Northern Powerhouse Rail
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 day, 23 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)
With permission, I would like to make a statement on the Government’s plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail. I realise that I am not the first Minister to talk about transforming infrastructure in the north of England, and I get why people there are sick to the back teeth of Westminster politicians promising the earth and delivering absolutely nothing because parties, whether that means the Tories or Reform, lack ambition and are incapable of doing, or are unwilling to do, the hard yards of delivery. That ends today.
It has been over a decade since the then Conservative Chancellor pledged a transport system fit for a northern powerhouse, and what came of it? We had High Speed 2 to Manchester and Leeds—both promised, both axed—rail services have let down commuters, and we have a railway still reliant on diesel trains and two-track Victorian infrastructure. We had levelling up, the integrated rail plan and Network North—just empty slogans, and emptier pockets to pay for them.
That gulf between rhetoric and reality has consequences. An unbalanced economy does not just affect growth; it strikes at the heart of the fairer country that we want to be. Political choices made over decades mean that a 40-mile commute to Manchester is a world away from a similar journey into London. Take Liverpool, which has only two fast trains an hour to Manchester; a direct rail journey from Liverpool to Manchester airport takes an hour and 25 minutes, when it is only 28 miles away. Or take Leeds, which is still the largest city in western Europe without mass transit; only a third of the population can reach the city centre in 30 minutes.
We are finally consigning this sorry political legacy to the bonfire of history. No previous Government have acted as swiftly and decisively to back northern leaders. We have made the largest ever investment in local transport. We have given the go-ahead to road and rail projects across the north, and we are allocating billions of pounds in pothole funding to local leaders across this Parliament. Today, Mr Speaker, we are going further. After years of under-investment in the north’s rail network, I am proud to announce that we will deliver Northern Powerhouse Rail.
This is a generational commitment, building on the ongoing trans-Pennine route upgrade. We will invest up to a further £45 billion to create a turn-up-and-go railway along the northern growth corridor of Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds and Sheffield, as well as York. There will be regular services onward to Newcastle and Hull, and to Chester for connections to north Wales.
Make no mistake: NPR will transform how people travel. We will end the hour-long waits if people miss their train. We will attract more people to a railway that will be faster, more accessible and more frequent than ever before. For northerners who have long complained about being treated as second-class citizens, my message is simple: those days are over.
This is an ambitious long-term programme, but it is not HS2 reheated. I stood at the Dispatch Box last year and said that we would learn the lessons of that infrastructure project, and I meant it. Unlike the previous Government’s Network North plan, which was announced without so much as a phone call to the mayors, we have been working directly with them on developing the proposals. I am proud to announce that every single one of those mayors is backing the plan today.
I am clear that NPR will not be a central Government vanity project. It will be rooted in northern communities, and designed, developed and delivered from the bottom up. We will also take the time to get this right. That starts with agreeing mature, stable designs as well as consents, all before construction. Finally, unlike HS2, this is not about the fastest line at any cost. Northern Powerhouse Rail will be the shoulders of this nation’s rail network, improving services across the north and beyond.
Let me now turn to delivery. We are making £1.1 billion available to develop NPR over the next four years. This will proceed in three phases, sequenced so that passengers experience a better railway as soon as possible. The first phase will prioritise electrification and upgrades east of the Pennines for delivery in the 2030s. That covers the Leeds-Bradford, Sheffield-Leeds and Leeds-York corridors, including the stations. Alongside NPR, we will develop the business case for the Leamside line, as part of our broader plans for the north. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson), who has been campaigning on this for over 20 years.
Phase 1’s benefits will be clear. It means pressing forward with plans for a new station in Bradford, with funding secured to take it forward subject to business case, and it means working with local leaders on a redesigned York station masterplan. I would like to recognise the work carried out by Lord Blunkett in his Yorkshire plan for rail. It was his vision, endorsed by the white rose mayors, that informed our plan for phase 1, and I am proud that Lord Blunkett is backing our plans today.
Work also starts now for the second phase, west of the Pennines, with major construction planned for the 2030s. It includes a new route, and a predominantly new line, between Liverpool and Manchester. This will run via new stations, improving access to Manchester airport from across the north and north Wales, and to Warrington Bank Quay, with plans to deliver thousands of new homes. I have today instructed my officials to immediately resume work on the adapted hybrid Bill, so that we can reach planning consent for the parts of the route in Manchester. These plans align with the prospectus of the Liverpool-Manchester Railway Board, and I would like to thank all of the board’s members, including the chair, former Rail Minister Huw Merriman, who is also backing our plans today.
The third phase, which takes us to the 2040s, will improve connectivity across the Pennines, over and above the trans-Pennine route upgrade currently under way. I see Bradford to Manchester, Leeds to Manchester, and Sheffield to Manchester as key routes that we will upgrade.
If we are to secure Britain’s long-term growth, we must also recognise that future capacity and connectivity is needed along other major routes, such as the west coast main line, and ensure that this is reflected in our decision making now. I can therefore confirm this Government’s long-term aim to see a full new north-south line from Birmingham to Manchester. That is one of the reasons why we have chosen the Liverpool to Manchester route, as put forward by local mayors, because it is the only route that properly preserves our ability ultimately to build a new line south to address longer-term congestion and crowding challenges on the west coast main line.
Again, this plan will not be a revival of HS2, and no decisions have been taken on the specification or timetable. In the meantime, we will retain land that the Government have already purchased between the west midlands and Crewe. This will be an incremental programme of change, and delivery will be taken forward after NPR has been built. Nevertheless, I believe that laying out our strategy now is sensible, responsible and in the long-term interests of the country.
Today we are announcing a second rail revolution in the very region that gave us the first. The north powered Britain’s past, and it can lead this country’s future. This plan is a downpayment on the north’s potential and part of a broader growth drive to lift the region’s productivity, boost living standards and add tens of billions to the UK economy. At the heart of this lies connectivity, because only by strengthening the links between our northern cities and bringing their pools of talent closer together can the region begin to rival the other major growth corridors in Europe.
Too many northerners still face the choice of either staying at home and putting aspiration on hold or moving away in search of a better future. I say no more unfair choices and no more missed opportunities. Today we start delivering Northern Powerhouse Rail, and I commend this statement to the House.
Heidi Alexander
I cannot believe what I have just heard, to be honest. I know that the hon. Gentleman is standing in for the shadow Transport Secretary, the right hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden), but I really hoped that he would have done a bit better than that.
The hon. Gentleman talks about no budget being set out. We have set out £1.1 billion to be spent over the next four years, which is far more than his Government ever spent on Northern Powerhouse Rail in the 14 years in which they had an opportunity to make improvements to the rail network in the north of England. If that is the way the Conservatives approach basic maths when we are spending more than £1 billion, I can see why the public booted them out of office at the last election.
We are working in collaboration with local mayors. We have agreed with them that where they see opportunity to boost economic growth beyond the core scope of the Northern Powerhouse Rail proposals, we will work with them to agree local contributions so that the full benefits of this investment can be realised.
More generally, this is a classic case of the hon. Gentleman writing the questions without listening to the announcement. We are delivering Northern Powerhouse Rail in full. We have set out our plans in full, we are funding NPR in full, and we will deliver it.
The hon. Gentleman mentions the previous Government and their aspirations. Let me remind the House of what that actually amounted to—the plan that got the location of Manchester wrong on a map, promised new tramlines that had already been built, and diverted funding away from the north to fix potholes in the south. That plan was not worth the paper it was written on, so we will take no lessons on this matter from the Conservatives.
If the hon. Gentleman will not listen to me, maybe he will listen to the people who run our great city regions in the north. The Mayors of West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire and North Yorkshire said that
“we welcome the government’s once in a generation commitment to improving transport across the North”.
The Mayor of the Liverpool City Region said:
“After more than a decade of dither, delay and broken promises, this is the start of a new era, with a genuinely strategic approach and a government finally backing Northern Powerhouse Rail in full.”
The Mayor of Greater Manchester said,
“Finally, we have a government with an ambitious vision for the North”
and a
“firm commitment to Northern Powerhouse Rail”.
Let me quote one more person:
“NPR is a project I’ve long championed…so it is excellent to see the government backing it in full”.
Those are not the words of a Labour mayor or a Labour Minister; they are the words of former Conservative Rail Minister Huw Merriman. Our plans are backed by the mayors, by business leaders, and by the Conservatives’ own former Rail Minister. That tells us everything we need to know about who is delivering for the north and who never did.
Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)
This is another hugely welcome transport statement from the Secretary of State for Transport and her team. Today’s announcement promises levels of rail connectivity for communities from Merseyside to Tyneside that will compare to those of the London travel to work area. The question that I and many others have is: when will we see more details about the timescales and potential funding sources for phases 1 and 2 and, most importantly, phase 3—linking Birmingham with the Northern Powerhouse Rail network, which is so desperately needed and was so cruelly and ridiculously cancelled by the Conservative party in government—so that we can relieve the pressure on the west coast main line and link up London and Birmingham with the cities of the north?
Heidi Alexander
The Chair of the Transport Committee is completely right that the proposals we are announcing today will deliver rail services for the north that are comparable to those in London and the south-east—a “turn up and go” railway where people do not have to check the timetable before they go to the station, because they know that a train will be there within a reasonable timeframe and that if they miss their train, they will not have to wait an hour for the next one. She is right to press me on when more information about the different phases will become available. The first phase of improvement relates to the corridors into Leeds from Sheffield, Bradford and York; we will be progressing with urgency on those, as well as the plans for the new line between Manchester and Liverpool. Phase 3 of NPR relates to further trans-Pennine improvements beyond the trans-Pennine route upgrade, and we will say more in due course about our plans for Birmingham to Manchester, noting that the delivery of those plans will come after NPR has been completed.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
I have read the statement—I am very grateful for early sight of it—and have listened to the Secretary of State carefully. The Liberal Democrats are massive supporters of Northern Powerhouse Rail, but all that is really concrete in this statement is just over £1 billion so that we can spend the next four years planning to perhaps come up with another plan.
The failure of the previous Conservative Government to deliver infrastructure projects such as this and HS2 was utterly depressing and embarrassing. However, I hope the Secretary of State will understand the scepticism of many of us in the north—not just Liberal Democrat Members—who fear that this Government are also being worryingly pedestrian, lacking the determination to deliver vital projects such as these, and that high-speed rail for the north will be delivered at a snail’s pace if we are lucky. Would I be right to surmise from the Secretary of State’s announcement that while we will see upgrades in the 2030s—still a long time away—we will not see trains running on the new track much before 2045? What confidence can she give us that we will not see even more slippage in that timetable? What guarantees can she give us that we will not see a repeat of the Conservatives’ approach of stop-start, stop-start, stop-start, and then cancel?
Finally, I remind the Minister that the north of England does not stop at the M62. While we are proud of our cities of Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool, the biggest visitor destination in the north of England is Cumbria, yet there is not a single mention of either Cumbria or Lancashire in the statement. It contains nothing about the vital upgrades needed to the west coast main line north of Warrington, especially in light of the recent derailment at Shap, and we continue to wait for the Government to invest in the all-important lakes line to Windermere, where a simple passing loop at Burneside would double the line’s capacity at a fraction of the cost of Northern Powerhouse Rail, directly connecting Manchester airport to the heart of the English Lake district. Will the Minister agree to meet me to discuss these vital projects, to help prove that this Government’s concern for the north includes the actual north?
Heidi Alexander
I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are getting on with this, and we will see these improvements delivered. I do not share his cynicism that we will spend the next four years simply coming up with a plan; the £1.1 billion that has been allocated is for land acquisitions and early preparatory works on the Yorkshire schemes. We will see delivery in the 2030s, with passengers seeing the benefits of some of those schemes, but I will not make the same mistakes as the last Government made with HS2. They let contracts before the scope of schemes had been finalised, which was essentially a free meal ticket for building contractors. We will take the time to do this properly and spend taxpayer money wisely. Of course I want to see the delivery of rail infrastructure speeded up, but I also want to ensure that every single penny that this Government spend is well spent.
The hon. Gentleman asked whether I could reassure him about the stop-start nature of plans being drawn up and then delivered. We have taken our time to come up with a credible, sequenced, prioritised programme of improvements, in stark contrast to the previous Government. I can assure him that this is a plan for the whole of the north of England, and when it comes to our Government’s commitment to Cumbria, I gently remind him that the Department for Transport has invested over £13 million in Carlisle station, Cumberland has received an £18 million multi-year bus funding deal, and £10 million has been spent on a Borders rail viability study. The hon. Gentleman should remember that we are investing across the north of England in improving public transport for the travelling public.
Lucy Powell (Manchester Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker—it is nice to speak from the Back Benches for the first time in a very long time. I strongly welcome this commitment to Northern Powerhouse Rail and the vision that underpins it. This will be game-changing for the north after decades of under-investment and poor connectivity; after years and years of indecision by the Conservative party, this really is going to transform lives. Does the Secretary of State agree that in order to ensure long-term reliability and capacity for generations to come, we have to solve the problem of Manchester Piccadilly station? That station finally having through capacity in an underground station will truly unlock connectivity between Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield and Manchester airport and unlock the real potential of all regions across the north.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
Order. I want to help everybody. Those Members whose constituencies are involved in this programme are the ones who I want to get in. We have got three statements. I know this statement matters, especially to the north, so we have got to get the people in. Please, if we can help each other, that would be useful.
Jim McMahon (Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)
This statement is welcome. The north of England has been held back for far too long, with our people and economy not being allowed to realise their full potential. The commitment to properly review the Manchester Piccadilly underground proposal alongside the Mayor of Greater Manchester is also welcome. Without that scheme, it leaves one route in and one route out, with trains forced to turn back on to the network. It is slower, second rate and not something the north can support. First, can we have more detail on the Manchester airport local contribution and how we will ensure it is fair and at a level that can be raised locally? Secondly, can we have a clearer idea on the timescales for the Birmingham to Manchester line?
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
Sadly, we have heard all this before. I admit that some of the last Government’s ambitious proposals have not come to fruition, but the Labour Government are now finding that it is easy to criticise. I do not recall that the criticism coming from Labour Members when we were in power was, “Don’t worry, by 2050 we can solve the problem.” They were saying that they had immediate answers. I suggest that, instead of these ambitious proposals, the Secretary of State announces something that she can deliver. If she shook her petty cash tin, she could find the few thousand pounds she would need to extend the King’s Cross to Lincoln service through to Grimsby and Cleethorpes, and so boost the local economy there—
Mr Speaker
Order. Come on! The hon. Member seems to be making a statement—there is not even a question in there. Secretary of State, I am sure you can rustle up a quick answer.
Heidi Alexander
I will ask the Rail Minister to write to the hon. Gentleman and update him on the particular scheme that he is advocating.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Heidi Alexander
Many of the cheapest fares on LNER are still available. In the long-distance fare trials, the vast majority of people will benefit from the simplified ticketing system. Of course, as these trials take place, we will want to review this process and ensure that we are providing good value for money for as many of the travelling public as possible.
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
But it is not just LNER, is it? We have also heard worrying accounts about Greater Anglia and c2c, shortly after they have been nationalised. The Government say that fare simplification is one of their key objectives; fair enough, but there are increasing numbers of accounts of discounted tickets being removed in the name of fare simplification. How will the Secretary of State prevent the fare simplification process from turning into just the removal of discounts?
Jim Shannon
I thank the Minister for his answers to the seven questions on the Order Paper about buses. The Holy Bible refers to seven as the perfect number. If we are to improve local bus services, we need to improve the type of buses that are manufactured, make them energy efficient, and provide an hourly service. What discussions has the Minister had with Wrightbus in Northern Ireland about the production of more electric buses? Will he acknowledge the superior quality of those buses, and the company’s capacity to deliver high-quality buses, which are best of British, at a good price?
Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)
Happy new year to you, Mr Speaker, and to the Government.
Yesterday, the Minister for nature, the hon. Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), told the House that there was no national bus fare cap under the last Conservative Government. That is not surprising, as the Prime Minister keeps gaslighting the public by saying exactly the same thing. Does the Minister accept that he must ensure that his colleagues correct the record, since there was a national £2 bus fare cap under the last Conservative Government? The Conservative manifesto committed to a £2 fare cap for the duration of this Parliament. This Government are taking the public for fools, as they increased the fare cap by 50%, which is hammering hard-working people up and down the country, costing them hundreds of pounds every single year.
Keir Mather
My hon. Friend is right to champion the principle of innovation in the rail network to make the travelling experience better for the public. As she rightly notes, innovations such as digital pay-as-you-go mean that passengers can get the very best price for their journey. Innovation will be at the heart of Great British Railways as it works to deliver a better railway for all.
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
Rumours are swirling around the northern mayoralties that the Government are about to row back on Northern Powerhouse Rail. Is this going to be another U-turn from the Government, or can the Minister take this opportunity to put those rumours to rest by saying from the Dispatch Box that the scope, funding and timeframe for Northern Powerhouse Rail are not going to be changed?
Keir Mather
I am perplexed at the Opposition’s new-found support for passengers on the rail network. Fares in our system rose by 60% from 2010 to 2014 under the last Government, including for residents in the north of England. This Government are committed to levelling up our railway across the United Kingdom, including in the north of England. We will put passenger experience and affordable fares for those passengers at the very heart of what Great British Railways seeks to do.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
The Liberal Democrats welcome the Government’s decision to embrace our 10-year-long campaign for a rail fares freeze. However, I am sure the Secretary of State would agree that passengers have had to bear above-inflation fare increases for two decades prior to that, yet experience trains that are late and overcrowded, and lack the right onboard amenities such as luggage storage, functioning toilets and effective wi-fi. Does the Secretary of State support the idea of a 21st-century railway passenger charter that would guarantee the better passenger experience our passengers deserve?
Heidi Alexander
I would be happy to meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss these issues. I am aware of the significance of the Ely-Haughley junction improvements. It was not possible to fund that scheme in the spending review, but it is part of the longer-term pipeline that we are looking at, not least because of the important freight links to the port in Felixstowe that could be improved. I would be happy to have a further conversation on the wider issues.
Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)
Could the Secretary of State enlighten the House as to how reversing the last Conservative Government’s 5p a litre fuel duty cut will help the transport system to support economic growth? Is it not the truth that, come September, this will be known as Labour’s back to school tax?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
I commend my hon. Friend for securing those improvements. This Government are committed to modernising our roads and getting Britain moving, which is why we have already announced that we will be investing £25 billion on the strategic road network over the next five years. We will be setting out our plans for the third road investment strategy shortly.
Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)
At oral questions in September, my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith) asked the Minister to apologise for failing to bring down the driving test backlog, which Labour had promised to do. The Minister told the House then that there were “early signs of improvement”. Can he tell the House now whether driving test times have increased or decreased since Labour came to power 18 months ago?
Mr Speaker
Order. Mr Holden, you are getting very excited. Hale and Pace are not setting a good example. Come on.
Jas Athwal (Ilford South) (Lab)
Simon Lightwood
I agree that waiting times have been too high for too long, which is why this Government are taking the decisive action that I have talked about. We are reforming the booking system so that only genuine learner drivers can book and manage tests, and we are making changes to crack down on bots and resellers. Members will have seen the announcement yesterday of the road safety strategy. Importantly, the minimum learning period is expected to improve safety and raise pass rates by up to 7%—for every 1% saved there, there are an extra 40,000 test bookings.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
Across the country, people enjoy traffic-free walking, cycling and wheeling on disused railways such as the Tissington trail in Derbyshire, the Mawddach trail in Gwynedd or the Deeside way in Aberdeenshire. What steps will the Secretary of State take to make it easier for local government and communities to gain access to the 8,000 miles of disused railway that we still have, which creates such a good opportunity for family-friendly cycling trails, as part of a national network?
Heidi Alexander
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for fulfilling his role as spokesperson for the kingdom of Kent. I am keen to maximise the number of people who are using the rail network to get to Gatwick airport. We have granted planning consent for Gatwick to bring its second runway into use in future and I want to continue discussions with Network Rail and the train operating company there, as it comes into public ownership, about how we can look at direct routes to Gatwick and increase capacity on the rail network to that airport.
Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)
The Government have given mayoral authorities greater devolved powers to develop local transport infrastructure projects. Will the Secretary of State ensure that such powers provide the opportunity to speed up joint planning and decision making so that much-needed transport infrastructure, such as the West Yorkshire mass transit scheme, can be accelerated to meet the needs of communities and local economies?
Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)
I am delighted to inform the Secretary of State that the long-awaited footbridge with lifts has finally been installed at Stowmarket station and is due to be commissioned very soon—
Peter Prinsley
But indeed. [Laughter.] There remain several hazardous crossings on the busy east-west line between Ipswich and Cambridge, including at Thurston, where pedestrians are obliged to walk across the track. Does the Secretary of State agree that we must support all initiatives to improve the safety of such crossings?
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
If you have already asked a question, I would not bother trying to catch my eye, unless you are exercising your knees.
Sir Jeremy Hunt (Godalming and Ash) (Con)
My constituents in Cranleigh, Shamley Green, Bramley and Shalford find it very difficult to get to their local hospital in Guildford, and to the community hospital in Milford. There is no direct bus service. A quarter of older people do not have cars. What will the Government do to help them solve that problem, which is becoming more and more difficult?
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
After leading a town-wide campaign to reinstate the direct Eastbourne to London Bridge service, I am delighted to say that it will return on 15 December. However, many passengers and staff on those trains, including Louise and Rhiannon, on-board supervisors whom I have met, are concerned about the amount of antisocial behaviour, and Southern rail’s lack of support for on-board supervisors in tackling it. What steps will be taken to keep passengers and staff safe from crime and antisocial behaviour on our train services?
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
This summer, the Department for Transport wrote to the rail regulator that the Government firmly believe that
“the arrival of competition will benefit users of rail services by expanding the number of stations served (including new markets), encouraging greater differentiation in service provision and promoting competitive prices.”
That was for international rail. Why do the Government believe that competition is good when travelling abroad but should be replaced with nationalisation here in Britain?
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I use the railways every Monday, Thursday and on other days in the week. The things that passengers look for, as well as those I talk to who come over here from Northern Ireland, are price, punctuality, space and comfort. Can the Minister assure us that those things are central to the Government’s obligation to the passenger? Let me add another factor. When it comes to safety, sometimes pedestrians stray on to the tracks, thereby holding up the trains. What is being done to ensure that security is taken into account?
Mr Speaker
I think that is slightly off the question. Minister, do you want to have a go at it?
Keir Mather
I will have a crack at it, Mr Speaker—thank you. The hon. Member is right to raise a number of issues that affect the experience of passengers on the railway. That experience is exactly what the passenger watchdog, which will be created through Great British Railways, is designed to protect. It will set minimum consumer standards that GBR and operators must meet as part of their licence conditions, but most importantly, that accountability will be public. The watchdog will publish reports and data on passenger experience and will be a statutory adviser to the Office of Rail and Road, which will carry out enforcement.
Heidi Alexander
I recently visited Norwich, where business leaders and representatives made the case to me for improvement works at the Ely and Haughley junctions. I am aware of the importance of freight on those lines, given the adjacency to the port of Felixstowe. We have had to take some difficult decisions in this spending review about the rail enhancement programme. While we understand the benefits of this scheme, it has not been possible to fund it in this spending review period. However, it is part of the future pipeline of work that we will be looking at.
Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)
There is no passenger growth commitment in the Railways Bill, just the expectation of inflation-busting fare rises in the Budget. Holidaymakers are being used like a piñata, with a 13% rise in air passenger duty already in prospect, and airport business rates will be passed on to them too. Ports have been throttled by delayed decisions on connectivity with the rail infrastructure. Motorists are facing potential fuel duty rises, with insurance premium tax rises and pay-per-mile hanging over them. Which of the above measures is supporting, rather than hammering, economic growth?
Heidi Alexander
The right hon. Gentleman really does need to get with the programme. We have seen the best month ever when it comes to sales of EVs and hybrid vehicles. He talks about Ford. In fact, since launching our electric car grant in the summer, over 30,000 drivers have been helped to purchase an EV, including the Ford Puma and the Ford E-Tourneo Courier. There is a discount of £3,750 for individuals buying those models.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
For decades, rail fares have been subject to above-inflation increases, and many people feel that prices such as £7,780 for an annual season ticket from Didcot to the London travelcard area do not represent good value for money and hinder the railways’ potential to reduce congestion and contribute to economic growth. Does the Secretary of State support the idea of a rail fares freeze? If she does, what representations has she made to the Chancellor ahead of the Budget?
Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)
I warmly welcome the tough action taken by this Government to cut the backlog in driving tests, but one thing that will help drivers more than anything, and help pedestrians too, is a crackdown on drug drivers such as Leon Clarke, who crashed his car and killed his eight-year-old son while driving under the influence of cocaine. Does the Minister agree that we need to change the law on roadside drug tests to stamp out this rising menace?
Mr Speaker
Order. The question is about driving tests, so as important as that matter is, the hon. Member would do better to try during topical questions.
Dr Allison Gardner (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Keir Mather)
The Government are committed to supporting aviation. [Interruption.] We are advancing airport planning decisions, modernising airspace and reviewing the airports national policy statement on Heathrow expansion. [Interruption.] To make sure that this growth is sustainable we have introduced a sustainable aviation fuel mandate and supported production through the advanced fuels fund, and are legislating for revenue certainty.
Mr Speaker
Order. Mr Holden, you have had your question. You might want to go for a walk if you are going to carry on.
Lee Pitcher
As the work to reopen Doncaster Sheffield airport takes off, the focus now turns to ensuring that it succeeds in the long run. A key part of that is building the next generation of pilots and aviation professionals. I am already working with training providers and we will hopefully launch “Pitcher’s pilot programme” for our young people. Will the Minister set out what steps the Department is taking, working across Government, to ensure that the next generation of aviation professionals is ready to take to the skies?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
Driving test wait times remain too high, and this Government are committed to getting them down. Last week, the Secretary of State announced further actions to do so, including measures to prevent tests being booked up and resold by bots, and bringing in the Army to bolster examiner numbers. We continue to develop and assess further measures to tackle this serious issue.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
Snuck out on a Government website, we learn that narrower roads are coming to make driving more miserable. Is it not the case that such a move will cause even more friction between motorists and cyclists, and slow our roads down so much that it costs the economy billions?
Simon Lightwood
I am enjoying the tour of village halls this morning. Level crossings can be a significant safety risk. Network Rail, the owner of that level crossing, has legal responsibility to reduce risk so that it is as low as practically possible. The Rail Minister would be happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss the specifics of the crossing.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
The new railway between Oxford, Bicester and Milton Keynes has been open for more than a year, successfully running freight and charter trains, but passenger trains have yet to start. When will passenger services begin, and what does the Secretary of State feel are the lessons for her Department as to what has gone wrong?
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(4 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Heidi Alexander
Passengers on LNER will benefit from the new December timetable, which will bring an overall improvement in reliability and capacity, but I would be very happy to ask the Rail Minister to speak to the hon. Gentleman about the particular issues at Berwick-upon-Tweed.
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
Before I ask my question, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the fact that last night, a man lost his life, a wife lost her husband, and children lost their father because of political intolerance. It was a personal tragedy, but also a tragedy for the body politic. I want to take a moment to recognise the importance of free speech in our democracies.
The Secretary of State quite rightly talks about improving rail performance, yet we are in a city paralysed by strike action from the RMT. The Government claim that nationalising the railways under Great British Railways will bring untold improvements. They are “untold”; Lord Hendy tells us that there will be rigorous performance standards, but he has repeatedly refused to set out what they will be. When will the Secretary of State set out the standards by which the Government’s nationalisation experiment should be judged—or are they still discussing them with the RMT?
Simon Lightwood
We have the £3 bus fare cap in England, and we have committed to continuing that up to March next year. We will continue to keep our support for bus fares under review for the future.
Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)
As I am sure the Minister knows and agrees, improving bus services must include making them safer for women and girls. Concerningly, sexual offences on the UK bus network have increased in recent years; for example, they increased by 13% on London buses in the first six months of this year. What is his Department doing to ensure that women and girls feel safe using the bus network, and can he share with the House any more information on the work being led by the Confederation of Passenger Transport, which he alluded to in yesterday’s debate on the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill?
Heidi Alexander
I am pleased to hear that the right hon. Gentleman had a constructive meeting with the new South Western leadership. I was clear with Lawrence Bowman when he took up the job that I wanted him to meet local MPs along the route to talk about quick wins to improve services. I am very happy to ask officials from the Department for Transport to meet the right hon. Gentleman to have the conversations he seeks.
Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)
Thank you very much indeed, Mr Speaker. I also thank the Secretary of State for her welcome last night, and welcome the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Selby (Keir Mather) to his new role.
I associate myself with the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew) regarding the assassination of Charlie Kirk yesterday. He was a champion of freedom of speech and open debate, and I know hon. Friends and Members from across the House all want to see politicians disagreeing well. On the subject of disagreeing well, I will come to my questions.
Fundamental to economic growth is a functioning transport system, but faced with tax hikes and inflation-busting fare rises people will find the Secretary of State’s comments difficult to believe—ASLEF strikes on CrossCountry, our capital city hammered with tube strikes and bus drivers striking tomorrow. Next weekend, Manchester will see the biggest strikes in years, followed closely by strikes in Luton, Milton Keynes, Stevenage, Hemel Hempstead, Preston and even, Mr Speaker, Chorley. Sir Sadiq Khan says that strikes in London are nothing to do with him. The Department for Transport, Downing Street and the whole Labour Government say that they are nothing to do with them, despite many of the unions on strike being Labour’s multimillion pound funders. So I ask the Transport Secretary, will anyone, anywhere in the Labour Government stand up for passengers facing an autumn of discontent?
Mr Speaker
Before the Secretary of State answers, I say to the right hon. Gentleman that welcoming the shadow Secretary of State does not mean that he can then have an essay to portray one question! [Laughter.]
Heidi Alexander
Let me congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his appointment. I know he has experience as a Transport Minister. And, of course, he had extensive experience of travelling the length and breadth of the country before the last election searching for that rarest thing, a Tory safe seat. [Laughter.]
On the substantive point, I of course recognise the frustration of the travelling public about strikes. The Mayor of London is completely right to have called for the RMT—the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers—to get back around the table with Transport for London to find a resolution to the dispute. May I caution the right hon. Gentleman, though? He might wish not to adopt such an indignant tone, because when he was at the DFT there was a rail strike one day in every 10. In fact, under the Tory Government, we saw the highest number of total strike days for any 19-month period since the 1980s. Forgive me, I will not be taking any lectures from him on industrial relations.
Mr Speaker
Right, with all those pleasantries done, we now come to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)
A transport system can support economic growth only if it provides a reliable service on which businesses and passengers can depend. According to the Evening Standard, there have been 149 incidents of industrial action on TfL since Sadiq Khan became Mayor, with millions of people inconvenienced and businesses disrupted again this week in yet another tube strike. Can the Secretary of State tell us what steps she is taking, as a senior Labour politician, to sort out the mess caused by the Labour Mayor of London’s failure to reach an agreement with his Labour friends in the RMT, a union that has given hundreds of thousands of pounds to their comrades on the Government Benches in recent years?
Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Keir Mather)
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
This year, our Department will publish the integrated national transport strategy outlining our long-term vision for transport in England. It will set out how the transport sector, Government and local leaders should work together to improve people’s everyday journeys however they choose to travel, including how people access ports and airports. We look forward to providing more information in due course.
The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)
The Government are committed to making Britain a clean energy superpower, which is why we are investing £4.5 billion to support the transition to electric vehicles. That includes £1.4 billion to support the continued uptake of EVs through targeted grants, with 35 models now eligible for discounts of up to £3,750 through our electric car grant. To make charging up an electric car as easy as filling up at the petrol station, we are also supporting the roll-out of 100,000 more public charging points, building on the 84,000 already available.
Perran Moon
Meur ras ha myttin da, Mr Speaker. I declare an interest as chair of the electric vehicle all-party parliamentary group. In the year to date, one in five new car registrations has been an electric vehicle, with the sale of new EVs up 27%. Demand is rising thanks in part to the Government’s proactive commitments to reducing transport emissions. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss how we can make even more progress by providing that vital certainty to industry transitioning away from a fossil fuel-based transport system and ultimately saving drivers across the UK thousands of pounds?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
I know that my hon. Friend has raised this issue time and again with East Sussex county council. The delay to the Queensway Gateway project has wreaked havoc for her constituents. Given that the project was funded with Government money, serious questions must now be asked of East Sussex county council about these issues and the delays that have come about.
Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)
When we next have transport questions, the Budget will be just days away, so can the Transport Secretary rule out any of the following—increased duty on fuel or flights, VAT on private hire, increasing the insurance premium tax or raising rail fares above inflation? If she will not, has she at least spoken against any of these measures in Cabinet or to the Chancellor since she took up her role?
Heidi Alexander
We are committed to improving rail connectivity and capacity in the north of England. I would be happy to have a further conversation with the hon. Gentleman about that scheme.
Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)
I, too, look forward to working with the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Selby (Keir Mather), in his new role. Last week, the Transport Committee heard that car clubs, peer-to-peer ride-sharing and car-sharing schemes align with Government objectives on transport integration, reducing congestion, increasing electric vehicle use and supporting residents in rural areas where public transport is poor. Unlike France and other countries, the sector in the UK operates in a policy vacuum, particularly since the Government withdrew the car clubs toolkit guidance in May. Is the Minister planning to address that policy vacuum?
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(6 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Heidi Alexander
The hon. Gentleman will know that we have invited Heathrow to bring forward proposals for a third runway and we are expecting further information on that this summer. We are clear that part of the expansion of Heathrow is about improving regional connectivity. He will also be aware that we have provided airports such as Doncaster with Government money to support that reopening.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
To achieve growth, businesses rely on our world-class logistics and haulage sector. Given that Logistics UK said that it was “disappointed” that the logistics sector had not been identified as one of the foundational industries in the industrial strategy this week, what happened? Did the Department for Transport go into bat for our logistics sector? Did it lose the row? Or did it not bother? What will the Secretary of State be doing to ensure that our logistics sector is seen across Government as foundational to any growth mission?
Heidi Alexander
This Government’s industrial strategy sets out the sectors that have the potential to deliver economic growth and for which are competing internationally for mobile capital investment. My colleague the Minister for the Future of Roads and I meet repeatedly with the industry, be that to discuss fuels or freight and logistics. We are determined to get our economy firing on all cylinders, and we know what critical role the sectors he talks about play in that.
Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)
My party and I were pleased when the Chancellor recently announced funding for Northern Powerhouse Rail to improve connectivity. However, we still do not know on what the money will be spent. Any plan to boost the northern powerhouse must surely include a new main line between Manchester and Liverpool—a vital link that would not only drive economic growth across the north-west but strengthen connections between two of our greatest cities. When will we finally see the detail behind the Chancellor’s announcement, and will she meet with me and my hon. Friends the Members for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) and for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) to discuss proposals for the better linking of Manchester and Liverpool?
Heidi Alexander
The mayors of Greater Manchester and Liverpool—Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram—have made a strong case for improving rail connectivity between their two great cities. The hon. Member is right to say that this Government are committed to improving the country’s rail network. I hope to say more on schemes for the north in the weeks and months ahead. I assure all hon. Members that I will come back to the House swiftly when I have more information so that they can question me further.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
Heidi Alexander
This Government are committed to investing in local transport around the UK. I am pleased that we have been able to make such a substantial investment in bus services in my hon. Friend’s constituency. Fylde council’s business case found that there was potential to increase frequency on the south Fylde line. I know the Rail Minister would be happy to meet him to discuss the matter further.
Mr Speaker
The lead question is on Cumbria. We are putting general questions into what is a lead question, and I do not think it is good to join them up. We are now going round the country on what should have been a Cumbrian question, which is something we could think about for the future.
Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)
Rail services are important in Cumbria, but they are also important in Sleaford. For some time, I have been campaigning for lifts at Sleaford railway station for those who have difficulty with stairs. I was pleased when the previous Government included Sleaford in the Access for All scheme, and having raised it at previous Transport questions, I was delighted when the Rail Minister wrote to me to confirm that the feasibility studies will go ahead. When I met Network Rail yesterday, I found that it is stuck. Network Rail has done as much as it can, but the money ready for it has not been officially unlocked. Could the Secretary of State look into that and ensure that the work goes ahead as soon as possible so that people can access the second platform even if they have trouble with stairs?
Simon Lightwood
Services returning to public ownership is a watershed moment for our railways and the beginning of our efforts to build Great British Railways, a new publicly owned organisation that runs our trains. We want passengers to see improvements to their services now and, starting with SWR, each operator will have to meet rigorous bespoke performance standards on things such as punctuality, cancellations and passenger experience, so that we can begin to build a world-class public service.
Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)
Worcester Park is a station that my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor) and I know well as it is on the boundary of both our constituencies, and I confirm that my constituents face the same issues of overcrowding. SWR acquired 90 high-capacity Arterio trains to address this issue back in 2019, yet six years later only a handful have entered service. The UK taxpayer is currently spending over £5 million every month on leasing the Arterio fleet, and over £0.5 million additionally every month to store the unused trains. Will the Minister confirm how many Arterio trains are now in use, whether the issues delaying roll-out have now been addressed, and whether he thinks that spending millions of pounds every month on unused trains is a good use of taxpayers’ money?
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
Order. I now have to move on to topical questions. There will be disappointment for hon. Members whose questions are next on the Order Paper, but that is because of the way questions have been grouped. We really do need to think about why we are grouping questions that are not relevant to each other.
Heidi Alexander
The hon. Lady is entirely right to highlight the importance of decarbonising our maritime industry and ensuring that our ports have the grid connections to enable fleets to purchase new vessels, so that we can get carbon emissions down on the seas, as well as elsewhere in our economy. I would be very happy to talk to her further about what more we can do to champion that important work.
Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)
Both Grand Central and Hull Trains have seen their passenger numbers increase dramatically since the pandemic, by more than 50% and 20% respectively. That is a significant increase compared with other operators. Why does the right hon. Lady think that might be?
Heidi Alexander
I have said repeatedly at this Dispatch Box that we see a role for open access operators when they open up new markets and add value. We have to balance that against the revenue that they abstract from the public sector operator. We cannot have a situation in which we import too much congestion on to the rail network, because there is constrained and finite capacity. I am keen to see a mixed model of delivery going forward, but I need to reduce the taxpayer subsidy going into the rail network at the moment. We are supporting—
Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)
Antonia Bance (Tipton and Wednesbury) (Lab)
Following the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), last week the Casey review showed us yet again that private hire vehicles are a dangerous place for many children and young people. Nationally in 2023, 96% of taxi licences were issued in one local authority—Wolverhampton, one of my neighbouring local authorities—yet only 10% of the applicants lived there. What action is the Minister going to take to ensure local taxi licensing is done locally and to high standards?
Heidi Alexander
Baroness Casey has rightly brought this issue into sharp focus, and as I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), we are committed to addressing it. We will work as quickly as possible and consider all options, including out-of-area working, national standards and enforcement, in seeking the best overall outcome for passenger safety.
Lilian Greenwood
I look forward to seeing that business case when it comes forward, and I will of course be happy to discuss it with the hon. Member at the appropriate time.
Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)
A new report from the all-party parliamentary group for cycling and walking warns of the growing public safety risk posed by the widespread use of unsafe, illegally modified bikes, and the fire risk caused by their cheap but powerful batteries bought from online marketplaces. What assessment has the Minister—along with his colleagues in other Departments—made of the risks posed by those fake e-bikes?
HS2 Reset
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(6 months, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
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.
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 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?
A66 Northern Trans-Pennine Project
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(7 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Markus Campbell-Savours (Penrith and Solway) (Lab)
It is a pleasure and a privilege to have secured the last Adjournment debate before recess, especially on an issue that is of great importance to my constituents, Cumbria and the wider region. I start with an apology to the Minister. Recess is starting and half our colleagues have already set off to their constituencies, and I have dragged her in for the graveyard shift. I am sorry, but it is appreciated.
We are rapidly approaching completion of the spending review. Having spent months communicating with officials in National Highways, and along with my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) with Ministers in the Department for Transport and the Treasury, I view this as my last chance to help get the project over the line.
In preparation for what is my first Adjournment debate, I noted the last time that a politician with my surname spoke in a pre-recess Adjournment debate. It was 24 years ago, and the then Speaker—perhaps setting an unusual precedent—joined in the debate. If you want to say some supportive words, Mr Speaker, I am sure that my constituents would be very pleased—although, I admit that the extent to which Speaker Martin stuck to the topic of the debate in 2001 is debatable.
The A66 northern trans-Pennine project is the north of England’s largest road project and, at a cost of £1.5 billion, it should come as no surprise to anyone that the new Government are reviewing the business case. I will set out the importance of the project for my constituents and why it must go ahead.
I know that the Minister will not preannounce from the Dispatch Box the outcome of the spending review, but I hope that she will confirm that the A66 project is in the running and has not been shelved, as was claimed by a Conservative politician on BBC television last week. That politician oversaw and left a council on the brink of bankruptcy, and the irony of them now pontificating on the nation’s finances is frankly bizarre.
I take the financial position inherited from the last Government very seriously, and I applaud the Government’s mission of securing sustained growth. The important thing for those of us in the rural north is that we see our fair share of that growth and the investment that enables it. The last decade has given us reasons to worry. The Institute for Public Policy Research North has produced figures showing that between 2010 and 2020, the north missed out on £86 billion in transport investment compared with London—a lost decade that only leaves us weaker at a time when we need growth. Last year the same think-tank calculated that total public spending on transport projects in 2023-24 was £1,321 per person in London, which is more than double the £615 per person spent on the north.
I therefore welcome the Government’s renewed focus on the north and the recent announcements of higher investment in the north of England this year as part of Labour’s plan for change. Indeed, the Prime Minister has indicated that the Government will be spending more than double the money per head on local transport in the north than in the south this year. But I still remember the last Government’s integrated rail plan for the north, which made not one mention of Cumbria.
I see this project as a key enabler for delivering growth in my region. The project will see the upgrade of approximately 50 miles of the A66 between the M6 at Penrith and the A1(M) at Scotch Corner, converting single carriageway sections into dual carriageways and improving countless junctions along the route.
I feel obliged to offer some expectation management to my constituents, as not one mile of the road will be dualled in the Penrith and Solway constituency. The major benefits for the residents of Penrith will be the upgrades to the junction 40 of the M6 and the Kemplay roundabout. I cannot count the number of times I have sat in traffic on those junctions, alongside local residents fighting through the commercial and tourist traffic, just trying to go about their daily business, with tourists stuck just at the beginning or end of their holiday in the Lake District national park or north Pennines, and the heavy goods vehicle drivers anxiously thinking about their tachographs. Perhaps they are thinking about dinner and getting home to their families, as I am sure some hon. Members are now. Some are simply travelling down the M6, possibly not even conscious that a bottleneck on an adjacent A road is the cause of their delayed journey.
The planned underpass just outside Penrith will separate the east-west A66 traffic from the north-south flow. That will reduce traffic volumes by 55% and provide major benefits for local people, including pedestrians and cyclists, improving access to Penrith itself and the facilities and businesses around the roundabout. It will reduce delays and queues at the M6 junction 40 and will ensure that visitors have a much better start to their holidays, whether they are travelling by car or taking advantage of the local active travel network.
There will be environmental benefits and economic benefits. We would feel as if the Government had prioritised the rural north, so often neglected by central Government. This project will improve connections between Cumbria, North Yorkshire, the Tees Valley, Tyne and Wear, and beyond. It is the most direct route between the central belt of Scotland and the eastern side of England. It connects cities such as Glasgow and Edinburgh with Leeds, Sheffield and Norwich, if those journeys are made by road.
Safety has been a huge concern along the route and there have been a number of avoidable deaths over the last few years. The junctions of particular concern are in the Richmond and Northallerton and the Westmorland and Lonsdale constituencies, and I know that the hon. Members representing those areas have raised their concerns with Ministers. However, the wider route is regularly used by my constituents and I am acutely aware of the risks that stretches of the road present.
Adjacent to the Kemplay roundabout are the Cumbria fire and police headquarters, with operational elements at both. In the summer, it can take 45 minutes for non-emergency vehicles to travel 100 metres. For our emergency services, that congestion presents a significant issue, and I know that Dave Allen, Cumbria’s police, fire and crime commissioner, fully supports the project not only to improve emergency vehicle access, but to make the A66 safer.
After my election in July, I met National Highways to discuss the scheme, knowing that this Government faced difficult choices. I wanted reassurance that the business case was up to date and would withstand scrutiny. The primary economic benefits come from travel time savings that will be realised by business users. The A66 is an important route for freight traffic, with HGVs comprising a quarter of the vehicles on the route, and the fact that that is more than double the national average highlights the importance of the route for business. The regular closures on the existing route present significant disruption for business-to-business transactions, with many of my constituency businesses directly affected.
During discussions with National Highways, it became apparent that existing Treasury Green Book guidance prevents a distinction being made in the economic case between general road users and business vehicles. That means that the cost-benefit ratio does not distinguish between an individual making a social trip in a car and an HGV delivering vital components to a factory. For a road project so important to business, that is a disaster.
I understand that new guidance is on the way, but not in time for it to be used to appraise this project in this spending review. That limits the ability for the economic case to tell the true story, so efforts have been put in to reflect that within the strategic case. However, that still leaves me uncomfortable that the true benefits of the scheme are not fully articulated. As frustrated as I am, the economic case as it stands still predicts hundreds of millions of pounds of benefits, primarily through cost efficiency and saving to business, and even additional tax revenue through employment.
The project is vital for Cumbria. It will reduce road traffic accidents and deaths on the single-carriage section of the route. It will improve strategic regional and national connectivity, particularly for hauliers—heavy goods vehicles, which account for a quarter of all traffic on the road, are double the national average. It will reduce delays and queues during busy periods and improve the performance of key junctions such as the A66/A6 junction and M6 junction 40. It might even occasionally stop me missing the train. I appeal to Ministers to support this project.
Mr Speaker
Let us come to Minister Greenwood, even though I have been tempted to say that I hope it is not another 22 years before we discuss this again with a Campbell-Savours.
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(8 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
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.
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
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.
Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)
At yesterday’s Transport Committee hearing, the Minister for Local Transport outlined the measures that the Government are taking to reverse the 15-year decline in bus services. The measures will protect many at-risk bus routes and may deliver a few more, but as they deliver growth and reduce congestion, do the Government have a wider ambition to ensure that all rural and non-city areas in England have at least a basic level of bus service so that everyone can get to school, work and the shops, and use public services without needing to drive a car?
Lilian Greenwood
Safety is our No. 1 priority, and the weight restriction is about future-proofing the bridge for years to come, but I know how disruptive it is when a key crossing is closed or restricted to traffic. I would be happy to meet my hon. Friend.
Sir Jeremy Hunt (Godalming and Ash) (Con)
Thank you for squeezing me in, Mr Speaker.
Is the Secretary of State aware that to access the platform at Ash Vale station in my constituency, people have to go up multiple flights of steps, equivalent to two or three floors, making it all but impossible for many older people and disabled people to use the rail network? Before she decides on how to allocate funding under the Access for All scheme in the spending review, will she or one of her Ministers visit Ash Vale, where we promise her a warm Surrey welcome?
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.
Claire Hazelgrove (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Lab)
Residents across my constituency regularly raise with me the issue of potholes and the state of our roads in general. I greatly appreciate the additional funding provided by the Government to South Gloucestershire council to help with improvements. This is about safety. It also about pride of place and the costs of vehicle repairs—all these things matter—so what will the next steps be to support councils to keep roads up to scratch once the potholes are filled?
Zero Emission Vehicle Mandate
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(9 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
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.
Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I will not embarrass myself by announcing how old I am, but it is far too old.
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?
Oral Answers to Questions
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mike Kane
It gives me great pleasure to wish the hon. Member many happy returns on his 70th birthday earlier this week. I think he is actually asking to be retrained in aviation skills. [Laughter.]
Northern Ireland is a great place for the aerospace industry with its three great airports—the two in Belfast and City of Derry/Londonderry—which gives people a lot of skills. There is no limit to what people can achieve by getting into this industry in Northern Ireland and travelling the world over practising their skills.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
I add my birthday wishes to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon).
Significantly muddled messages are being sent to the aviation sector. On the one hand, the Climate Change Committee, upon whose altar the Government appear to worship, wants flights to fall by 2030, which is a massive blow to our aviation sector, while the Government equally say that they want growth and that they want to expand airports. Who is going to win? Will Ministers stand up to the Climate Change Committee or are we just going to end up with bigger, emptier airports?
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.
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?
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?
Lilian Greenwood
It is lovely that people are so keen.
Charge point availability is increasing everywhere. As of 1 March, there were over 75,000 UK public charging devices, with one added to the network every 29 minutes, but we recognise that there are still regional disparities. The local EV infrastructure fund will deliver a further 100,000 charge points right across England.
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.
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?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
We know that too often local bus services are late or, worse, do not turn up at all, blocking passengers from accessing vital services. Our reforms to the bus sector, combined with that £1 billion investment in buses, will give local leaders the tools they need to ensure that services truly reflect the needs of passengers.
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 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.
Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)
Yesterday, the all-party parliamentary group on cycling and walking published its report on social justice as it impacts on vulnerable road users. Injuries to pedestrians could be cut significantly with simple zebra crossings without Belisha beacons. That would align with the 2022 highway code changes. Such crossings are common across the world, and they are being trialled around the corner from this building at the Department for Transport. Will the Government consider amending the guidance for highways authorities so that these crossings can be rolled out across the country?