priority, and will she meet me to explore the potential of this as a priority project in the north-west?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend is right to highlight the importance of rail freight, and I am clear that with a reformed railway, we must do more to shift freight from the roads to rail. I am keen that Network Rail works collaboratively with industry to develop terminals where there is either current demand or the potential for future growth. If there is viable interest in developing this land, my officials and Network Rail would be happy to engage with interested parties.

[Harpreet Uppal]

I welcome the funding commitments for transport in Huddersfield, including rail upgrades to the Penistone line and the trans-Pennine route, which are very much needed. However, during a coffee morning with residents last week, the main issue discussed was the reliability of bus services and the need for integrated transport. Can the Minister outline how she is supporting our West Yorkshire Mayor in ensuring that transport-led economic growth includes bus services and is felt across all neighbourhoods and communities in Huddersfield?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am not surprised to hear that buses are top of the agenda for my hon. Friend’s constituents. Reliable, affordable bus services will be essential for so many of those she represents, and I was particularly delighted to see the successful launch this week of Mayor Tracy Brabin’s Weaver bus network. The Government are investing £36 million in West Yorkshire’s buses. That is in addition to the £830 million we are spending in the region to improve local transport infrastructure and the rail investment we are making as part of the trans-Pennine route upgrade.

[Sir Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con)]

The Secretary of State knows that High Speed 2’s central purpose is to deliver economic growth, but she knows, too, that it is taking far longer and costing far more to deliver than anyone expected. Given that projects of the scale of HS2 require parliamentary approval, is it not important that Parliament has accurate estimates of how much the project will cost and how long it will take to deliver? Will she commission a properly independent and thorough review of why the budget for HS2 has increased so often and the timetable has expanded so often?

[Heidi Alexander]

I will be providing updates to the House on the emerging cost position and opening window. As the right hon. and learned Gentleman will know, this Government have appointed a new chief executive of HS2, Mark Wild, who is conducting an ongoing review. We have also reintroduced ministerial oversight, which was sorely lacking under the Conservative party’s leadership. I recognise that this is an important issue, and we are doing all we can to deliver the rest of this railway at the lowest reasonable cost to the taxpayer, so that people can enjoy excellent rail services in the future.

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

The Transport Secretary recently refused to commit to keeping the £3 cap on bus fares outside London beyond the end of this year, leaving many in rural areas worried about how much more they will end up having to pay to get to work. Residents across my constituency have already seen vital routes scrapped or scaled back, holding back economic growth. Can the Transport Secretary explain what support will be made available to not only keep rural fares down but restore lost services?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Lady will know that this Government stepped in to prevent soaring bus fare increases, given the last Government’s decision to only fund a bus fare cap until the end of last year. [Interruption.] Opposition Members can chunter, but the truth of the matter is that it was fantasy money, and the money was not allocated to fund that bus fare cap. We are in an ongoing process, through the spending review. I appreciate the importance of affordable, reliable bus services, and we will do all we can to ensure that people can continue to enjoy the bus network that they need.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

Greater Anglia supports economic growth in the east of England with modern, quiet, fast trains, paid for by £2 billion of private sector investment. Its service is the most punctual in the country, it is popular with its passengers, and it is run so efficiently that instead of costing the taxpayer, it pays money into the Treasury. It is currently train operator of the year. Greater Anglia knows that nationalisation is coming, and it has offered to extend its operations to allow the Government to focus on the worst performing operators first. Why did the Government refuse? Is the Secretary of State focused on improving the lives of passengers, or is it an ideological determination to put the unions back in charge of the railways?

[Heidi Alexander]

I really do not know how many times I have to say this to the hon. Gentleman. I met him a couple of days ago, and I explained that our process for bringing train operating companies into public ownership is designed to offer best value for money to the taxpayer. We will not be buying out failing private sector operators by breaking contracts early. He is right to say that Greater Anglia provides an excellent service, and I am confident we will build on that when it comes into public ownership in October.

[Jerome Mayhew]

Perhaps the Secretary of State did not understand the nature of the offer from Greater Anglia. It was not expecting to be bought out; it was offering to continue its current arrangements for a couple of years.

In a previous answer, the Secretary of State said to me that the benefit of rail nationalisation will be the £150 million of efficiency savings. Let’s see how that is going. Her first nationalisation will be South Western Railway in two weeks’ time. That new service will need trains, yet The Telegraph has revealed that inept contract negotiations by her Department, where there was no effective competition, mean that the cost of re-leasing the same trains is increasing by £250 million over five years. Are those the efficiency savings she had in mind?

[Heidi Alexander]

The up to £150 million of savings that the taxpayer can enjoy as a result of train operating companies coming back into public ownership are the saved management fees that we are currently paying to private sector operators, and efficiencies will be delivered on top of that.

On the substantive issue that the hon. Gentleman raises about South Western Railway, the cost of renewing rolling stock leases has been fully and properly budgeted for, with successful commercial negotiations recently concluded. The franchising process under his Government saw some “buy now, pay later” deals done on rolling stock, where costs were always expected to increase. I think that approach was deeply dubious, but that was the short-termist, ill-thought-through approach of his Government, and we are now having to clear up that mess.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

3. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help ensure that workers have necessary skills for the rail sector.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

A skilled workforce is key to delivering the railways that passengers need, and I am working closely with colleagues across Government to ensure that we train up the right people in the right way for the jobs of the future. As my hon. Friend will know from our visit to Derby last week, we are also taking action to ensure that we attract younger talent into the industry, by lowering the age at which someone can become a train driver to 18.

[Catherine Atkinson]

Derby is the centre of the largest rail cluster in Europe—an east midlands cluster employing 45,000 people. There is an incredible range of roles in the sector, from engineering to driving, digital to welding, advanced manufacturing to customer services, and many more. However, with a third of workers in the rail sector aged 50 or over, it faces a significant shortage of rail skills in the future. What role can Great British Railways, with its headquarters in Derby, play in ensuring that we have the skills we need for the future?

[Heidi Alexander]

Developing an industry workforce plan will be a key priority for Great British Railways, and I am confident that we will be making the most of the expertise that already exists in places such as Derby. The fact that Derby will soon become the new national headquarters of GBR will mean more high-skilled jobs for a city that is already brimming with rail industry talent. I look forward to working with my hon. Friend and local leaders on maximising the opportunities that the creation of GBR presents.

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

4. What steps she is taking to support the maritime sector.

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew Ranger (Wrexham) (Lab)]

5. What assessment she has made of the adequacy of the performance of rail services operating from north Wales.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

Despite recent improvements, the performance of Avanti West Coast’s services in north Wales is still not good enough. Poor Network Rail infrastructure reliability also remains an issue. North Wales and its surrounding regions have such huge potential, so I am actively engaged with the Welsh Government on plans to create a transport system that meets the needs of all our communities and delivers economic growth.

[Andrew Ranger]

Rail plays a vital role in the north Wales economy, so I welcome the recent announcement of 12 additional services per week between Holyhead and London. However, that remains a shadow of the pre-covid timetable, which saw up to 14 daily direct services. The north Wales line regularly sees more cancellations and poorer reliability than other parts of the west coast franchise. It is vital that with economic growth, tourism and access to employment across north Wales and beyond, we see a return to a more frequent and reliable service pattern. What measures is the Secretary of State taking to ensure that that happens?

[Heidi Alexander]

The uplift in service levels between London and Holyhead from this Sunday is indeed welcome, and I agree that a reliable service being delivered for the passengers of north Wales is vital for economic growth. I recognise that Wales has not seen its fair share of funding historically, and I am committed to continued rail infrastructure investment in Wales to release capacity and improve reliability.

[Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)]

The midlands rail hub was backed by the previous Government. It will unlock and drive economic growth across the west midlands and beyond, including into Wales, and improve the performance of existing rail services. When will the Secretary of State make an announcement in her review of that project, or is this just another example of the Treasury reversing or holding up investment in our region?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can see that Mr Speaker is smiling; I congratulate the right hon. Lady on her ingenuity in working in a question about the midlands. She is right to talk about the benefits of the midlands rail hub. She will be aware that a spending review process is under way, and I anticipate being able to say more on that project in due course.

[Peter Lamb (Crawley) (Lab)]

6. Whether she plans to increase rail capacity on the Brighton main line.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tristan Osborne (Chatham and Aylesford) (Lab)]

15. What recent progress her Department has made on constructing the lower Thames crossing.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

In March, we took the decision to approve National Highways’ planning application for the lower Thames crossing, which is a big step forward for the project and ends decades of inaction by previous Governments. Ahead of construction, my officials and National Highways are exploring all funding options, including private finance. As with all capital projects, spending decisions are subject to the spending review process.

[Tristan Osborne]

I welcome that response, the certainty the decision has provided to people living in the Thames estuary, and the visit yesterday to supply-chain businesses by our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero. Will the Secretary of State for Transport confirm that she will meet me and a delegation of Kent and south-east London MPs to discuss how we can ensure that investment and skills are secured for local supply chains and the development of further education colleges?

[Heidi Alexander]

I would be very happy to have that meeting with my hon. Friend and his colleagues.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

After years of dither and delay, we are taking bold action to take the brakes off growth, create jobs and get Britain moving. Last week, we announced a lower minimum age for train drivers to future-proof our railways and prevent frustrating cancellations, and we have granted planning permission for the lower Thames crossing, a strategic freight route between the south-east and the rest of the country.

We are also strengthening our aviation industry. Planning approval has been given for the expansion of Luton airport, a final decision on Gatwick will be made as soon as possible, following the airport’s submission of further information, and we look forward to receiving proposals for a third runway at Heathrow later this summer. Finally, we introduced the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill yesterday, giving confidence to the industry as it charts a green future.

These measures show how we are delivering on our plan for change: driving opportunity, creating better journeys and improving living standards up and down the country.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the Secretary of State for setting out those positive opportunities for the future. Air passenger duty adversely impacts economic opportunity for companies in Northern Ireland. To continue the positivity from the Secretary of State, would she commit to asking Cabinet colleagues to adjust the block grant for Northern Ireland to allow a reduction in APD in order to enhance connectivity within this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?

[Heidi Alexander]

I appreciate the importance of aviation to the Northern Ireland economy and thank the hon. Gentleman for his interest in this matter. As the Minister responsible for aviation, my hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane) said in answer to substantive questions, airports are currently seeing their busiest times ever. This Government feel that our approach to APD is proportionate given the fantastic demand we are seeing.

[Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)]

T2. Reliable bus services are not just a privilege; they are the backbone of communities across my constituency, and connect individuals to schools, jobs, financial services and social interactions with family and friends. Rural communities in Northumberland deserve the same opportunities as our more urban regions. Does the Minister agree that as the Government’s better buses Bill proceeds to its further stages, we must not overlook rural voices on the services that they need?

--- Later in debate ---

[Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)]

At the last transport questions, on 27 March, in the context of the Secretary of State saying on television that some strikes are “necessary”, I pointed out that the trade unions have welcomed her rail reform plans and said that

“a just transition to nationalisation would mean the levelling up of pay and conditions for rail workers.”

The cost of that to the taxpayer would be considerable. When I asked the Secretary of State whether she would

“consider a strike over harmonising pay and conditions to be a necessary strike”,—[Official Report, 27 March 2025; Vol. 764, c. 1099.]

she avoided answering the question, which was uncharacteristic of her. I will give her another chance now: would that be a necessary strike?

[Heidi Alexander]

The answer I gave to the shadow Secretary of State’s previous question was that if, as an operator of the railway, we felt it was necessary to take a strike on grounds of safety, we would, of course, put the safety of the travelling public first—that will always be the case. On the harmonisation of terms and conditions, we need to bring legislation forward to establish Great British Railways. We will have many discussions with our trade union colleagues in a constructive way while ensuring that we provide value for money for the taxpayer.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

T3. Project Willow supports the potential of sustainable aviation fuel to bring jobs to Grangemouth, if the right policies are in place such as flexibility on the cap on hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids, and expediency on the revenue certainty mechanism. What is the Department doing urgently to assess, integrate and implement the recommendations of Project Willow and to support accelerated investment at Grangemouth?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

Following the fire at North Hyde substation that closed Heathrow a few weeks ago, various lines on the London Underground were brought to a standstill by another power outage this week. It is clear that we need to do more to improve the resilience of our transport energy infrastructure, so will the Secretary of State commit to a full review to ensure that these incidents do not keep happening?

[Heidi Alexander]

A review is being conducted by the National Energy System Operator on the Heathrow substation fire. The interim report has been published, and we expect the full report in June. The Heathrow report is expected to go to its board in May. My Department and I work very closely with all transport operators to ensure that they have robust resilience plans in place. The Government are conducting a review of critical national infrastructure to address the broader question.

[Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

T5. In Hartlepool, to make a journey of just 2.8 miles from St Hild’s school to the Headland requires two buses and takes approximately 40 minutes. The Hartlepool transport users forum and residents across the town have had enough. Other parts of the country are putting buses back into public hands. Will the Minister mandate Tees Valley combined authority to do the same for Hartlepool?

--- Later in debate ---

[Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)]

T8. My constituents in Tiverton and Minehead face many challenges when it comes to transport connectivity. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss the merits of a strategic outline business case set out by West Somerset Railway to reconnect the heritage railway line at Bishops Lydeard to the mainline at Taunton? That would allow students to access the only sixth-form facilities in Taunton, take the pressure off the No. 28 bus, and massively improve our ability to entertain more tourists.

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Lady mentioned this to me a couple of days ago when I bumped into her, but I regret to inform her that the Department does not currently have any plans to take forward a development link between Bishops Lydeard and Taunton. I have, however, asked officials to reach out to those at the local authority to discuss the merits of the scheme.

[Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)]

In the ’60s, North West Leicestershire lost its only passenger rail service, the Ivanhoe line. In 2025, my constituents still have no direct access to the rail line. Increasing connectivity of railways is crucial to securing economic growth. Will the Minister share the Department’s plans to improve access to passenger rail for communities with no current access?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)]

The 7.58 am train from Sunbury to Shepperton is used by a lot of schoolchildren in my constituency to get to school, but it was cancelled for four days during a recent six-day period, which meant that children were late for school. That appears on their attendance register, which follows them throughout life. The Secretary of State will own South Western Railway by the end of the month. Will she commit to improving the reliability and punctuality of that section of the line?

[Heidi Alexander]

With the transfer of South Western trains into public ownership in 10 days’ time, the Government are determined to turn this situation around, but I have to say that we have inherited an abject mess from the train operating company, which over six years has failed to get the new fleet of Arterio 701 trains into service.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Transport Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

That doesn’t always work.

[Heidi Alexander]

I am aware that feasibility studies have been done on 50 Access for All stations, and we are reviewing the outcomes of those studies. I apologise to the right hon. Gentleman for not knowing whether that station in his constituency is one of those 50. I promise him that I will talk to officials about the matter.

[Mr Speaker]

In Chorley’s case, work started but it has still not been finished. It was abandoned halfway through.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

Will the Secretary of State accept my warm invitation to visit my constituency and sit in traffic with me so she can experience what my constituents experience morning, noon and night on the A27, which is strangling economic growth in the area and preventing investment?

[Heidi Alexander]

As tempting as the hon. Lady’s invitation is, I regret that I will not be able to do that, and I will not commit the Roads Minister to it either, but we will look at the matters she raises and write to her with an update on the action we think could be taken to improve the situation.

[Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley) (Lab)]

Economic growth requires people to be able to get to work. This morning, yet another road traffic accident happened on the stretch of M6 motorway that goes through my constituency and yours, Mr Speaker. This has a hugely disruptive impact on the mainly small roads around it in my constituency. Yet again, my residents in Longridge, Grimsargh and all the surrounding areas woke up to the prospect of another journey to work that takes two hours instead of 20 minutes, and that is becoming a monthly—if not weekly—occurrence. Will the Minister meet me to discuss what can be done?

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Revenue Certainty Mechanism

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

Monday 28th April 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

Sustainable aviation fuel is integral to reaching net zero aviation by 2050. It reduces greenhouse gas emissions by around 70% on average over the lifecycle of its production and use when replacing fossil kerosene. It is also an enabler of growth, and can provide good, skilled jobs across the UK.

That is why this Government has taken rapid action to support SAF. Just weeks into office, we reiterated our commitment to the SAF mandate. In November, we signed it into law, and it has been in place since January.

The SAF mandate is the UK’s key policy mechanism to secure demand for SAF. It delivers GHG emission savings by encouraging the use of SAF within the aviation industry. It does this by setting a legal obligation on fuel suppliers in the UK to supply an increasing proportion of SAF over time. Suppliers receive certificates for the SAF they supply. Certificates are issued in proportion to the level of GHG emission reductions that the fuel delivers—that is, the greater the savings, the greater the number of certificates they receive. The SAF mandate started at 2% of total UK jet fuel demand in 2025 and increases linearly to 10% in 2030 and then to 22% in 2040. It could deliver up to 6.3 million tonnes of carbon savings per year by 2040.

We are also committed to developing the UK SAF industry to secure a UK supply of SAF, attract investment and create good green jobs across the UK.

In January, we announced an additional £63 million of funding for the advanced fuels fund, our grant funding programme for UK SAF production, extending the programme for another year.

We are also introducing a revenue certainty mechanism to help attract investment into UK SAF production. Under the SAF revenue certainty mechanism, SAF producers will enter into a private law contract with a Government-backed counterparty. These contracts will set a strike price for SAF. If producers sell their SAF for below the strike price, the counterparty makes payments of the difference; if the SAF is sold for above the strike price, the producer makes payments of the difference to the counterparty. This addresses the most significant constraint on investment in SAF production and sends a clear signal to investors: that this is a serious UK investment opportunity.

This Government have made significant progress towards delivering the revenue certainty mechanism. We announced in the King’s speech that we will be introducing a revenue certainty mechanism Bill in the first Session of this Parliament and will have the legislation in place by the end of 2026 at the very latest.

In 2050, up to 15,000 jobs and £5 billion gross value added in the UK could be supported with future low-carbon fuel production for the domestic and international markets. The revenue certainty mechanism, along with the Government’s modern industrial strategy, will provide a launchpad for this sector to drive growth and investment.

[HCWS608]

Road Maintenance

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

Monday 7th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered road maintenance.

For too long, Britain has been plagued by potholes. Too many people in too many parts of the country have had their everyday journeys turned into frustrating obstacle courses by our pockmarked roads. It is worse than that, however, because cratered roads can be dangerous, can make our trips longer and more stressful, and can consume the hard-earned cash of ordinary families. With the average vehicle repair costing a staggering £600, it is little wonder that the AA tells us that this issue is a priority for 96% of drivers. It is not just motorists who are suffering; damaged roads cause problems for cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians, and dodgy pavements are infuriating for those pushing a pram or using a wheelchair.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

My right hon. Friend reminds me of the road on which I live, where drivers trying to avoid a pothole in the road went on to the pavement, which led to the pavement being damaged. Does she agree that fixing potholes quickly wills save pavements as well?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend describes a win-win situation.

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

At my constituency surgery on Friday, my constituent Helen came to see me because she has had a terrible fall on a badly maintained pavement, and she has really been struggling to find out who is responsible for maintaining the pavement. Does anything in the funding brought forward by this Government enable quick and easy repairs to pavements, so that people like Helen do not have terrible accidents?

[Heidi Alexander]

Local authorities are free to use the money as they see fit, as long as they are using it in a way that represents value for money for the taxpayer. The money can be used for work on roads, pavements or structures. On the issue of responsibility raised by my hon. Friend’s constituent, that will be for the local highways authority.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for giving way. I thought I would get in before she gets back into her stride. Can she throw some light on an issue that has puzzled me for some time in my New Forest East constituency? A stretch of road—Southampton Road—is often used as a short cut by very heavy goods vehicles, rather than using the appropriate section of the M27 motorway. These are often very large petrol bowsers, tankers—you name it—and surprise, surprise, the roadway is constantly getting broken up and potholes appear, with all the consequences she describes. Whenever we have raised this with any of the companies to which these heavy vehicles belong, they say, “Well, it’s a public highway, and we’re entitled to drive these vehicles where we want.” Is there any obligation on companies not to do that?

--- Later in debate ---

[Heidi Alexander]

I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman has raised the matter with the local highways authority. I believe there may be the ability to apply a weight restriction on roads or to curtail the movement of large heavy goods vehicles. That might be something he wishes to raise with the appropriate authority.

I was describing the frustrating state of our roads and pavements. Most importantly, the country’s broken roads have become, sadly, a symbol of the national decline presided over by the previous Government. Our roads have compounded the feeling that nothing works in this country. They tell a story of a country left in a woeful state of disrepair after 14 long years of the previous Government. Roads are the backbone of our transport system; they are the concrete arteries of our local and regional economies. Yet too often they fall way short of the standards we should expect in the 21st century. That is why this Government are taking decisive action to deliver the renewal of our roads.

[Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)]

Madam Deputy Speaker, you might not be aware that there is such a thing as the RAC pothole index. It shows that something like four out of 10 incidents of damage to cars happen as a result of potholes. The owners of vehicles are paying road tax and fuel duty, but they do not have the road infrastructure to support them. I welcome the Government’s support for filling potholes, but can we ensure that the motorist is looked after under this Government?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. That is why we have ploughed a record £1.6 billion into roads maintenance, including a £500 million uplift on last year. That is on top of the £200 million or so we are putting in the hands of local leaders in the big city regions, empowering mayoral combined authorities to mend the roads in their communities.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way. I want to raise a question that I am often asked. We have spoken about quick fixes. The problem is that we fix a few potholes, but the disrepair reappears. Does she agree that we should focus on resurfacing our roads?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend is completely right. In some cases, preventive comprehensive road resurfacing will be the appropriate action to take.

In total, we are investing around £1.8 billion in fixing our local roads this year.

[Helena Dollimore (Hastings and Rye) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way and for the record investment of this Labour Government in fixing potholes. I particularly welcome the £21 million for East Sussex to fix our roads. Does she share my frustration at the fact that Conservative-run East Sussex county council has told me that it will have a lower highways budget this year than last year, even with that record injection from the Labour Government? We need to track how it is spending that money. I welcome the Government’s commitment to making councils publish reports on how the extra pothole money is spent. I hope it will include a geographical breakdown, so I can make sure that Hastings, Rye and the villages are getting their fair share.

--- Later in debate ---

[Heidi Alexander]

We are asking local authorities to publish a report on their websites by June this year. We are tipping more money into highways maintenance and it is absolutely right that people should see visible results on their roads. And it is right that my hon. Friend is holding her local Conservative council to account.

Our investment in highways maintenance is not a sticking-plaster solution; it is a vital investment that could see councils fixing an extra 7 million potholes next year. That is just the beginning. As I said, for the first time we have asked councils to prove that they are using their funding wisely. By June, they will be asked—as I have just said—to report on how many potholes they have filled and provide an update on the condition of their roads. If we are not satisfied that they are delivering value for money, councils risk losing up to a quarter of their funding uplift.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

Surrey has 70,000 potholes—5% of all the nation’s potholes and the most in the country—so I welcome the extra money for potholes, but given the recklessness of the Conservatives in Surrey, how will that help my constituents?

[Heidi Alexander]

The wider transparency and accountability measures we have announced, whereby we are withholding a quarter of the funding uplift until such time as the local authority has demonstrated how it is using that money, will hopefully be of assistance to both the hon. Lady and her constituents.

It is only right that taxpayers can see how their money is being spent. This new era of accountability and transparency will see their cash being put to good use, and road users will see the results.

[Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Heidi Alexander]

I will just make a little bit of progress. I will give way to the hon. Gentleman later.

The Government will end decades of decay on our roads. We will lift the lid on how taxpayers’ money gets spent. We think that is a crucial part of the solution. I am pleased that this move has been positively received, with the RAC, National Highways, Logistics UK and so many more coming out in support. In fact, Edmund King, president of the AA, described it as

“a…concerted attack on the plague of potholes”.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I could not have put it better myself. It is great to see councils broadly welcoming our approach, too. As Councillor Adam Hug, transport spokesperson for the Local Government Association, put it:

“it’s in everyone’s interests to ensure that public money is well spent.”

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

From one Adam to another. When I was a child, my late grandmother used to say that you could always tell a drunk person in Harare, because they drove in a straight line. One of my constituents said to me recently that, “In the United Kingdom, we are meant to drive on the left-hand side of the road, but in Newcastle-under-Lyme many people drive on what’s left of the road.” [Laughter.] They are very wise people in north Staffordshire, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Secretary of State is making an excellent speech. What would her two messages be, first to the good people of Newcastle-under-Lyme as we approach Thursday 1 May, and secondly, to the current Conservative leadership of Staffordshire county council?

[Heidi Alexander]

First, I congratulate my hon. Friend’s constituents on an excellent sense of humour and perceptiveness in describing the state of the roads in their community. I would say simply to his local authority that it has no excuse. It has the money—get on and fix it.

As much as we want to see councils go full steam ahead on road repairs, I also know that roadworks can be disruptive. We have all felt the frustration of being stuck at temporary traffic lights or by the sound of a pneumatic drill on a Sunday morning. That is why we are clamping down on companies that fail to comply with the rules by doubling a range of fixed-penalty notices, with the worst offences now facing £1,000 fines. Plus, we are extending charges for street works that run into the weekend.

This is not about patching up the problem, either. We want to see repairs that are made to last, so we do not see the same bits of road being dug up over and over again. That means getting it right first time around, championing the best materials and techniques, ensuring contractors are properly managed, and embracing the innovation and new technology that will help us to get the job done while getting proper bang for our buck.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It would be churlish of anybody in this Chamber not to welcome all the money the right hon. Lady says she will spend on roads. It is welcome. I understand there is new technology for a better and more modern way of fixing potholes. I understand it does the job better and is cheaper. If that is the case, I met a manager in my constituency last Friday who told me he would be very interested in that scheme but he does not know about it. Will the Secretary of State share this new way of fixing potholes? If so, everybody in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland could benefit from it.

[Heidi Alexander]

We are running a number of Live Labs projects to look at how we can best make use of AI and new technology to ensure we get good value for money in delivering roads maintenance. Over the next year, we will be working with the UK Roads Leadership Group to update the code of practice on well-maintained highways. I would be happy to speak to the hon. Gentleman further about what has been learnt.

The important work that we are doing will help to set clear expectations for local authorities up and down the country, meaning cleaner, greener and better roads delivered with the needs of local people in mind.

[Alan Gemmell (Central Ayrshire) (Lab)]

Laurence, Eileen and the residents of St Quivox have been campaigning for 10 years to cut the speed on the B743 in my constituency. At this weekend’s public meeting, 45 people were delighted to hear that Sergeant Slaven of Police Scotland and South Ayrshire council’s director Kevin Braidwood support their campaign to cut the speed on this dangerous road, which has seen almost 30 accidents in the past decade. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Ayrshire Roads Alliance and South Ayrshire council need to urgently reduce the speed limit on this road and work with residents to introduce other traffic calming measures?

[Heidi Alexander]

Decisions on the appropriate speed limits on their roads are decisions for local highways authorities. I will not pretend to know the detail of what my hon. Friend is talking about, but I will say that safety is an absolute priority for this Government, and that any local highway authority should be taking appropriate decisions to limit the number of people being injured on our roads and, ideally, to eradicate death and serious injury.

This Government’s ambition for road users stretches far beyond local roads. Just last week, we announced £4.8 billion for National Highways to deliver critical road schemes alongside maintaining motorways and major A roads. With this bold investment, which is higher than the average annual funding from the last multi-year settlement, we can get on with vital schemes in construction, such as the A57 Greater Manchester link road, the A428 Black Cat scheme in Cambridgeshire, the A47 Thickthorn scheme near Norwich, unlocking 3,000 new homes—

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

Hear, hear.

[Heidi Alexander]

I hear appreciation from the hon. Gentleman on the Opposition Front Bench.

Those works will also include the M3 junction 9 scheme in Hampshire, which will support 2,000 more homes. By raising living standards, creating high-quality jobs and kick-starting economic growth, these projects will drive this Government’s plan for change.

We are committed to delivering the road infrastructure that this country needs today, tomorrow and far into the future, and we are already working on the next multi-year road investment strategy to do just that. This is part of our mission to secure the future of Britain’s infrastructure. We are building better roads, creating safer streets and unlocking more efficient transport systems to help businesses to thrive and make life easier for all.

[John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)]

When the right hon. Lady leaves South Swindon and goes into Wiltshire, she will be pleased to note that the £20.7 million the Government have given to Wiltshire has been added to with £22 million put aside by Wiltshire council to maximise the impact. Could she say something about the connectivity between Bristol and Southampton? I was grateful for the meeting with her colleague, the Minister for Future of Roads, but does the Secretary of State recognise that now the A303 scheme is not happening, we need greater investment on north-south connectivity in Wiltshire?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am aware that the right hon. Gentleman met with my hon. Friend, the Minister for Future of Roads, and I understand that as a follow-up to that meeting, National Highways is looking into the very issue that he describes.

[David Smith (North Northumberland) (Lab)]

On the point of road safety, after the previous Conservative Government singularly failed to dual the A1 in my constituency, attention must now turn to the safety of that road. Will the Secretary of State and the Roads Minister join me in my constituency to hear the conversations I have been having with National Highways about how we can improve the A1?

[Heidi Alexander]

I know that the Minister for Future of Roads would be very happy to visit my hon. Friend in his constituency. While we cannot reopen the decision on dualling the A1, we are happy to look at whether smaller-scale schemes could address specific issues around safety and congestion on that very important road.

The public are tired of seeing roads left to deteriorate with no accountability for how maintenance money is spent. This Government are laying the foundations for change, and this is just the beginning. There is so much more to do as we restore our transport system so that people across the country can fulfil their potential in a Britain where everyday journeys are smoother and safer, families are not shelling out for expensive and unexpected repairs, and hard-working people have more money in their pockets—a Britain not defined by disrepair and disarray, but where improved infrastructure becomes a symbol of our national renewal.

Improving connectivity will unlock jobs, growth and opportunities across the country. By fixing our roads, building better infrastructure and ensuring that transport works for all, this Government are securing Britain’s future.

Zero Emission Vehicle Mandate

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

Monday 7th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

With permission, I shall make a statement about the zero emission vehicle mandate. Today, this Government are giving British car makers certainty and support on the transition to electric vehicles, as we set out plans to back industry in the face of global economic headwinds. We have worked in close partnership and at pace with colleagues in the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive, whom I would like to thank.

The automotive industry is a cornerstone of our economy. It supports over 150,000 jobs and generates £19 billion every year. Today, with Government backing, it must negotiate the turbulence of fresh global economic challenges. For too long, the sector has been held back by a lack of long-term certainty. That changes now. This Government listen and act. We have listened to car manufacturers, large and small, from Sunderland to Solihull, and from Crewe to Coventry. Car makers have told us what they need to not just survive, but thrive. What they want is what we are delivering: practical, sensible reforms that will unlock investment, protect jobs and strengthen Britain’s leadership in the zero emissions transition.

Today, I can confirm that the Government are maintaining our manifesto commitment to phasing out the sale of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030. I can also reconfirm our commitment to all new cars and vans being 100% zero emission from 2035; there are no changes to the trajectory of the transition set out in the ZEV mandate regulations. We support the role of hybrid vehicles as a crucial stepping-stone in that journey; new full hybrids and plug-in hybrids will be on sale until 2035. That strikes the right balance. We are being firm on our climate commitments, but flexible on how we meet them, because our aim is not to impose change for its own sake, but to enable industry to make the transition in a way that matches supply with demand, and to support businesses, and the jobs that they provide, every step of the way.

We are significantly increasing the flexibility within the ZEV mandate. Manufacturers will have more freedom on how they meet targets, including the ability to sell more EVs towards the end of this decade, when demand is projected to be higher. We are also extending the ability to borrow and repay credits through to 2030, and the ability to earn credits for cleaning up non-ZEV fleets all the way out to 2029, so that companies can manage their pathways more effectively. This recognises the real-world challenges that British businesses face, and gives them the smoothest possible road to run on.

We are also reducing fines for missing ZEV targets from £15,000 to £12,000 per vehicle. Where fines are levied—for the vast majority of manufacturers, they will not be—the revenue will be recycled directly back into support for the sector, because this Government invest in solutions and do not punish ambition. Let me be clear: this is not a retreat from our ambitions on EVs—quite the opposite. It is right that the threat of fines remains, as it is an inescapable fact that the domestic transport sector remains the UK’s single largest carbon emitter, accounting for 30% of emissions in 2024. That is why we are doubling down on our commitment to the electric transition. There is more than £2.3 billion available to support industry and consumers. That includes funding for new battery factories, EV supply chains and charging infrastructure, and grants for zero emission vehicles.

The public are already leading the way. March saw a 43% increase in electric vehicle sales, compared to the same month last year. February was a record month too, with EVs accounting for one in four new car sales. That surge in demand shows that we are moving in the right direction, but it also shows the importance of maintaining momentum, so we will continue working with industry to ensure demand keeps pace with supply, building a sustainable market for the long term.

The infrastructure is growing, too. There are over 75,000 public charge points now available, and more than £6 billion of private investment is lined up for UK charge point roll-out by 2030. Today, a new charge point is installed every 29 minutes. That is more than 50 every day. Families charging at home can now save up to £1,000 a year, compared with petrol drivers. An EV charged at home overnight can run for as little as 2p a mile. That is putting money in people’s pockets while relieving pressure on the planet.

We know that one size does not fit all, which is why small and micro-manufacturers will be exempt from the new measures. It is why vans will have five extra years to go green, because we recognise their unique role in the economy and in giving businesses the time that they need to adapt. It is why we are making space for hybrid vehicles in the mix, not as a compromise, but as a contribution. Hybrids offer lower emissions today without requiring overnight shifts in driving behaviour or infrastructure. They build public confidence, support choice and ensure that no one is left behind in the transition.

This is not just a transport, environmental or economic policy; it is part of this Government’s plan for change. It is a long-term effort to deliver clean, sustainable and high-quality growth, creating new jobs in battery production, EV supply chains and infrastructure, anchoring manufacturing here in the UK and supporting skilled apprenticeships in clean tech and advanced engineering. With today’s announcement, British names such as Rolls-Royce, Land Rover and Vauxhall will have the certainty they need to plan, invest and lead. We are backing British businesses to succeed at home and abroad. These reforms are fair to manufacturers, reasonable for workers and right for the climate challenge ahead.

I know some people might retreat to tired arguments about a war on motorists, but this Government are focused on real challenges, not imaginary grievances. Most of us are motorists or passengers; we are all in this together. What we need is not division, but direction, and that is what we are delivering today by listening to industry, following the data and building a strategy grounded in evidence and ambition.

When we came into government, we promised to prioritise one thing above all else: growth—for industry; for clean transport; and for people, places and pay packets. With these bold, practical reforms, backed by the Prime Minister’s plan for change, that is exactly what we are delivering. I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I think, on his birthday, we should hear from the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Gareth Bacon]

I thank the Secretary of State—[Interruption.] That was a very helpful intervention by the hon. Gentleman; he is completely right. I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and for advance sight of it. The announcement by the United States of America that 25% tariffs will be imposed on UK automotive exports has understandably caused significant concern in the automotive sector. Automotive manufacturers now face tariffs of 25% on around £8 billion-worth of car and auto parts exports—a potentially devastating blow for the automotive industry. I assure the Secretary of State that we will support the Government when they do sensible things to reverse the impact on our already fragile economy. In that vein, I am glad that the Government have recommitted to negotiating a better deal with our closest ally and largest single-country trading partner, and I sincerely hope that they are successful in their negotiations.

However, on the substance of the right hon. Lady’s statement, I cannot share her enthusiasm for the rest of Labour’s plans. The reality is that today, Labour is simply trying to clear up the uncertainty that it has contributed to. When the previous Conservative Government reacted to sluggish automotive trade figures by making the pragmatic decision to delay the ban on new diesel and petrol cars from 2030 to 2035, aligning the UK with major global economies such as France, Germany, Sweden and Canada, Labour accused us of undermining the automotive industry. This morning, the Secretary of State criticised the previous Government for chopping and changing, and a consultation put out by Labour claimed that our policies caused “great harm” to the UK’s reputation as a leading nation in the EV transition by moving the goalposts. However, that is precisely what Labour did upon taking office by ideologically reversing the 2035 deadline. The plans announced over the weekend do not place the automotive sector in a better position than it was when we left office, despite some minor adjustments to the zero emission vehicle mandate.

What is more, this announcement will not undo the damage that this Labour Government have already caused. Their introduction of a £25 billion national insurance jobs tax in their first Budget was a major blow to businesses; we have warned for months that this tax will harm industries, and the automotive sector is no exception. The Secretary of State will know that US tariffs on UK car exports are set to cost the automotive sector £1.9 billion. Combined with the Government’s jobs tax—which is predicted by the Office for Budget Responsibility to put 50,000 jobs at risk, and is likely to cost the automotive sector an additional £200 million—that double whammy is going to be very difficult for the sector to absorb.

Indeed, despite today’s announcements, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders has stated that zero emission vehicle mandate targets remain “incredibly challenging”. In its words:

“ZEV Mandate targets are incredibly challenging, especially with a paucity of consumer demand and geopolitical upheaval. Growing EV demand to the levels needed still requires equally bold fiscal incentives…to give motorists full confidence to switch”,

but that is not what the Government are offering. Instead of the “bold changes” that the Prime Minister boasted of at the weekend, what we have is mere tinkering at the edges. Allowing producers of luxury vehicles, such as Aston Martin and McLaren, to be exempt from the 2030 ban on the sale on new internal combustion engine vehicles is welcome, as is the news that all forms of hybrid cars will be available until 2035. However, this does not go anything like far enough. The Government are still proposing to increase the level of tax liability on the value of hybrid company cars by as much as 16%, which could potentially cost individual drivers thousands of pounds each. The reduction in fines for missing EV sales targets from £15,000 to £12,000 per vehicle is nothing to be celebrated—it is like drowning at the depth of 100 metres instead of 120 metres.

Over the past few months, we have heard from numerous businesses that they simply cannot cope with the ZEV mandate. In October, the chief executive officer of Jaguar Land Rover warned that the mandate was causing severe disruption to the new car market. Not long after, Vauxhall announced the closure of its Luton factory, citing the ZEV mandate as a key factor in making that plant economically unviable. More recently, uncertainty has surrounded Plant Oxford, the home of the Mini since 1959. Last year, excluding fleet sales, the fact is that only 10% of private purchases of new vehicles were electric. Far from doing retailers a favour, the Government’s offer to fine them a small amount less for failing to sell a product that consumers demonstrably do not want is a kick in the teeth to the automotive industry.

I must therefore ask the Secretary of State the following questions. With just one in 10 private buyers purchasing an electric vehicle in 2024, why are the Government still trying to force people to buy something for which there is limited consumer demand at present? Is she really pretending that any of the measures announced today were not already in train before the tariffs were announced? Will she commit to reversing the hike in the hybrid company car tax? Does she really think that reducing the fine for each car that fails to comply with EV quotas will be enough to mitigate the impact of tariffs? Does she not believe that, rather than chasing an arbitrary timeline, now is the time for a more gradual transition to electric vehicles, one that would allow the sector to mitigate many of the challenges it is currently facing? Finally, does she recognise that the combined impact of the ZEV mandate, the jobs tax and external tariffs is a perfect storm for the automotive sector, which is facing significant and exacerbated challenges because of the choices her party has made over the past nine months?

[Heidi Alexander]

I also extend my birthday wishes to the shadow Secretary of State. I hope he is grateful for the two birthday presents I have given him: not only a statement but a general debate, so that we can face each other across the Dispatch Box not once but twice today.

It is rich for the shadow Secretary of State to blame uncertainty in the automotive sector on this Government. I can only think that he has some sort of selective amnesia going on, because it was his Government who introduced this policy. They then delayed the phase-out date, tanking EV demand by 15% almost overnight. We had the spectacle of the previous Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak) standing up to make a speech pushing that date back out to 2035. Almost overnight, we saw those sales tank. The shadow Secretary of State should be explaining to Britain’s car manufacturers why his party faffed about so much, costing them millions and arguably leaving the sector less resilient to the global economic headwinds it now faces.

The shadow Secretary of State claims that this is a moment when we are tinkering at the edges, but nothing could be further from the truth. This is a significant moment for industry. He quotes the SMMT, and I just gently say to him that Mike Hawes, its chief executive, said this morning:

“The government has rightly listened to industry, responded quickly to global dynamics and recognised the intense pressure manufacturers are under.”

The shadow Secretary of State is also right to raise Jaguar Land Rover, which is affected by the imposition of the global tariffs that President Trump announced recently. I point out to the hon. Gentleman that Adrian Mardell, CEO at JLR said:

“We welcomed our announcement of the increased flexibilities in the zero emission vehicle mandate, and the clear commitment from Government to incentivise electric vehicle uptake and invest in infrastructure.”

The shadow Secretary of State also said that consumers do not want to buy electric vehicles. He needs to do his homework; the UK is the third largest market for electric vehicles in the world, after the US and China. It is the largest market in Europe. Last year—[Interruption.] He can chunter as much as he wants. Last year, 382,000 EVs were sold. We have had record figures in February and March this year, where we have seen demand for EVs go up by more than 40% compared with the same month in the previous year.

The shadow Secretary of State claims that we were going to make this announcement anyway. Well, he is right that we have been talking to industry for a number of months, and we were always going to have to do something to clear up the dog’s breakfast of a policy left by his Government. Clearly, the announcement last week about US tariffs on the car industry has made it all the more important that we act with pace and urgency. It is completely right that we have provided the certainty and clarity for which the sector has been calling for years.

The shadow Secretary of State claims we are not going far enough. We are investing £2 billion in an automotive transformation fund, which will ensure we can build the battery gigafactories of the future, support the EV supply chain and ensure that those high-skilled jobs of the future are available in communities across the country. Between now and 2030, we are spending £200 million supporting the roll-out of charge points, backed by £6 billion of private investment. We are spending £120 million on plug-in vehicle grants, giving people who want to purchase a new van up to £2,500 and those wanting to purchase a larger van up to £5,000.

I say to the shadow Secretary of State that this Government are acting where his Government failed. We are giving certainty to businesses, protecting jobs in a critical industry, cutting carbon and fostering a competitive market to benefit consumers.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

Today’s news on support for our automotive industry in the move towards electric vehicles will be welcomed by my constituents, including those who work for the nearby Toyota plant at Burnaston. Will the Secretary of State continue this encouraging level of engagement and responsiveness to industry concerns? Will she confirm that, to make sure that the transition is a success, this Government’s wider industrial strategy will further back British auto manufacturers?

[Heidi Alexander]

I know that the Under-Secretary responsible for the future of roads, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood), has visited the Burnaston plant in my hon. Friend’s constituency, and I understand what a critical employer it is locally. Toyota will benefit from many of the changes that we have announced today. We are allowing the sale of both full hybrids such as the Toyota Prius and plug-in hybrids after 2030, and Toyota will also benefit from the extension and expansion of the CO₂ transfer caps. Moreover, if it is ever in a position in which it needs to pay fines, it will pay them at a lower level—and we would, of course, reinvest that money in supporting the sector. I can give my hon. Friend the assurance that she and her constituents want: we will continue to support this vital sector.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and for advance sight of it. Let me also congratulate the shadow Secretary of State on his birthday, and note that he is much younger than the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

It is clear that the Government must take urgent steps to help the car industry make the switch to electric vehicles. Although increasing flexibility in the mandate is welcome, voices across the industry have made it clear that we also need to bolster demand by lowering the barriers for individuals and businesses to purchase electric vehicles. As the Secretary of State knows, the recent surge in demand to which she referred was a result of significant discounting to promote sales. It is crucial that, as well as improving the charging network, we end the inequality between public and private charging by bringing the VAT rate for public charging into line with that for home charging, at 5% rather than 20%. Not only is the present system damaging demand, but it is wrong to penalise those who have no access to private charging. Ministers should also postpone the increase in vehicle tax on electric cars, and explore the possibility of reintroducing the plug-in car grant.

As the Secretary of State made clear on the media round this morning, the spectre of Trump’s tariffs also looms large over the industry. If the Government are serious about protecting car manufacturing in the UK, the Prime Minister must continue to work with our allies in Europe and around the world on a co-ordinated response. The only way to tackle Trump is to negotiate from a position of strength, and to show that the UK is not alone and will not be bullied.

May I ask the Secretary of State three questions? First, what conversations has she had with the Chancellor about lowering the public charging rate to 5%, and what other measures are the Government considering to strengthen EV demand? Secondly, can she confirm that the measures announced today are a response to the ZEV consultation that ended in February, and tell us what, if any, additional measures are being considered in respect of the tariffs that have since been announced? Thirdly, will the Government start negotiations with the EU about the formation of a UK-EU custom union, to cut red tape not only for vehicle manufacturers but for all UK industries?

[Heidi Alexander]

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government keep the VAT variation between public and private charging under review. The 20% standard rate to which public charge points are subject applies to most goods and services, with very few exemptions. We are trying to give people low-cost and affordable options for public charging by investing £380 million to roll out overnight chargers, which are cheaper and will be installed to help those without a driveway. Today, Brighton & Hove City Council confirmed that it had signed the contracts to deliver 6,000 of those chargers, and in February Midlands Connect announced that it was rolling out more than 16,000 across the midlands, helping drivers to charge their vehicles for less.

The hon. Gentleman asked me whether today’s announcement was a response to the consultation that we launched at the end of December, which closed in February. It is indeed a Government response to that consultation. As for the discussions that we will have with European colleagues, we will continue those discussions. Although the hon. Gentleman tried to tempt me into giving him a commitment to rejoin an EU customs union, I am afraid that that is not a commitment I can give.

[Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)]

On behalf of those of my constituents who work at JLR Halewood, I thank my right hon. Friend for the stability and confidence that she has given to our automotive industry; it will be enormously reassuring to them. The last Government confirmed through Mark Harper, the then Secretary of State, that it was already cheaper for drivers to switch to electric vehicles—he did so from the Dispatch Box this time last year. For those of us who are able to plug in at home, it is cheaper by up to £1,000 per family, as she said in her statement. May I encourage her to work with the Energy Secretary on reducing the cost of electricity more widely to benefit those of us who cannot plug in at home, and to improve consumer demand, which is so crucial to supporting our manufacturers?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can assure my hon. Friend that I will continue to work across Government with colleagues in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, and in the Department for Business and Trade, in order to make the take-up of EVs as affordable as possible for individuals who want to make the transition. He is entirely right to point out that, compared with a petrol car, drivers can save up to £1,000 a year if they mostly charge at home, and that an EV can be run for as little as 2p per mile if charged at home. Half of all used electric cars are now sold for under £20,000, and there are 29 brand-new electric cars on the market for under £30,000.

[Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)]

I am proud to have Ford’s UK technical headquarters, which employs thousands of fantastic workers in high-quality R&D jobs, at Dunton in my Basildon and Billericay constituency, and elements of what the Secretary of State has announced today will certainly be very welcome. On the flip side, local businesses that rely on the Ford HQ—and, in fact, the entire automotive sector—saw a £200 million-a-year increase in national insurance kick in yesterday. Today, small businesses in my constituency, many of which work in London, face charges on the Blackwall tunnel for the first time ever and charges on the Silvertown tunnel, which means that many will face charges of £35 a day, just to operate in London. Will the Secretary of State raise those issues with her colleague the Mayor of London and the Chancellor of the Exchequer? Could she also tell us how long the plug-in van grant will be extended? We know it will be there in 2026, but for how much longer?

[Heidi Alexander]

I was struggling to decipher a question in the speech that was forthcoming from the other side of the Chamber. The right hon. Gentleman asks me to comment on the opening of the Silvertown tunnel in east London. I suspect that a number of his constituents—regardless of whether they are driving for work or to try to reach friends and family—have been stuck in absolutely atrocious traffic north and south of the Blackwall tunnel. For the first time ever, London’s double-deck red buses will now be able to cross the Thames east of Tower Bridge. I hope that he might join me in congratulating both the Mayor of London and Transport for London on getting a new river crossing open, which is much needed.

[Preet Kaur Gill (Birmingham Edgbaston) (Lab/Co-op)]

The news over the weekend that Jaguar Land Rover was pausing shipments to the United States was worrying for many of my constituents. JLR employs 9,000 people at its factory in nearby Solihull, and supports thousands of jobs in the wider supply chain. After the flip-flopping of previous Governments, this Government have acted decisively to give British car makers certainty and support in the transition to electric vehicles. Can the Minister confirm whether she is planning to build flexibilities into the mandate targets?

[Heidi Alexander]

That is precisely what we have done. I reassure my hon. Friend that I have been in touch directly with Jaguar Land Rover over the last couple of days, and I am pleased that we have been able to provide the company and other car manufacturers with certainty at this very difficult time. We have been able to do that this week, and I hope it will provide some comfort to her constituents who are employed at that local facility.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

As someone who has never bought a new motor vehicle, apart from a motorcycle, may I probe the Secretary of State further on what she said about the second-hand EV market? For families that will never be able to afford a new vehicle, does she anticipate a time when the second-hand EV market will be comparable in price to the second-hand market for conventional vehicles?

[Heidi Alexander]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that question. He is right to mention the second-hand market: 80% of car purchases in any given year are in the second-hand market. I am told that, at the moment, some of the most popular products on AutoTrader are second-hand EVs. They are selling very well, and he is completely right that these vehicles need to be affordable to everyone and an option for everyone, so I am made hopeful by the green shoots we are seeing in the second-hand market at the moment.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and the leadership she is showing in delivering our manifesto commitments in partnership with industry. The contrast is clear with the Opposition, who are bringing along uncosted ideas for grants, subsidies and tax cuts. I welcome the reaffirmation of the plan to roll out EV charging, but is she sure that that will be able to meet EV demand, and are there any plans for a battery health check to help reassure people buying used vehicles in the second-hand market?

[Heidi Alexander]

I thank my hon. Friend for that question. We are working with the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe on the battery health check issue that he raises. I assure him that we are working closely with the private sector on the roll-out of charge point infrastructure. As I said in my statement, a new EV charger is currently installed every 29 minutes, or at a rate of 50 a day. Only a couple of weeks ago, I visited the new InstaVolt charging super-hub in Winchester, which, when one sees it, really is a glimpse into the future. It is imperative that the Government continue to work with the private sector to make sure that the charging infrastructure is there for everyone in the places where they need it when they need it.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

UK businesses in the automotive supply chain, both across the country and in my constituency, need more support. Indeed, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders agrees that a package of measures is needed for the supply chain. What consideration has the Secretary of State given to supporting the needs of the supply chain specifically? Given that she is not inclined to be tempted by my hon. Friend the Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) imploring her that we should join an EU-UK customs union, what assessment has the Department made of the cost of not doing so?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Member will be aware that the Cabinet Office leads on the EU reset negotiations, so she might most appropriately put that question to my colleagues in the Cabinet Office. On her wider question about support for the EV supply chain, we have announced the automotive transformation fund to a value of £2 billion, part of which is specifically for supporting the EV supply chain.

[Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)]

Many of my North Durham constituents proudly work at Nissan in the constituency of my neighbour my hon. Friend the Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson). Nissan Sunderland’s 6,000 staff make excellent cars, including hybrid and electric vehicles. My right hon. Friend deserves credit for putting together at pace a package that has been welcomed by industry, but she is right to suggest that this is only one piece of the puzzle. What more will she and Ministers be doing to support the sector in the coming months?

[Heidi Alexander]

We will continue to roll out the electric charging infrastructure, which is really important to give consumers confidence. The time to switch to EVs is now. We will continue to have the plug-in vehicle grants for individuals who are thinking about purchasing a new van. We will also continue to keep under review what else can be done to stimulate demand and make sure we maintain the momentum that we are seeing in the market in the first few months of this year.

[Sir Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con)]

I welcome what I think the Secretary of State has announced about smaller luxury vehicle manufacturers such as Aston Martin, which is based in my constituency. I say “I think” because her statement says that

“small…manufacturers will be exempt from these new measures.”

I would be grateful if she clarified whether that refers to the existing mandate of measures, because she knows that that is what the smaller manufacturers in question have been lobbying to be exempted from, rather than the loosening she has announced today. If she can confirm that, and she is relying on an argument that we can treat smaller luxury manufacturers differently from everyone else, would she commend that argument to her colleague the Trade Secretary in the discussions on tariffs with the United States?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can confirm to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that smaller and micro manufacturers are exempt from the ZEV mandate, but they will need to comply with the 2035 complete phase-out date, as per all other manufacturers.

[Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)]

I hope the rest of the shadow Secretary of State’s birthday is rather better than the last half hour; I do not think his contribution today will age very well at all. The measures the Government are proposing are a sensible compromise. The industry did need certainty. There were real concerns about that, as my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) and other Derbyshire MPs heard on a recent visit to Toyota, so the measures absolutely strike the right balance. What can the Secretary of State say to my constituents who live in either council flats or terraced properties, which makes home charging more difficult, about what more we can do to ensure they are not faced with a huge price disparity in comparison to those who are able to have charging infrastructure at home?

[Heidi Alexander]

We issued guidance to local authorities before Christmas on cross-pavement solutions, and we are offering a grant of up to £350 for households with on-street parking. I hope those two things together will offer some comfort to my hon. Friend’s constituents who are in the situations he describes.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. Pace is needed, understandably, but I do have some concerns in that due process needs to be followed with the devolved Administrations. Can she assure the House that sufficient time is being allowed for the devolved Administrations, including the Scottish Government, to be fully involved and engaged in a consultation on policy development, and the Scottish Parliament for any legislative changes that may be required? Secondly, what assessment has been made of the potential for those changes to impact negatively on carbon emissions in the UK and Scotland, and our respective Governments’ ability to meet statutory climate change targets? Will she publish any such assessments?

[Heidi Alexander]

I would like to put on record my thanks to the Scottish Government for their assistance in working at pace over the past couple of days. I committed to the hon. Gentleman’s colleagues in the Scottish Government to work closely with them and that is exactly what I have done. With regard to carbon assessments, we have conducted a carbon assessment. I can assure him that today’s proposed changes make a negligible change to the carbon emissions that were predicted to be saved as a result of the ZEV mandate.

[Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement, given the uncertainty and turmoil caused by US tariffs on British-made vehicles. Will she outline how she is responding to major employers such as Jaguar Land Rover, to ensure they can remain competitive and safeguard jobs in our local communities, as shared by Members from across the House?

[Heidi Alexander]

As I may have said to other colleagues, JLR will stand to benefit from the flexibilities we have announced today: the increased borrowing flexibility; the extension and the expansion of the carbon dioxide transfer cap; and the changes we talked about on the way we measure CO₂ emissions from plug-in hybrids, which will make it easier for them to use the CO₂ transfer flexibility. I think all those things we have announced today will be welcomed by JLR and, hopefully, by her constituents employed at the factory.

[Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)]

If the Government’s top priority really is growth, a policy that sets artificial targets to ban products that people want to buy, which are not subsidised, to force them to buy cheap Chinese products that they do not really want, which are subsidised, does not sound like a policy for growth. Incidentally, they also suffer from very high insurance costs and high depreciation costs, and may lead to the closing down of capacity to produce in the United Kingdom the products that people do want to buy. The Secretary of State may have priorities, but growth is not one of them.

[Heidi Alexander]

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman speak to his constituents, who are buying EVs in numbers. There has been a 40% increase—

[Sir Bernard Jenkin]

I’ve got one!

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Gentleman is telling me that he has one, which is fantastic—he is clearly leading the way. This is a massive industrial opportunity for this country and we need to give certainty and confidence to both businesses and consumers, which is precisely what this Government are doing. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to become the poster boy for the EV industry, I would be very happy to have a conversation with him about that.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

Workers at BMW Cowley have made clear to me their determination to play their part in a jobs-rich transition to net zero. Can my right hon. Friend explain how these changes will benefit BMW Cowley specifically, given its significance for my constituency and for UK manufacturing as a whole?

[Heidi Alexander]

We are confirming today that we will maintain the existing CO2 scores for plug-in hybrids instead of using the revised scores that are now being used in the EU. That will be of particular benefit to BMW and the Mini Cowley plant.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

The car industry will be hardest hit by Trump’s tariffs, as my constituency knows better than most; our single largest employer, McLaren, sells 42% of its product to the US. Will the Minister consider retaliatory tariffs, particularly against Tesla, to protect British jobs and show that tariffs have consequences?

[Heidi Alexander]

McLaren will, of course, benefit from the exemption we have announced today for small and micro manufacturers. We are considering our position regarding the imposition of tariffs, and the Business Secretary is consulting industry on future steps. I would say, however, that an escalating trade war is not in anyone’s best interests.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. Harlow is a new town, and it has a number of properties that do not have off-street parking. I ask her to drill down on the guidance she has given to local councillors on what they can do to provide more off-street charging facilities.

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend is totally right. This is a critical issue. The guidance that we published before Christmas is vital, as is the grant we are giving to households.

[Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)]

It is not just the absurdity of fining firms for making the wrong cars, and insisting that is good for growth; it is that the national grid and local distribution networks do not have the capacity to cope with growing demand now, let alone if and when cars and central heating are electrified, as the Government promise, and all those data centres are built. Can the Secretary of State confirm that the connections queue stands at 756 GW and that only 0.54 GW was delivered in the past month, while the queue grew by 21.8 GW?

--- Later in debate ---

[Heidi Alexander]

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I am in regular contact with the Energy Secretary to ensure that we have the grid connections and capability for the EV charging infrastructure that we need.

[Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)]

Jaguar Land Rover and its wider supply chain employ huge numbers of people in my constituency, so I am very glad to see the Prime Minister and the Transport Secretary backing our automotive industry so strongly today. This commitment makes clear our strong climate commitments, but also our support for the transition in the industry. Will the Secretary of State say more about how we will support demand-side change to get EV charge points across towns such as Oldbury and West Brom in my constituency?

[Heidi Alexander]

Of course, the Prime Minister is at JLR in the midlands today. We are spending £200 million of public money to support the roll-out of EV infrastructure, which sits alongside £6 billion of private investment to ensure that charge points are where people need them, when they need them.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and answers. Over time, UK Governments have committed hundreds of millions of pounds to perfecting electric vehicle charging infrastructure in England, but back home in Northern Ireland, the ratio of charging points to electric vehicles is not sufficient. It is nowhere near the level on the mainland, and we are a much more rural community. Will the Minister ensure that through the Barnett consequentials, additional attention is paid to giving the devolved institutions the funding necessary to make sure that electric vehicle charging infrastructure can meet the demand of the electric vehicles on the road?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Gentleman raises a fair point about the availability of charge point infrastructure in all places in the UK. It is a matter I look forward to discussing with my counterparts in Northern Ireland when I next have the opportunity to meet them.

[Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State on behalf of my constituents, many of whom work for Jaguar Land Rover and Aston Martin. This update is very welcome news, especially the changes for small and micro manufacturers and for hybrid, too, particularly in the light of Washington’s tariffs last week. Electrification and hydrogen are the future. I look at China with its market of 12 million electric cars—38% to 50% of its vehicles are now electric. Can I urge the Government to look once again at support for manufacturers, which are subsidised in the sale of electric vehicles?

[Heidi Alexander]

The automotive transformation fund that I mentioned earlier is a sizeable investment that the Government committed to at the last Budget. I look forward to hearing my hon. Friend’s ideas about how it might best be utilised.

[Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)]

One of the major issues holding back wider EV ownership is the complete lack of EV charging infrastructure in towns such as Huntingdon and St Ives in my constituency. What assessment have the Government made of the grid capacity required to facilitate a significant uplift in EV charging infrastructure, and how much will the upgrade cost? At what point will current grid capacity be unable to provide adequate charging? Separately, what is the plan for a significant increase in EV battery disposal and to address the prohibitive cost of new batteries for older electric vehicles?

[Heidi Alexander]

Those are matters that the Department constantly reviews. Regarding grid capacity, I refer the hon. Gentleman to my earlier answer to the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy).

[Sally Jameson (Doncaster Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

To make sure the transition is a success, can the Secretary of State confirm that the Government’s wider industrial strategy will back British auto manufacturers and British supply chains further and ensure that this is a place-based growth agenda for all our communities?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can confirm that for my hon. Friend, and we will be publishing the industrial strategy soon. This is about creating the jobs of the future in high-skilled industries and the right conditions for growth, and that is completely what the Government are committed to doing.

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

The Transport Secretary omitted to mention that UK car production last year was at its lowest level for 70 years, aside from the pandemic; that UK car production this year is down a further 11%; and that total registrations of electric and hybrid cars this year are down another 2%. Will the Minister agree that the best thing to do to ensure growth and increase production is to scrap all these ridiculous zero emission targets forthwith?

[Heidi Alexander]

No, I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman. The number of new cars sold in the UK last year was 1.9 million, and the market grew by 2.6% on 2023. The number of new EVs sold last year was 382,000, which was nearly 20% of the market and represents a 21% growth on 2023.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

I commend the Secretary of State for standing up for cheaper and cleaner British cars in the face of the global chaos being forced on our economy—particularly in the light of the Conservatives’ botched Brexit deal, which wrecked Britain’s car industry and lost this country a decade of golden British manufacturing. My constituents in Bournemouth East are crying out for charging infrastructure. The Secretary of State said that nobody would be left behind. Can she outline how she will invest in charging infrastructure to make sure that everybody who wants to can be part of the electric vehicle revolution?

[Heidi Alexander]

This is a partnership between public investment and the private sector. I assure my hon. Friend that we will be paying attention to Bournemouth, as we will to all other parts of the country.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I rise to speak as a very satisfied second-hand EV driver. I visited Ohme’s head office last month to learn about how home charging of EVs can revolutionise the energy market and help EVs become a way of managing our grid, as well as a way to drive. What consideration has the Secretary of State given to accelerating work on flexible generation of storage to help to drive demand for businesses and homes and to make Britain the starting place of this revolution?

[Heidi Alexander]

Officials in my Department are looking at this issue very closely. I would be interested in learning more from the hon. Member about the visit she made to the business in her constituency.

[Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)]

South Norfolk is proudly home to Lotus Cars. This morning, I had a conversation with the management team, who welcomed the announcement. In our long-term plan for the car manufacturing industry, what action will the Government be taking for UK-based original equipment manufacturers to ensure that we have a good plan for the EV transition so that we are competitive in future markets?

[Heidi Alexander]

Everything that the Government are doing, and everything in the announcement, is about ensuring that our British businesses are competitive. I am pleased to hear that Lotus is pleased with what we have announced. I understand that other British brands such as McLaren, Bentley and Caterham are also pleased with the announcement, which is all about the Government’s commitment to driving growth and opportunity.

[Siân Berry (Brighton Pavilion) (Green)]

I am concerned about public health. We all know that diesel and petrol hybrids are not zero emission, we know that the 2035 extension is not about tariffs—it applies only to UK sales—and we know that the move was already on the cards since Labour ripped clean air out of its manifesto completely. Has the Secretary of State assessed the impact of the announcement on the achievement of clean air target commitments? Is this the last we will hear of any clean air Act from this Government?

[Heidi Alexander]

I assure the hon. Lady that an analysis of environmental impacts has been done, and that relates to both carbon emissions and air pollution.

[Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State is correct to say that demand for electric vehicles is strong, but in my rural Norfolk constituency the lack of charging infrastructure over the last 14 years has left many not wanting to make that switch. Will she confirm that rural areas such as Norfolk will be prioritised for such charging infrastructure in the future?

[Heidi Alexander]

We increased the installation of EV charging infrastructure in rural areas by 45% in the last year. I hope that my hon. Friend and his constituents will start to see the fruits of that soon.

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)]

Autonomous vehicles are the next step into the future. What discussions has the Secretary of State had with UK manufacturers to ensure that they can take full advantage of the next revolution in how we use cars?

[Heidi Alexander]

We regularly talk to manufacturers and other organisations that are interested in the move to connected and autonomous vehicles, and we are open to exploring how that might work in the UK. We need to do it in a safe way, but I am interested in how we might expedite trials in the UK. That is a subject that we are working on at the moment.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

I do not know which businesses the shadow Secretary of State or indeed the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice) have been listening to, but I have spoken to businesses including Honda, whose European headquarters are just outside my constituency, and they have said that they are committed to decarbonisation but had concerns about the inflexibility of the scheme that we inherited from the Conservative party. Does the Secretary of State agree that the statement shows that Labour is the party on the side of the British car industry, and of the industry across the world?

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend is entirely right. We are backing British business and supporting our domestic car manufacturing industry. I am pleased to hear that the companies based in his constituency will be welcoming the announcement.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

Previous Labour and Conservative Governments did little when Welsh livelihoods were swept away by global market forces at places such as the Ford plant in Bridgend and the steelworks in Port Talbot. Wales’s car sector is facing 25% tariffs thanks to President Trump. That threatens an industry that employs 30,000 people. The Welsh Automotive Forum has said that the Government’s commitments are not enough; it is calling for direct support. Recycled fines are hardly direct support. Are the Government prepared to step up and provide that?

[Heidi Alexander]

We have a £2 billion automotive transformation fund, and we are investing hundreds of millions of pounds in other forms of support. I work closely with the Welsh Government on these issues. We will leave no stone unturned in our attempts to protect the car manufacturing industry and preserve high-skilled jobs in communities in Wales and across the rest of the country.

[Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

My constituency needs charging infrastructure, so I am grateful for the Secretary of State’s statement and her answers to colleagues across the House. In Leeds South West and Morley, many residents live in terraced houses without driveways. Some of them have contacted me asking what they need to do to get the charging infrastructure required for an electric vehicle. I promised one such resident that I would raise that with the Secretary of State. What update can she give on our commitment to charging infrastructure across the UK?

[Heidi Alexander]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on fulfilling his promise to his constituent. We are working closely with local authorities through the local electric vehicle infrastructure—LEVI—scheme to roll out charging infrastructure, and we have issued the guidance that I mentioned earlier to local authorities on improving cross-pavement charging solutions. There are also grants available for householders who do not have a driveway but who wish to install a charge point.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Saving the best till last, I call Sammy Wilson.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

The statement today is further evidence of the economically damaging and market-distorting impact of the unrealistic net zero policies. The only reason that the Minister is having to impose fines on producers is that demand does not meet the targets that she has set for the production of electric vehicles. Does she not accept that the response from producers will be either to cut back production, reducing jobs, or to reduce the price of EVs, reducing profits and investment in the UK? Are car workers going to be the next group of workers to be sacrificed on the altar of net zero?

[Heidi Alexander]

It is right that we retain the threat of fines, but I gently point out to the right hon. Gentleman that we do not believe that any manufacturers will have to pay fines in the first year of the operation of the ZEV mandate. The trading window for credits is yet to close—it will close later this year—but our initial analysis suggests that no manufacturers will have to pay fines this year.

Oral Answers to Questions

Heidi Alexander Excerpts

Thursday 27th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

7. What steps she is taking to help ensure that the transport system supports economic growth.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

Growth is this Government’s No. 1 mission, and transport connectivity is key. We are getting on with delivering this Government’s plan for change by delivering the basics of a better transport system: cutting journey times and improving connections. That means improving the everyday journeys that drive growth and improve lives.

[Mark Ferguson]

I thank the Secretary of State for her response. Can she update me on the conversations the Department has had with Gateshead council about the state of Gateshead flyover? This 400-tonne barrier to jobs running through the middle of our town is holding back businesses and growth, and stopping us achieving our full potential.

[Heidi Alexander]

I recall meeting my hon. Friend just before Christmas, and I appreciate how critical the resolution of this issue is to his constituents and the wider area. My officials, along with colleagues from the North East combined authority, have been meeting regularly with Gateshead council to build the case for the regeneration of the area, facilitated by the planned demolition of the flyover. I know that the Minister for Future of Roads visited Gateshead in January to see the issues for herself.

[Douglas McAllister]

Scotland’s ferry network to the islands is an essential transport system. Island communities have at times been effectively cut off due to ferry chaos, disruptive cancellations and expensive repairs. The SNP has decided to inflict a 10% fare hike and sent a contract for seven new ferries to Poland. The Scottish Government are depriving Scotland’s iconic shipbuilding industry of much-needed growth and jobs. Can the UK Government assist the Scottish Government with fundamental reform of how we procure and run ferries in our country?

[Heidi Alexander]

As all of us know, Scotland has a world-renowned shipbuilding industry, so it saddens me that, under the SNP, Scotland’s ferries are being built elsewhere. I am aware that Scottish colleagues want to see reforms to how ferries are run and procured. In the meantime, I urge the Scottish Government to reconsider sending vital jobs and investment abroad.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s comments on improving everyday transport for UK residents, and her comments on Scottish ferries. Does she agree that my constituency, on the Isle of Wight, should not be left behind in the Government’s transport plans? Will she agree to intervene and look at all options in order to regulate private equity—currently, we are entirely reliant on it for our connectivity with the UK mainland, which is harming our local economy—and to look at the potential of empowering any future combined mayoral authority with some regulatory power over cross-Solent transport?

[Heidi Alexander]

I had a useful meeting with my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley) about this issue a couple of weeks ago, and I am afraid he slightly beat the hon. Gentleman to it in suggesting that we should consider what powers might be available through any future mayoral combined authority. Let me assure the hon. Gentleman that we are speaking to stakeholders across the island, including the ferry operators, to understand these issues in more depth and how we might make improvements going forward. That engagement will continue, and my hon. Friend the Maritime Minister will have a meeting with all stakeholders in due course.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

Regional growth is really important for the wider economy. There has been a huge focus on London airports—Heathrow, Gatwick and Luton—in recent weeks. What efforts is the Transport Secretary making to address regional growth and regional airport investment?

[Heidi Alexander]

I meet my counterpart in the Scottish Government regularly, and I will discuss this issue with her. The potential expansion of Heathrow is very important for regional connectivity to our other airports. With regard to Scottish airports, if there are specific issues that the hon. Gentleman would like to bring to my attention, I would be very happy to have that conversation with him.

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

2. What assessment she has made of the adequacy of the provision of public transport in Newcastle-under-Lyme.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

20. What recent assessment she has made of the adequacy of passenger rail performance.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

We are starting to see train performance stabilise following a decade of decline, and cancellations are no longer rising. We have ended the national industrial dispute, bringing passenger confidence back with a 7% increase in passenger journeys. Furthermore, we have made station-specific performance information available for the first time, as a visible sign that we are determined to improve standards.

[Jade Botterill]

I thank the Secretary of State for her answer. In rural towns, rail links are vital to keep our communities connected, but many stations, such as Shepley station in my constituency, have poor accessibility for disabled and elderly travellers. Can she offer an update on the Department’s plans to upgrade accessibility at Shepley station through the Access for All programme and through its consideration of the business case submitted by Kirklees council to ensure that all residents can use it?

[Heidi Alexander]

I can assure my hon. Friend that accessibility is at the heart of our plans for rail reform. Although I am not yet able to comment on next steps for Access for All projects at specific stations, such as Shepley in her constituency, I assure her that we are committed to improving the accessibility of the railway. It will be a priority for Great British Railways.

[Natasha Irons]

The Croydon area remodelling scheme would upgrade East Croydon and Norwood Junction stations in my constituency and improve services across the Brighton main line and most of the south-east. However, after the previous Government withdrew funding for this vital infrastructure project, passengers continue to suffer delays, and opportunities for growth across the south-east remain untapped. Given the Government’s mission for growth and increased demand for rail services to Gatwick airport, will the Secretary of State look again at the Croydon area remodelling scheme and meet me to discuss how investing in Croydon’s transport infra- structure could unlock growth across the south-east?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am sorry to say that the previous Government recklessly over-promised on rail infrastructure projects, misleading passengers who have struggled for far too long to access the services that they deserve. In fact, I would go as far as saying that Conservative Ministers travelled around the country promising rail users the moon on a stick, paid for with fantasy money. I will gladly meet my hon. Friend to discuss the Croydon area modelling scheme.

[Tessa Munt]

The Secretary of State will know about the planned engineering works between Didcot Parkway and Swindon and in the Paddington area, which will cause significant disruption between London and Bristol and in south Wales this Sunday and next Sunday. Disruption on major routes causes massive chaos on the rural routes that are accessed via Bristol and further to the south-west. Then there is the closure of the M4 between Bath and Bristol, which means that there will be no buses between Swindon and Bristol on those days. The alerts about longer and busier journeys and train cancellations and delays advise us to travel the day before or the day after. That does not seem adequate. Will the Secretary of State please pull the rail, bus and road bodies together to avoid clashes such as this, particularly when we face six years of further disruption as a result of High Speed 2 works, which will not benefit the south-west in the slightest?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Lady makes a fair point. Having readjusted my own travel plans for this weekend, I feel her pain somewhat. This Government recognise that Sunday performance in particular, irrespective of planned engineering works, has not been good enough on Great Western Railway, and we are working actively to address that. GWR is continuing to make tactical interventions to improve the resilience of timetabling, diagramming and rostering. I will raise her wider point about join-up between modes with officials in my Department.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

Given that one in five trains operated by Southern Rail arriving at Chichester station is late, and that there is no fast service connecting Chichester to London, what steps are being taken directly to improve train punctuality and reliability for my constituents, especially considering that an annual ticket is nearly £8,000?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Lady is right to demand excellent train services for her constituents, and that is what this Government are determined to deliver. We are working with the train operating companies on plans to improve timetabling and staff availability and rostering. I am happy to take away the specific issues that she has raised in relation to Chichester and provide her with more detail on the intervention plan on that line.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

We are told that nationalisation is the answer to improving passenger rail performance. If that is the case, surely it would make sense to start by nationalising the worst performing operators. CrossCountry comes last out of all train operating companies for passenger satisfaction and it is not complying with its obligations. The Secretary of State could call in that contract, so why is it not the first operator to be nationalised under GBR?

[Heidi Alexander]

We made a commitment to bring the train operating companies back into public ownership without any cost to the taxpayer. The appropriate point at which to bring the train operating companies back into public ownership is when the franchises expire. If there is terrible performance, we can seek to break a contract earlier. I am pleased that there are some improvements at CrossCountry. We are seeing improvements from the train operating companies that have been brought into public ownership. In particular, for TransPennine and LNER there is a really positive story to tell on passenger journeys and revenue growth.

[Jerome Mayhew]

I thank the Secretary of State for that answer, but she ducks the point that if she had the political will she could bring CrossCountry in-house now. It is not the first operator to come under GBR or even close to it. Under current plans, the Government will not get around to tackling CrossCountry until 2031. In the meantime, highly effective private operators with some of the highest levels of customer satisfaction such as c2c and Greater Anglia will be subjected to dislocating nationalisation this year. Why are the Government forcing nationalisation in areas where current services are liked, and sitting on their hands where people are crying out for improvements?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am not sure the hon. Gentleman listened to my previous answer. I said clearly that we are bringing the train operating companies into public ownership in a way that offers good value for money for the British taxpayer. The number of cancellations on CrossCountry has reduced markedly since the start of this year, and although we recognise that there is more to do, CrossCountry is on a good improvement trajectory.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

11. What steps she is taking to increase capacity on the railways.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

We are committed to increasing railway capacity. For instance, the delivery of HS2 phase 1 will more than double long-distance seated capacity between London and the west midlands, and many projects that will increase capacity are being funded through the rail network enhancements pipeline, particularly in the north and midlands.

[Tom Gordon]

I pay tribute to Brian Dunsby OBE, who was a pillar of the Harrogate business community. He tirelessly campaigned to improve our railways, including getting a direct service from London to Harrogate. One of the issues that we spoke about before he sadly passed away was how the Leeds to York line via Harrogate becomes a single track at Knaresborough, which has implications for running higher levels of services and for delays, as once one service is delayed, the entire day can quickly fall. I am launching a campaign for the dualling of the line between Knaresborough and York so that the railways serving our communities are fit for purpose. Will the Secretary of State join me in that? Will she offer any advice on how we can go about securing that investment?

[Heidi Alexander]

May I express my condolences on the loss of the rail campaigner and constituent the hon. Member mentioned? I am aware that Network Rail is looking at both electrification schemes and potentially longer platform schemes for stations that serve his constituency, but I recognise that he is talking about dual tracking. May I suggest that he seeks a meeting with the Rail Minister in the other place to discuss that in more detail?

[Jacob Collier (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)]

My constituents in Uttoxeter have no trains on a Sunday until 3 pm due to long-standing Network Rail staffing issues in signal boxes. With Uttoxeter’s growing population, it is unacceptable that residents are left without transport for much of the day on Sunday. I thank the Rail Minister for his engagement with me so far, but will the Secretary of State say more about how the Government are improving the reliability of train services?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am clear that we must have a seven-day railway where trains are as likely to turn up on a Sunday afternoon as they are on a Monday morning. We are working with train operating companies across the country, including those that serve my hon. Friend’s constituents in Uttoxeter, and I am happy to provide more information to him in writing about the specific action we are taking in his constituency.

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

In 2017, South Western Railway ordered 90 new Arterio trains to increase capacity on its rail network. They were meant to enter service in 2019. However, six years later, only five are in service—presumably not counting the empty one that sailed by a teeming and seething platform at Wimbledon this morning. With SWR set to be in Government hands in two months, what steps will be taken to ensure that those trains are finally brought into service?

[Heidi Alexander]

I know that the Rail Minister is seized of this issue. He has spoken to me about it, and I understand that it relates to issues with lighting on platforms, what can be seen from the CCTV cameras and the role of the guard. We are across the detail, and it is important that those issues are resolved before the trains are brought into public ownership on 25 May.

[Will Stone (Swindon North) (Lab)]

12. What steps she is taking to support the proposed railway line between Swindon and Oxford.

--- Later in debate ---

[Julia Buckley (Shrewsbury) (Lab)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

I put on record my thanks to all those involved in responding to the major incidents that we have seen unfold on land and at sea in recent weeks. The collisions of vessels in the North sea and the fire at the electricity substation serving Heathrow have caused disruption and distress. I am pleased that recovery has been swift, and I am clear that no stone should be left unturned either in identifying the causes of the incidents or in learning lessons for the future.

I am pleased with the work taking place across my Department to keep Britain moving. On Monday, we announced what councils need to do to unlock their full share of almost £1.6 billion of investment to repair our broken roads. For the first time, we are asking every council in England to tell us how many potholes it has fixed to unlock its allocation. As we strive to make our trains more reliable, I welcome the end of the Avanti West Coast dispute. Transport continues to drive the Government’s plan for change, unlocking jobs, growth and opportunities for all.

[Julia Buckley]

Last weekend in my constituency, our Shrewsbury Moves festival celebrated progress towards our 10-year plan to implement more inclusive and integrated public transport across our beautiful medieval town. What additional transport is the Department making available to historic and economically thriving towns such as Shrewsbury in order to combat congestion by enabling more integrated public transport?

[Heidi Alexander]

The Aviation Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane), tells me that he was at Shrewsbury Moves on his wedding anniversary and had a very good time.

The integrated national transport strategy will set the long-term vision for transport in England. Different places face different challenges, so we want to enable local leaders to deliver the right transport for communities. That will always include good public transport, as well as schemes that balance the needs of drivers, cyclists and pedestrians on the roads.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)]

When the Government handed the ASLEF trade union an eye-watering £9 billion pay agreement in the summer, they promised that it would

“protect passengers from further national strikes”.

Yet recently the Secretary of State said on national television that

“there will be occasions on which strikes will be necessary”.

Will she provide the House with an example of a necessary strike?

[Heidi Alexander]

The hon. Gentleman will know that I have extensive experience from my time in London, where we did take strikes when safety was at risk. That is one direct example that I can give him.

[Gareth Bacon]

The Secretary of State will be aware that in response to her Department’s recent rail consultation, the trade unions welcomed her plan and said that a just transition to nationalisation would mean the levelling up of pay and conditions for rail workers. The cost of that to the taxpayer could be considerable. Would she consider a strike over harmonising pay and conditions to be a necessary strike?

[Heidi Alexander]

Let us be clear: the cost of those national rolling strikes over two years was £850 million in lost revenue. I am sorry, but I am not going to take any lessons from the shadow Secretary of State on industrial relations on the railway.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

T2. I have launched a petition in my constituency asking Warwickshire county council to take our buses back under public control. Almost 30% of buses do not run on time, and my constituents are sick and tired of being stranded if they do not have a car. Does the Minister agree that Warwickshire county council must do the right thing and improve the dismal service that my constituents are currently stuck with?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

Yesterday, the Chancellor spoke about the importance of getting individuals back to work in order to grow our economy, but the uneven coverage, unreliability and inaccessibility of our transport network are key barriers that prevent many from doing so. Furthermore, the Chancellor maintained the decision she took in October to cut the Department for Transport’s budget. Does the Secretary of State believe that cutting the transport budget is a good way of increasing economic growth?

[Heidi Alexander]

I know that the Chancellor and her colleagues in the Treasury understand completely the importance of investing in our transport infrastructure to unlock the jobs, homes and opportunities of the future.

[Claire Hughes (Bangor Aberconwy) (Lab)]

T3. People in my constituency desperately need better and faster railway connections across our region and into the north-west of England to connect with jobs and opportunities. I thank the Secretary of State for her positive engagement with the Welsh Government and the Secretary of State for Wales on the topic of rail infrastructure in Wales. Will she meet me and colleagues from north Wales to specifically discuss the latest on the north Wales main line?

[Heidi Alexander]

I would be happy to meet my hon. Friend. As I said in my letter to Ken Skates in January, we do

“recognise that railways in Wales have seen low levels of enhancement spending in recent years,”

and we will seek to address that.

[James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

When the Roads Minister came to Norfolk recently, she was reported to have cast doubt over the approval of the A10 West Winch housing access road, which is essential to unlock thousands of homes and economic growth. Without the road, the homes will not be built. Given the Government’s commitment to house building, will the Transport Secretary reaffirm her support for this long-standing road scheme?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con)]

The Secretary of State will recognise that it is very difficult for private landowners and local authorities along the line of High Speed 2 to plan future development when they do not know what will happen to land that is necessary for construction but is not needed for the long-term operation of the line. A land disposal strategy for HS2 is overdue. Can she produce one urgently? When she does so, will she seek opportunities to benefit communities like those I represent, which are suffering the disruption of the line but will not benefit from its operation?

[Heidi Alexander]

This is a matter that I am seeking to expedite, as I recognise the uncertainty it causes for landowners and communities along the line. I will take the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s wider point into consideration.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

T6. East Midlands Railway has a new fleet of trains that will be on the tracks this year—a £400 million investment. These trains can be powered by electrified tracks, but can revert to diesel when travelling on the parts of the midland main line that are not yet electrified. As electrification means cleaner air, less diesel and quieter and faster trains, does the Secretary of State agree that the more of the track that can be electrified, the better it will be for passengers, communities and the environment?

[Heidi Alexander]

I do agree that Government investment in new bi-mode trains and electrification on east midlands railways will result in lower energy costs, a reduction in noise emissions and a significant improvement to the railways.

[Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)]

As the Secretary of State will be aware, the Government moved the money earmarked for Aldridge train station on the whim of the Labour Mayor, sadly making Aldridge residents feel that they are no longer cared about. As the Government say that they are minded to grant open access from Wrexham to Euston, will they work with me to demonstrate to the people of Aldridge that they do actually care by working to deliver a train station by 2027, as planned and budgeted for by the Conservatives?

[Heidi Alexander]

I find it rather strange that every month I come to the Dispatch Box and answer the same question from the right hon. Lady, given that she was Rail Minister for a number of years. I am very happy to discuss the importance of Aldridge station with the Mayor of the West Midlands and to update the right hon. Lady further.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Transport Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

My constituency has a very successful passenger branch line, but there also used to be a freight line. There is a tiny piece of track that, quite inexpensively, could be reopened to carry tin and lithium out through the docks. Will the Minister meet me to discuss the possibility of doing that?

[Heidi Alexander]

This Government are committed to moving more freight from road to rail, which is the right thing to do for our environment and our economy. I would be happy to have that meeting with my hon. Friend.

[Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)]

Derby station has recently been revealed as the seventh worst for delays in the UK. When people cannot get to work on time, it is not just a pain for them; it also impacts productivity and holds back our local economies. Will the Secretary of State outline the steps she is taking to tackle delayed trains in Derby and the east midlands, so that the transport system supports economic growth rather than holding it back?

[Heidi Alexander]

We are working closely with East Midlands Railway and CrossCountry to resolve cancellations and delays, whether related to train fleets, staffing or infrastructure matters.

[Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)]

The reduction in funding for our waterways by 5% year on year from 2027 will have a detrimental impact on the operations of the Dudley Canal and Caverns Trust. Will my right hon. Friend commit to a review of the funding of our waterways and reinstate that support?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am happy to look into that issue for my hon. Friend and provide her with a written update.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

I recently met the managing director of Morebus again to call for new services to Hengistbury Head, reinstated services to Throop and better services, such as an improved 33 route and routes to the Royal Bournemouth hospital and the airport. Does the Minister agree that better buses are good for our communities and our economy, and that there is a lot of growth to unlock in Bournemouth and the south-west with better buses?