Oral Answers to Questions

Kelly Tolhurst Excerpts

Thursday 12th March 2020 Commons Chamber

[Craig Tracey (North Warwickshire) (Con)]

3. What steps he is taking to improve bus links in North Warwickshire.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Kelly Tolhurst)]

The bus market outside London is deregulated, with service provision being a matter for bus operators and local authorities. We are, however, providing £5 billion of new funding to overhaul buses and cycling across the country.

[Craig Tracey]

The reality in predominantly rural North Warwickshire is that I can get to London quicker by train than it takes for me to travel by bus from outside my house to my constituency office just 6 miles away. The situation makes it really difficult for people to get to hospital appointments, to work, to school and, as I found out last week, to Jobcentre Plus appointments. What can we do to reinvigorate transport across North Warwickshire and Bedworth so that my constituents can access the fantastic opportunities that this Government are keen to deliver as part of their levelling-up agenda?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

I understand my hon. Friend’s frustration. I am pleased to say that the Government have launched two schemes that are relevant to North Warwickshire. The first is a call for an expression of interest in a £20 million rural mobility fund to support innovative solutions to transport problems in rural areas, and the second is the allocation of £30 million to every local authority in England to support new bus services or replace lost services.

[Mohammad Yasin (Bedford) (Lab)]

4. What steps he has taken to help avoid the spread of covid-19 on public transport.

--- Later in debate ---

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

7. Whether he plans to take into account the Paris climate change agreement in future decisions on airport expansion.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Kelly Tolhurst)]

The Court of Appeal judgment on the airports national policy statement is complex, and we will set out our next steps in due course. This Government remain supportive of airport expansion, but we will permit it only within our environmental obligations.

[Dr Huq]

From “No ifs, no buts, no third runway”, to engineering a trip to Afghanistan to skip the vote, the last three Prime Ministers have started off very clear on Heathrow expansion and then obfuscation and U-turns have set in. Why do not the Government take the opportunity of the Court of Appeal ruling that expansion is incompatible with our Paris climate accord obligations and make this dead and buried once and for all, and also review the other 21 planned airport expansions?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

As I have already outlined, the Government are, and remain, supportive of airport expansion where we are able to deliver it within our environmental obligations. I must point out to the hon. Lady that the Court did not conclude that airport expansion is incompatible with climate change. As I have already outlined, we are reviewing this complex judgment and will lay out our next steps soon.

[Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough) (Lab)]

In the light of the Court of Appeal’s decision, the Government were wrong to deny the relevance and application of the Paris agreement. Do the Government now accept that their overriding obligation is one of compliance with our Paris accord commitments in reducing emissions, meaning that their national policy statement on aviation has to be revisited and revised, and that they should be saying no to climate-busting expansion at Heathrow?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

I can understand the concerns that many hon. Members may have around the Government’s next steps. That is why we have outlined that it is currently an ongoing legal process. We have said that we will review the judgment, which is complex, and set out our next steps. As I have already outlined, the Court did not judge that the airport expansion is incompatible with climate change. But we will obviously update the House as soon as possible on any future steps that we will be prepared to take.

[Andy McDonald]

The Court of Appeal said that it was illegal.

In the midst of a climate crisis, the Chancellor announced the biggest-ever programme of road building—a £27 billion splurge that will increase car use, worsen congestion, and increase climate emissions. In anticipation of legal challenges, as with airport expansion, and before the Government go any further, can they confirm that the roads programme has been subject to rigorous environment impact assessments and complies with our Paris agreement obligations?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

Yes.

[Gavin Newlands (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (SNP)]

The climate emergency concerns us all, and the aviation sector faces a particularly tough challenge to decarbonise, whether or not additional airport capacity is added in the south-east. However, we cannot shirk that challenge, so I am proud that Loganair, based in my constituency, is currently working to provide passenger services using electric planes to help to tackle our climate change targets. In Scotland, these targets include aircraft emissions. Will this Government match that level of transparency and honesty, and include emissions in their targets?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for outlining his particular interest and his understanding of the situation within Scotland. As he will know, Sustainable Aviation has committed to delivering on its net zero target.

[Gavin Newlands]

As the Minister has outlined, progress has been made with new engine technology continually setting new standards of efficiency and reducing carbon emissions, and there is huge research and development in the sector right now. Given that background, plus the fact that it may cost up to 10 times more, and that it is one of just two bodies whose regulations are followed the world over, replacing the European Aviation Safety Agency properly may take up to a decade, and recruiting the expertise required will be extremely difficult. Does the Minister not realise that leaving EASA is an act of sheer folly that is putting Brexit politics before passenger safety?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. He will know—I believe he spoke about it last week—that we will potentially see the first electric flight this year. We have invested £300 million in the future flight challenge fund. We are committed to working with everyone across the industry to ensure that we have the technology and the skills and can deliver on our target.

[Adam Afriyie (Windsor) (Con)]

10. What steps his Department is taking to support the roll-out of charging infrastructure for electric vehicles.

--- Later in debate ---

[Matthew Pennycook (Greenwich and Woolwich) (Lab)]

14. What plans he has to reduce the number of people affected by aircraft noise living (a) near and (b) under Heathrow airport flight paths.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Kelly Tolhurst)]

The Government’s airspace modernisation programme should allow aircraft to climb more quickly and descend continuously, which will have a noticeable noise reduction benefit for communities overflown by Heathrow flights.

[Matthew Pennycook]

I thank the Minister for that answer. She will know that 70% of the aircraft that arrive at Heathrow do so via what is known as westerly operations, involving a final approach over my constituency and others in south London. Given the concerns about noise on the part of those living under these flight paths, can the Minister tell the House whether the Bill on modernising our airspace that the Government have committed to will include provisions aimed at reducing the concentration of flight paths and mandating measures to reduce arrival noise?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question, and I understand his concerns. Airspace modernisation is intended to reduce the amount of noise per flight for those living under concentrated flight paths. However, there is a risk that they may experience more noise than currently. Whether this is the case will depend on the final routes proposed by airports, including any respite routes, and on the outcomes of consultation with local people, and I expect he will be very vocal at that time.

--- Later in debate ---

[David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) (Con)]

18. Whether he has made an estimate of the time it will take to review the Airports National Policy Statement. [R]

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Kelly Tolhurst)]

The judgment by the Court of Appeal was complex, and the Government need time to consider it carefully. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State issued a written statement on 27 February.

[David Simmonds]

I apologise for my earlier mistiming, Mr Speaker.

Does my hon. Friend agree that, as well as digesting what I agree are the complex implications of that judgment, she could take this opportunity to consider the report by the New Economic Foundation, entitled “Baggage Claim”? That report debunks many of the received wisdoms about the value to the UK economy of Heathrow expansion, and sets out in detail the economic opportunities created by regional expansion, especially in terms of levelling-up, which is a clear commitment of this Government.

[Kelly Tolhurst]

As my hon. Friend has outlined, just as I have a number of times today, the Court of Appeal judgment is complex. We are considering it, and we will set out our next steps in due course. On regional connectivity, we are committed to delivering airport expansion that is in line with our environmental obligations. We are also committed to levelling up, and ensuring that people are able to travel, whichever part of the country they live in, and that obviously relates to local and regional airports.

[Kim Johnson (Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab)]

19. What recent assessment he has made of the viability of the rail franchising system.

--- Later in debate ---

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

20. If he will bring forward legislative proposals for the mandatory collection of bus accident data by bus companies for publication by local authorities.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Kelly Tolhurst)]

It is up to individual local transport authorities to determine which powers in the Bus Services Act 2017 are used to address issues of bus safety. Under a partnership or franchising scheme, bus operators could be required to provide bus safety data at specified intervals.

[Matt Western]

While in London this data is collected, in all other areas of the country it is not. It is public transport we are talking about and the public should be made aware, or be allowed to be made aware, of this key data on the number of accidents and the causes of those accidents. Will the Minister agree to meet me and members of the family of Rowan Fitzgerald, who sadly died in 2015 in an unnecessary accident, to discuss the proposals in Rowan’s law?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

I know the hon. Gentleman has met a number of bus Ministers to discuss the fatal accident in Coventry in 2015. I offer my deepest condolences for this terrible tragedy. Collection of data could be considered within the national bus strategy. I, or one of my colleagues, would be happy to meet him to discuss that further.

[Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Richard Holden (North West Durham) (Con)]

T3. The A68 runs from the town of Darlington all the way up to Edinburgh and through five constituencies in the north of England, including mine. Given that 30% of its use is from heavy goods vehicles, will the Secretary of State consider Transport for the North’s recommendation that it becomes part of the strategic road network?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Kelly Tolhurst)]

My hon. Friend mentioned that briefly to me already, so I know that it is on his radar. It is important that all our roads are managed by the appropriate authority in the interests of road users and local communities, and I would be quite happy to meet my hon. Friend and the roads Minister.

[Justin Madders (Ellesmere Port and Neston) (Lab)]

T8. A recent survey of social media found that the M56 was the most complained about motorway in the whole country. Junctions 12 to 14 are a complete bottleneck, causing regular accidents and frustration for local people, so I hope that the Minister will be able to confirm that among the many announcements yesterday, those junctions on the M56 will also get some investment.

[Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con)]

T4. At a recent community event in Middlewich organised by Redeeming Our Communities, one of the loudest calls from young people was for improved bus services in the town. What support can the Government give to help to facilitate that?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

My hon. Friend will know that we are providing £5 billion in new funding to overhaul buses and cycling nationwide to benefit all passengers of all ages. The national bus strategy will set out further details.

[Cat Smith (Lancaster and Fleetwood) (Lab)]

T9. Yesterday’s Budget provided no further clarity on the £350 million for cycling that the Prime Minister mentioned on 11 February. As a consequence, from the start of next month, local authorities outside London have nothing earmarked for their local cycling and walking infrastructure plans. Will the Minister explain why cyclists were forgotten in yesterday’s Budget?

[Mr William Wragg (Hazel Grove) (Con)]

T5. A short-sighted decision by Transport for Greater Manchester and Stagecoach to scrap the 375 bus service, serving my constituents in Mellor and Hawk Green, has been met with dismay. Will my hon. Friend, the excellent Minister, meet me urgently so that we can maintain this important service and keep the wheels on the 375 bus going round and round?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

My hon. Friend will know that decisions are made locally for Transport for Greater Manchester, and Greater Manchester already receives just under £3 million each year to support local bus services. The Government have also committed to £5 billion more for buses, which I hope is a cause for optimism for him, but as he knows, I will always be happy to meet him to discuss any particular issues.

[Margaret Ferrier (Rutherglen and Hamilton West) (SNP)]

Fairground operators make a significant economic contribution to my constituency and use red diesel for their power-generating equipment. Members of the Showmen’s Guild of Great Britain have contacted me to say that the Chancellor’s planned increase in fuel duty on red diesel will put them out of business altogether, and they are not in line for an exemption. Will the Minister make representations to her colleagues in the Treasury to exempt the fairground industry from the planned increase to protect the livelihoods of this unique and vibrant community?

--- Later in debate ---

[Anthony Mangnall (Totnes) (Con)]

T7. I welcome the Government’s decision yesterday on the A303. The potential to unlock the south-west has just been announced, and I look forward to seeing it come to fruition. I also congratulate the Government on their 2050 maritime strategy. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we can uplift the potential in our coastal communities and make sure their local economies are not at sea?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

Like my hon. Friend, I represent a coastal constituency. The south-west has great strengths in maritime autonomy and renewables and clean maritime innovation. We look forward to working with the recently formed Maritime UK South West to create an environment where these objectives can be realised nationally and in the south-west. I would be more than happy to work with him as we progress some of these ideas.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)]

The Government’s airports policy has been struck down by the Appeal Court, and the Government have decided not to appeal that decision. Does the Minister accept that the Government cannot be a bystander on this and leave this for a decision between the courts and Heathrow’s management, who have no interest other than their own financial interests?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

We have been clear that the court case is complex and we will set out our next steps. We have always been clear that any expansion would be done via the private sector. It is for the promoters of the scheme to take that forward, and as I have already outlined this morning, there is an ongoing legal case.

[Mark Eastwood (Dewsbury) (Con)]

In my constituency, we have major issues with disabled facilities at Dewsbury railway station, where there is no tactile paving for the blind and partially sighted, and at Shepley and Mirfield railway stations, where there is a lack of wheelchair access. What assurance can the railways Minister give to my constituents that these problems will be tackled in the near future?

--- Later in debate ---

[Peter Aldous (Waveney) (Con)]

The development consent order decision for the Lowestoft third crossing should have been made by 6 December. More than three months on, I would be grateful if my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State advised as to when a decision will be announced. Does he agree that if the UK is to build the infrastructure that the Chancellor outlined yesterday, we need a timely and efficient legal process for making such decisions?

[Kelly Tolhurst]

I understand my hon. Friend’s frustrations with the delay. We will be issuing a written ministerial statement setting out a new date for the decision as soon as practically possible, but as it is a live planning application, I unfortunately cannot comment further on the scheme. However, as he knows, we of course want to ensure that all applications are dealt with in a timely way, and our Department will work to ensure that.