Department for Transport

Mike Kane Excerpts

Wednesday 25th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Deputy Speaker. As you cannot speak from the Chair, may I say what a doughty champion you are for the reopening of Manston airport, in your constituency?

First, I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury) and for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing the debate and for the work they have done on the Transport Committee. I am grateful for all Members’ important, interested and varied contributions, and will try to address as many as humanly possible—there were an awful lot of questions in many of them. I know that Members are anxious for news on specific schemes in their local areas, but I will not be able to announce any new decisions today. We will make announcements in due course through the usual processes.

Let me address the comments made by the Transport Committee Chair about how spending is linked to the Department’s strategic objectives. Our spending is wholly orientated towards delivering this Government’s missions and our plan for change. At the heart of our approach is harnessing transport to drive growth, as better transport will connect people and opportunities and ensure that businesses can grow and thrive. That is why we are investing in vital public transport services, repairing our road networks, transforming our railways and providing unprecedented investment for local leaders to invest in their priorities. Five out of the first 10 Bills in this Session were on transport—we did not have five transport Bills in 14 years under the last Government. We are moving at pace.

In the financial year 2025-26 alone, we are delivering £1.6 billion for local road maintenance, £1.3 billion for local transport in our big city regions and over £1 billion for bus services. We are also providing more than £420 million for our smaller cities, towns and rural areas, as has been mentioned today. Our investments will help to drive growth in every part of the country and raise living standards for everyone.

We are supporting the transition to net zero and an economy powered by clean energy, with more than £200 million to accelerate the roll-out of electric vehicle charge points this year. We are investing in active travel infrastructure to improve the health of the nation, with an additional £150 million of investment in cycling and walking infrastructure in this financial year alone. We are supporting bus services and capping fares to connect people to jobs and to boost opportunity. We are also supporting safer streets by making public transport safer—including, most importantly, for women and girls. Across our work, we are making sure that every penny of taxpayers’ money is put to good use, from greater efficiency within the Department to getting to grips with the spiralling costs of HS2 and bringing that project back on track.

Although this debate concerns the estimates for 2025-26, I note that only two weeks ago, the Chancellor set out how our ambitions for the transport sector will last the whole of this Parliament. With the settlement we have received for 2026 onwards, we will deliver increased local transport investment in England’s towns and cities, prioritising funding in the north and the midlands and giving local areas more control over how the money is spent. We will improve everyday journeys across this country and invest in the critical national infrastructure needed to connect our cities and our towns in the long term, enabling economic growth. This will ensure that transport plays its part in delivering the plan for change and a decade of national renewal.

I thank the Chair of the Transport Committee for her speech. She asked me a number of questions about when we will publish the outcome delivery plan. This will be done by all Departments, co-ordinated through the Cabinet Office, later this year. She asked about subsidiarity, and what happens if mayors do not use the money and new powers we have given them on the things that we want to do, citing active travel as an example. Even with subsidiarity, mayors have to deliver against Government outcomes and objectives, and we hope to work with them in a spirit of co-operation to ensure that that is done right.

My hon. Friend asked what our bus reform and £1 billion investment was meant to achieve. We introduced the new £3 fare cap on single bus fares in England outside London, which has had the cap for a long time, ensuring that millions of people have access to affordable fares and better opportunities to both go to college and work and to see friends and family.

With UK SHORE, we have moved fast with the decarbonisation plan, and the research and development funding for this will continue. We have worked internationally with the International Maritime Organisation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across our planet. We have also announced £185 million through safer roads funds to invest in the 99 most risky A roads, and we have made clear commitments on rail cost base and subsidy.

The right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton), the former Rail Minister, is a doughty champion for Aldridge station—well done to her for that. The money was reallocated by the current mayor to cover the costs of schemes implemented by the former mayor that did not have the funding. She also talked about buses; I have already mentioned the £1 billion that we have invested in better buses.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bradford East (Imran Hussain), who cannot be in his seat at the moment, is an astonishing champion for Bradford. May I pay tribute to him and to Councillor Susan Hinchcliffe, the leader of Bradford city council, for their work in this area? The £2.1 billion train line and bus station investment is transformative. Some £35 million of Government money will see an additional five daily services to London, and we will be making announcements in the next few weeks regarding Northern Powerhouse Rail and how important it is to connect the cities of Leeds, Bradford, Manchester and Liverpool.

[Wendy Morton]

While the Minister is still talking about rail services, I just want to ask about Aldridge station to be absolutely clear about the situation. When the money for the station was allocated, it was ringfenced. It was his Government who decided to move the money from capital to revenue, so it is simply unfair to blame it all on Andy Street; it is not right.

[Mike Kane]

I thought the former mayor was quite a talented individual and he was succeeded by another talented individual, who has had to make tough choices around funds that were committed but never implemented under the previous Government. Promise after promise was made, but with no delivery whatsoever. None the less, the right hon. Member should carry on campaigning.

The hon. Member for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone) rightly talked about buses. I have already mentioned the amount of funding that we are putting in there, and the £616 million for active travel, which has been mentioned by a number of Members, on top of the £300 million that was allocated last year. I had a great time last Easter cycling with my wife around the hon. Member’s constituency on Rebellion Way, which is a wonderful piece of Sustrans infrastructure.

[Steff Aquarone]

I thank the Minister for coming to North Norfolk; he is welcome at any time. Having experienced at first hand the reality of rurality in my constituency, does he agree that we need to look at alternative models for rural public transport?

[Mike Kane]

We are giving back control of buses to local authorities—as difficult as it is in some circumstances. It is a £1 billion commitment. People in rural economies need to get about just as much as people in cities and we are committed to making sure that that happens.

Let me turn to my hon. Friend the Member for Monmouthshire (Catherine Fookes). I cannot wait to visit and to ride on the No. 65 bus. She is a doughty campaigner for her constituency. She also talked about two Labour Governments working hand in hand to bring rail investment to Magor and Undy station, and I am glad that she has had correspondence with the Roads Minister on the safety of the M48.

The hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) rightly talked about HS2. He highlighted the need to connect our maritime industries on the south coast with the rail network, so that we can take maximum advantage of both maritime and rail to get that freight off our roads.

My hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Jim Dickson) summed it up when he spoke about the collapse of Galley Hill Road, which I thought was a metaphor for transport under the last Government. We have committed to the Lower Thames Crossing, with an initial investment of £590 million, and we will be making announcements on that in due course. We have also put in £54 million to fix potholes in Kent. The Government are showing that we are committing to the Lower Thames Crossing, with announcements to come, and are fixing the roads, and yet not one Reform Member came to this debate. Let us remind the people of Kent day in, day out about Reform’s lack of commitment to improving their lives compared with what we are doing.

I was with the predecessor of the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) at the British Ports Association. Do they only elect Scottish Members to the Surrey Heath constituency? I noticed that even some of the mannerisms were the same. The hon. Member made some important points about evidence-based transport systems. I think we are demonstrating that we are not a cultural, woke Government but are looking policy data to drive our decisions about how we best connect this country up. He also talked about road safety. Our manifesto included a commitment to long-term connectivity for transport across the country. That will be coming, so I hope he gets involved in the debate when it comes forward.

The hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage talked about HS2. We have accepted James Stewart’s recommendations about the cost overruns, although the hon. Member was right to highlight them. He also asked about how our railways and maritime industry can work together. Green shipping corridors will be key to the future of shipping, but the grid capacity in our coastal communities is not up to scratch. He knows that and we know that, and that is why we made manifesto commitments on our grid capacity. I note that we have already made announcements about greater European train connectivity, but I understand the point he makes about depot constraints; the Government are looking at that as well.

My hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law) is a real champion for Cornwall. I was glad that we could announce £4.1 million for Cornwall alone in 2025-26 in addition to the £201 million —which, as he mentions, is four times greater than the last settlement. We hope to see things improve in that wonderful part of the country.

The hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) always astonishes me. He is like some latter-day Hilaire Belloc in his pinstriped suits and polka-dot tie. He was so positive about the Government that I thought he was going to cross the Floor for a second; we will give him time. He mentioned being disappointed about some areas, but we have done more to decarbonise transport this year, more for buses than any Government have done for a generation, and more for active travel in one year than any Government for a generation.

[Mr Kohler]

I thank the Minister for his compliments. Does he accept that Active Travel England will get £100 million less next year, and does he think that is a sensible way to move forward?

[Mike Kane]

Under this Government, Active Travel England gets settlements that go forward. I have to say that I thought the former Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip—the former Prime Minister—was actually very good in this space, but the announcements he made were then all pared back. Local authorities need to have long-term continuing investment to connect routes and get people walking, wheeling and cycling. My constituents die of type 2 diabetes, hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—all things that can be fixed by more of us walking, wheeling and cycling. Active travel is key to the Government’s health mission as well as to our transport mission.



I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), for his contribution. He mentioned that the settlements for West Yorkshire, Greater Manchester, Merseyside and the west midlands were similar to those from 2023. Yes, they are, but this Government are delivering on these settlements. We had so many promises from the last Administration, but we are delivering.

We will take no lessons from the Opposition on the costs of Great British Rail, which I think the nation is proud of, given that we were left to clear up the debacle of the overrun costs of HS2—a project that was cut by the previous Prime Minister while he was at the Tory party conference in Manchester. It was the most astonishing decision, and the most astonishing place to announce it. As a proud trade union member, I am glad that the trade unions have come to the table this past year. After years of industrial strife, we are solving the disputes, particularly in the railway industry, and services are beginning to improve.

On long-term investment, I gently remind the shadow Minister that he voted for Prime Minister Liz Truss’s Budget, which left us with a £22 billion black hole. We have been tackling that as well as setting out our ambition for the future. We are fixing the foundations of our transport system to deliver the Government’s priorities. Our funding settlement for 2025-26 enables us to press ahead with reforming our bus and rail services, to get to grips with the maintenance backlog, to empower local leaders to deliver, and to build transformative new routes for the country. The settlement announced earlier this month will build on that; it will drive progress on the Government’s missions, and improve transport for people and businesses across the country.

I thank hon. Members for contributing to the debate. I am grateful for the important work of the Transport Committee, and look forward to continuing to work with it. I commend the estimates to the House.

[Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Roger Gale)]

I call Ruth Cadbury to wind up.

Space Industry (Indemnities) Bill

Mike Kane Excerpts

Committee stage
Wednesday 18th June 2025 Public Bill Committees

[John Grady]

I do not want to cause some sort of inter-university fight first thing in the morning.

The purpose of the Bill is to help push forward vital investment in the UK’s space sector, which is vital for economic growth and also for the defence of the UK and Scotland. The UK, Scotland and Glasgow have great opportunities in the sector, which already employs more than 52,000 people with 126,000 jobs across the supply chain. It is worth over £18.9 billion to the economy. It is now possible to launch satellites from the UK, and Glasgow, my home city, builds more small satellites than anywhere outside California.

Clause 1 amends two sections of the Space Industry Act 2018 to provide legal certainty that all spaceflight operator licences must include a limit on the amount of an operator’s liability to the Government under section 36 of the Act. Section 36 provides for spaceflight operators to indemnify the Government in certain circumstances and the current risk for spaceflight operators is that claims from the Government exceed the carefully assessed insurance that is put in place by the spaceflight operators, following significant regulatory oversight by the Civil Aviation Authority. The current legislation does not require the Government and the CAA to cap operators’ liability; the Bill changes that, in essence by changing “may” to “must”.

Investors are unwilling to invest in companies that hold unlimited liability. It is not generally possible to insure against an unlimited liability in the space insurance market and there is very limited capacity in this specialist sector. The UK Government have a clear policy that licensees’ liability will be capped, but the issue for investors is that this is set out in a policy document and not in statute. This means that the Government and regulators could change the policy with comparative ease, which could mean that investors would find that they had exposure to unlimited liabilities. That deters future investment.

The issue is causing investors real concern and investors in the space industry have raised it with Government many times. It is a long-standing unresolved issue, on which I believe there is cross-party consensus. All our competitor nations limit liabilities or provide a state guarantee for launch activities of the type that take place from their territory. That puts the UK at serious risk of competitive disadvantage at a time when we are trying to grow the economy and focus on this important sector. The Bill, and these two simple clauses, confront the problem and make the UK, Scotland and, of course, Glasgow a much more attractive place to invest in space.

Clause 2 deals with the extent, commencement and short title of the Bill consistently, as one might expect, with the 2018 Act.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Sir Christopher, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow East for promoting this short but important Bill. He is without doubt a doughty champion for the space industry in his great city of Glasgow.

From the contributions we heard on Second Reading and this morning, we know how beneficial the Bill will be to many businesses in the UK’s thriving space sector, which contributes over £17.5 billion to the UK economy and directly employs more than 48,000 people. I am pleased to confirm that the Bill has the full support of the Government. The Government have economic growth at the heart of their agenda and this speaks directly to that. With 16% of UK GDP depending on satellite services, there is no doubt that the space sector is important to us as a nation, as my hon. Friend pointed out. The Bill, while advocating a minor change to legislation, will provide the sector with the legal certainty it is looking for to boost investor confidence and stimulate further growth in the UK economy.

The UK space sector is bolstered by being a member of the European Space Agency. Britian does better because of that key partnership. In the last quarter of 2024, UK businesses’ net revenues from the ESA were £80 million higher than our contribution. That is a record for any member state. As my hon. Friend pointed out, we now produce more satellites in this country, second only to California in the USA.

The Government recognise the question of liability insurance is of utmost concern. The industry has made clear it that holding unlimited liabilities will have an adverse effect on the UK spaceflight industry. If the Government did not limit a spaceflight operator’s liability, spaceflight companies and investors might move to other jurisdictions with more favourable liability regimes, where operator liability is limited and states provide guarantees to meet all claims or those above the operator’s limit of liability. That is why the Space Industry Act contains powers to limit a spaceflight operator’s liability when carrying out spaceflight activities from the United Kingdom. It is Government policy that the regulator should use those powers and specify a limit on operator liability in the licence.

The Bill is therefore fully consistent with Government policy. Furthermore, it improves the Space Industry Act by meeting a key request from industry to provide legislative certainty that spaceflight operators will not face unlimited liability when operating from the UK. For those reasons, we are pleased to support it.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 1 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill to be reported, without amendment.

Hydrogen-powered Aviation

Mike Kane Excerpts

Tuesday 17th June 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. It was also a pleasure, as a young councillor, to serve under your leadership of Manchester city council in the early ’90s. As I said in a debate the other day, you were chairman of the airport that last built an international runway in the UK—the only one in 80 years. I learned a lot in that period, and I am always grateful to you.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan) on securing an excellent first debate in Westminster Hall and thank other hon. Members for their contributions. Famously, my hon. Friend is a pharmacist by training and by trade; he actually lives in a village called Pill, which is probably the strongest case of nominative determinism I have come across in my political career. He is also a doughty champion for Bristol airport. He never fails to tackle me about the issue in the Lobby or the Chamber. The airport plays a crucial role in providing connectivity and enabling growth in the south-west, and I welcome the leading role that it has played in developing hydrogen, such as the recent Project Acorn trials, which demonstrated the safe use of zero emission ground handling equipment in an airside environment.

I am grateful to hon. Members for their contributions on the SAF Bill last week. The Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith), spoke well about his passion for this issue, and mentioned that hydrogen fuel produces only water vapour. It is good for the environment, jobs and airports. It can help general and commercial aviation.

Upon coming into government, I had to take some tough decisions. The Jet Zero Council, established under the last Government, was reasonably ineffective. It hardly met and it was unwieldy; people said that it had become a talking shop with limited outcomes. I made big decisions to refocus it, narrow it down and ensure that it had tangible outcomes.

For all the groundwork that the Opposition spokesperson said that the last Government laid, we have had to make tough decisions. We are the Government that introduced the mandate for SAF, which came into law on 1 January this year, and in the first Session of this Parliament we are making decisions about the revenue certainty mechanism. I am grateful to all hon. Members who are supporting that, but we should have been doing this years ago. We now have a Government who are committed to making progress, and we will continue doing so.

As the Secretary of State noted when introducing the Bill last week, the Government recognise the key role of the aviation sector in driving growth, and

“we will not accept false trade-offs that pit aviation’s growth against our commitments to net zero.”—[Official Report, 11 June 2025; Vol. 768, c. 1031.]

I want to see a future in which more passengers and goods fly while we transition to a greener aviation sector. In addition to introducing the SAF Bill, the Government have already established a SAF mandate, as I have said. The mandate and the revenue certainty mechanism will provide much-needed support to SAF producers, stimulating investment in domestic production, which we all want to see, by reducing financial risk and uncertainty for those producers and supporting the UK to become a world leader in sustainable fuel production. As I said in last week’s debate, the world is looking to us and asking us about our revenue certainty mechanism, because we are leading the world in that field.

As we all know, we are also acting to modernise our airspace. Earlier this month, we released a response to the consultation on a new UK airspace design service—UKADS—and support fund. UKADS will make flightpaths more direct and efficient, reducing unnecessary emissions and supporting flights with fewer delays.

Let us get to the subject in hand. I recognise the clear potential of hydrogen as a zero emission aviation fuel and what it could contribute towards greener aviation. As the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) said in his customarily excellent speech, it produces zero CO₂. He is right that it is costly, but we know that the costs will become competitive as we scale up. He speaks well of Spirit in his constituency and the workers who work there in this field. I pay tribute to him and them for what they do in Northern Ireland.

Given our world-leading aerospace sector, we should seek to capture in the UK the jobs and growth benefits emerging from these technologies. The Government have already acted to support the use of low-carbon hydrogen in aviation through the SAF mandate, with eligible hydrogen rewarded through the provision of tradeable SAF certificates. Innovation led by the sector is key, and I welcome the work by Airbus and GKN on hydrogen technology in the south-west and the support provided by academia, such as by Bath University. I congratulate the hon. Member for Thornbury and Yate (Claire Young); the south-west is well placed in the R&D world for this technology. Given her work as a former leader of the council and her expertise in the tech sector, I welcome her valuable contribution to the debate.

We will continue to co-invest with industry on a range of R&D projects, which a number of Members raised, including the development of hydrogen aircraft technology through the Aerospace Technology Institute programme that the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor) mentioned. As announced in the spending review, we will invest more than £3 billion in the next four years in the advanced manufacturing sector on zero emission vehicles, batteries and aerospace technologies. I join him in congratulating Cranfield Aerospace Solutions, which I visited while in opposition, on its work.

The Government will further set out our approach to the advanced manufacturing sector in the modern industrial strategy later this month. That will benefit from the UK-US trade deal signed today, under which there will be zero tariffs on UK aerospace trade with the United States. I am aware that aircraft developers are moving at pace, with ZeroAvia announcing plans last month for a manufacturing base in Glasgow. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) for mentioning it and for being a doughty champion for East Midlands airport near his constituency. He is right to mention the geopolitical situation. There are many reasons why we should make these changes, but energy security is one of them, given that we are in an increasingly uncertain world. He brings his previous tech experience to the debate, and I congratulate him on his contribution.

The wider sector should prepare for the adoption of this new technology and, to support those whole-system changes, the Government, the aviation and aerospace sector, and academia must work together. The Jet Zero Taskforce that I have established is a key focus for that collaboration, and I am pleased to co-chair the expert group alongside the Minister for Industry. Importantly, one of the task and finish groups of the Jet Zero Taskforce is reviewing barriers to the commercial operation of hydrogen aircraft. The group will report on its findings in the autumn, and I look forward to considering them closely.

As the hon. Member for Thornbury and Yate said, regulation is critical. Improving regulation in the UK, and ensuring that it enables growth and does not unduly hold back investment, is an essential part of the Government’s growth mission and of delivering on the plan for change. For that reason, in March the Chancellor announced that in the current financial year the Department for Transport will fund the Civil Aviation Authority’s hydrogen in aviation regulatory challenge. This work is helping the CAA to collaborate with innovative companies through regulatory sandboxes, in order to develop a proportionate regulatory framework for them.

Finally, I will touch on the production of low-carbon hydrogen, which is essential not only for aviation but for the wider economy. We have strong domestic expertise and favourable geology and infrastructure to develop a thriving low-carbon hydrogen sector in the UK. We are delivering real projects to kick-start the UK’s hydrogen economy, as demonstrated by the recently signed contracts for projects that were successful in the first hydrogen allocation round.

Later this year, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero will publish a refreshed hydrogen strategy to ensure that hydrogen achieves its unique role in the Government’s clean energy superpower and growth missions. Just last week, the Government announced over £500 million to develop the UK’s first regional hydrogen transport and storage network, boosting industrial regions such as Merseyside, Teesside and the Humber.

The week of the international Paris air show is an important time to reflect on the progress that we are making towards a greener aviation sector. I therefore reiterate my ambition on this important matter, as well as my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset for securing today’s debate and to other hon. Members for contributing to it.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill

Mike Kane Excerpts

2nd reading
Wednesday 11th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

I thank nearly all Members—no, all Members—for their consideration of the draft Bill and for their valuable contributions to this debate. I am grateful to the Opposition for their questions and scrutiny, and we will make sure as a House that we get this right for our nation.

I fully concur with the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith), that the Liberal Democrats have not been boring today, and I am grateful for their support in this matter. Having worked with the Liberal Democrats in the past, I know that they are always with you in the room until the fight breaks out, so let us see how we get on over the next period.

[Max Wilkinson]

Will the Minister congratulate innovators such as my constituent James Hygate, who was recently awarded an OBE for his work on green fuels? Over genteel tea and cake—as the House can imagine, this happens all the time in Cheltenham—he told me of his plans to turn human faeces into SAF. He is an innovator at the leading edge, and he says that the Minister might be able to work with his friends in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to solve some of the problems that we have with sewage in our rivers, by taking it out at source. Is the Minister considering that as part of this legislation?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mike Kane]

I thank the hon. Member for his contribution and join him in thanking James Hygate OBE for his work in this area. On the serious point about waste, I sit on the small ministerial group for the circular economy. It is a big part of what this Government are trying to do, and we will see how that work progresses.

The UK stands at the forefront of global efforts to decarbonise aviation. When this Government came into power, we acted immediately by laying the statutory instrument for the SAF mandate, which has been in place since 1 January. We have established the UK airspace design service, a programme of work that will modernise the airspace above us by decarbonising and supporting cleaner flights with fewer delays. We are now the first legislature on the planet to introduce a revenue certainty mechanism, and the world is looking to us. I hope that this House can get behind us.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

We cannot help but be excited about the Bill because of its potential to deliver. The Minister is a good friend of us in Northern Ireland, and a good friend of all of us in this Chamber and across this great nation. There are innovative people in Northern Ireland who have the technology, and they wish to play their part. Is it the Minister’s intention to ensure that everyone across this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has the opportunity to feed into SAF and to gain the benefit from it?

[Mike Kane]

I am always delighted to answer questions from the hon. Gentleman, who represents a place that I love dearly. I have responsibility for maritime travel, and we see Artemis Technologies decarbonising our maritime sector. We have refineries in Belfast. I spoke to a major chief executive whose family emigrated to Canada from Belfast and who is very fond of the city. We expect him to talk to his companies about applying for the contracts when we eventually let them do so, and that will be key.

I have a lot of questions to get through. The £1.50 that the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon) mentioned could be £1.50 more or £1.50 less, but I am happy to hand over £1.50 to him now, if he wishes. That is not going to have an impact on people’s ability to fly to destinations, as he rightly said. I think people flying for their annual holiday is key to the British way of life, and I do not want to damage that whatsoever. That analysis comes from Department for Transport business team itself.

Many of the questions were about going faster. I must gently point out that we were promised four plants by 2025 by the last Government, but I am not going to get into that. We could not go any faster—this is still the first Session—and we had to introduce the mandate and we are now introducing part 2, which is the RCM. So I would say we are going at as fast a pace as humanly possible.

We are neutral on when the contracts are bid for, so I say to those worried about waste or HEFA streams that these contracts change over time, and we will see what bids come in. The hon. Member for Orpington also mentioned large plants, and he will have seen Members—mainly those Government Members behind me—from our industrial north, south Wales and other places queuing up to get advanced, high-manufacturing facilities with well-paid, trade-unionised jobs. As we advance this, we are working with the industry on the strike price.

The Chair of the Transport Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury), said this is not a silver bullet, and it is not, but it is part of the package—airspace modernisation, sustainable aviation fuels, carbon pricing, carbon capture technology and zero emission flight—that this Government are pursuing to decarbonise aviation in our country, and we are investing £1 billion in the Aerospace Technology Institute to do that.

My hon. Friend also mentioned Heathrow, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, who has shown great leadership in this space—along with other Members, officials and the industry—has pointed out that the expansion of Heathrow is accounted for in the sixth carbon budget. I thank the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) for his thanks to me for getting on with what is part of a package of decarbonisation, as he rightly pointed out.

My hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan) is a doughty champion for Bristol airport—he mentions it every time I meet him in the Tea Room—and a champion for hydrogen. I look forward to visiting his airport and to replying to his Westminster Hall debate on Tuesday.

The hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Blake Stephenson) takes any opportunity he has to plug the Universal theme park. He spoke about his support for Luton airport, and how it will be a gateway for regeneration in his area. On how the approach differs from those of other markets, we are the first ones to do it. If we get this done in the next few weeks, we will be the only legislature on the planet to have done so, and the world is looking to us to move this forward.

Coming to my hon. Friend the Member for Derby South (Baggy Shanker), there was a bit of an arms race between Members, if they do not mind my saying so, about who loves their airport the most—Teesside, Norwich, East Midlands and on it went. I think we should have an independent competition for who loves their airport—

[Luke Myer]

rose—

[Mike Kane]

I think the hon. Member representing Teesside is about to intervene on me.

[Luke Myer]

Does the Minister agree with me that Teesside International airport is a real gem in our region, and it is absolutely critical that it returns to profitability as soon as possible?

[Mike Kane]

How could I not agree with my hon. Friend. We are proud of our airports—I am proud of mine in my constituency—which provide jobs and services. As everybody has said, they have a great history and provide great innovation, and we should celebrate them.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

Stoke-on-Trent does not have an airport, but we do use Manchester airport quite a lot, so while the Minister is sitting next to the Transport Secretary on the Front Bench, could he put in a word for a direct train link from Stoke to Manchester airport, so we can all enjoy his airport as much as he does?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mike Kane]

Personally, I disagree with my hon. Friend, because I think Stoke has a great airport—it is in my constituency, and it is called Manchester airport.

I can assure the House that I am not going to take any lessons on date nights from the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor). [Laughter.] But it is great to hear his expertise in this area. We do value that expertise in the House and I hope he makes the Public Bill Committee. He mentions ZeroAvia, which I worked with in opposition and in government, and how well it is doing with zero emission flights. He may have to run that equation past me again—I did not pick it up the first time.

What a doughty champion for Doncaster Sheffield airport my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster Central (Sally Jameson) is. It was great to hear the Chancellor mention it in her statement today.

I am glad that the hon. Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey (Graham Leadbitter), the transport spokesman for the SNP, welcomes the Bill. It is really good to see how the military and our armed services are getting in on the decarbonisation agenda. The RAF Lossiemouth, in his patch, is showing good practice.

My hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk (Euan Stainbank) talked with passion about Grangemouth near his constituency. In direct answer to his question, we have no plans to review the HEFA cap. This is about security in a fragile geopolitical situation and also about competitiveness. I remind him and my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) that the Government are considering EY’s report and recommendations regarding the refinery. The national wealth fund stands ready, and we encourage investors to come forward and secure the long-term future at Grangemouth.

My hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock and Loudoun (Lillian Jones) is right. This industry produces well-paid, unionised jobs often in industrial areas that have been deindustrialised. I thank her for her work chairing the APPG for the wood panel industry, and I am happy to accept her offer to speak to it.

My hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald) is another doughty campaigner for Norwich airport and its sustainable aviation hub. She is pushing that so hard. I was glad to meet her recently and I hope to visit Norwich in the near future. She talked about the jobs and apprenticeships that go with it.

My hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth —I will refine my remarks on Jim Ratcliffe; as a Manchester City fan, I had better be careful that I do not say anything out of turn—is right to talk about deindustrialisation. I saw that in east Manchester growing up in the ’70s, with the chemical and the mining industries. We are only now getting over that in parts of our great city. I just remind him that if we do this right, we are looking at 15,000 jobs and £5 billion to the economy by 2050.

I once tried a joke in the House and Mr Speaker said, “Don’t give up the day job.” I remind my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) of that advice. At every opportunity, he raises the work he does with Stansted airport. He ended his speech really strongly, saying that the country should be ambitious in this field. I completely concur.

My hon. Friend the Member for North West Leicestershire (Amanda Hack) talked about her love affair with East Midlands airport and how important it is to freight. I have had roundtables with the freight industry on how we grow our freight industry in the UK. If I can get to her airport’s 60th birthday celebrations, I will.

I wondered where my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) was going with that police story. And then we got into a very geeky arms race with the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson). He is right to say that aviation, while a small emitter now, becomes a much larger emitter, or the largest, by 2040. That is why it is imperative that we do this now—another call to arms to go faster.

I think my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (Luke Myer) said he was a supporter of the airport near his constituency. Alfana, Arcadia, Iogen and a plethora of companies could bid for contracts in the region and support a manufacturing renaissance. Just to remind him about carbon capture, which he mentioned, the Prime Minister recently announced £22 billion of Government money to research carbon capture and technology at Stanlow.

In the arms race for who loves their airport most, my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald) talked about hydrogen, wind, solar and clean energy.

Reform Members are not present, which is key because—[Interruption.] Oh, they are here now. Reform promises that it is going to re-industrialise these areas, but without a financial plan that adds up. This Government are actually getting on with it, and we will continue to get on with it.

This Government have demonstrated that we are committed to supporting our world-class aviation sector through what we have done in the first short few months of this Government. We have the third biggest aviation market on the planet, which is world class and competitive, and we want it to remain that way. We want more people to be able to fly, and we want them to do it sustainably, and that is why the transition to SAF is not a mere aspiration, but an imperative. I recognise that there will be challenges, but SAF will have our unwavering support, which is why we are backing it in the Bill, and I am grateful for the support around this Chamber today.

The revenue certainty mechanism will help new SAF plants to get off the ground, supporting good, green jobs in places like Teesside. Our SAF policies are helping to create the right environment for companies like Exolum, based in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Chester North and Neston (Samantha Dixon), which pipes the sustainable fuel to Heathrow, Gatwick and, of course, the UK’s fastest-growing airport, Manchester.

The Bill is delivering on our growth and clean energy missions and on our manifesto commitment to secure the aviation industry’s long-term future through promoting SAF. I urge this House to give the Bill its full support, and I stand ready to work with Members across this House on that. I commend the Bill to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill (Programme)

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 83A(7)),

That the following provisions shall apply to the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill:

Committal

The Bill shall be committed to a Public Bill Committee.

Proceedings in Public Bill Committee

(2) Proceedings in the Public Bill Committee shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion on Tuesday 22 July.

(3) The Public Bill Committee shall have leave to sit twice on the first day on which it meets.

Consideration and Third Reading

(4) Proceedings on Consideration shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour before the moment of interruption on the day on which those proceedings are commenced.

(5) Proceedings on Third Reading shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the moment of interruption on that day.

(6) Standing Order No. 83B (Programming committees) shall not apply to proceedings on Consideration and Third Reading.

Other proceedings

(7) Any other proceedings on the Bill may be programmed.—(Heidi Alexander.)

Question agreed to.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill (Money)

King’s recommendation signified.

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 52(1)(a)),

That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill it is expedient to authorise the payment out of money provided by Parliament of any expenditure incurred under the Act by the Secretary of State.—(Heidi Alexander.)

Question agreed to.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill (Ways and Means)

Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 52(1)(a)),

That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill, it is expedient to authorise:

(a) provisions by virtue of which persons may be required to make payments, or to provide financial collateral, to a designated counterparty, and

(b) the payment of sums into the Consolidated Fund.—(Heidi Alexander.)

Question agreed to.

National Policy Statement for Ports: Proposed Revision

Mike Kane Excerpts

Wednesday 4th June 2025 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

Today, I am laying before Parliament the draft amended national policy statement for ports.

The extant NPSP was designated in 2012. It sets out the need for development of ports in England, and at reserved trust ports in Wales, currently Milford Haven. The NPSP provides guidance for applicants in preparing, and for the Secretary of State in determining, applications for development consent orders for seaport applications.

The previous Government announced a review of the current NPSP in a written ministerial statement in March 2023. In light of our missions and priorities, this Government continued that review and have decided to amend the document.

Today, I have launched a public consultation on a draft revised NPSP, along with an appraisal of sustainability and a habitats regulations assessment. These are subject to a public consultation period of eight weeks and to parliamentary scrutiny in parallel. My Department is also publishing port freight demand forecasts for the United Kingdom as a whole, to which the draft NPSP refers. The documents are available on gov.uk.

I will place copies of the public consultation document, the appraisal of sustainability, and the habitats regulation assessment in the Library of the House. The public consultation will close on 29 July 2025. The relevant period for parliamentary scrutiny will be from 4 June to 14 November 2025.

The review of the NPSP is proceeding in parallel with our wider programme of planning reforms, including the Planning and Infrastructure Bill currently before this House, designed to expedite and facilitate decision making, and stimulate growth and green energy transformation.

[HCWS681]

UK Airspace Design Service: Consultation Response

Mike Kane Excerpts

Monday 2nd June 2025 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

The Department for Transport and the UK Civil Aviation Authority are publishing the response to the consultation to establish a UK Airspace Design Service, CAP 3106 https://www.caa.co.uk/ukads The UKADS will act as a new single guiding mind to deliver a modernised and holistic design of UK airspace, enabling quicker, quieter and cleaner flights.

UK airspace is an invisible but essential piece of our national infrastructure. Its design has remained largely unchanged since the 1950s when there were around 200,000 flights per year in UK airspace, compared to 2.47 million in 2024. If UK airspace is not modernised, it has been estimated that by 2040 one in five flights could experience disruption and delays.

Airspace modernisation will ensure that the UK’s airspace is fit for the future, enabling aircraft to fly more direct routes with optimised climb and descent profiles to and from energy-efficient cruising altitudes. This will benefit UK consumers through greater system capacity and better resilience to disruption. Crucially, it will help UK aviation achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

The Government and CAA have carefully considered the responses to the consultation last autumn. These helped to inform the decision to proceed with the creation of the UKADS and establishment of an airspace design support fund, announced by the Chancellor on 17 March 2025, and our aim is for the UKADS to be established and operational by the end of 2025.

NATS (En Route) plc—NERL—will be responsible for providing the UKADS. NERL is the only organisation in the UK with the necessary level of resource and design expertise to deliver the UKADS at pace.

The initial priority for the UKADS will be to design airspace for the London cluster of the airspace change masterplan. The London cluster has the most complex airspace in the UK, and modernisation will unlock significant benefits. This would include any airspace change required for a third runway at Heathrow.

Airspace modernisation will continue to be funded by industry, following the user-pays principle. The cost of the UKADS will be met through a new UK airspace design charge, which will primarily apply to commercial airlines. This charge will also enable a new airspace design support fund to help unlock the benefits of modernisation around the rest of the UK.

Two statutory instruments will be laid before Parliament, using powers in the Transport Act 2000, to enable NERL to be tasked with delivering the UKADS. The CAA will consult on the charge as well as proposed changes to the NERL air traffic services licence.

Consultation responses also identified opportunities to streamline and simplify the regulatory framework, including the CAA’s airspace change process and the Government’s air navigation guidance and air navigation directions. DFT and CAA intend to start consulting by September 2025 on possible changes, which will continue to support safe and efficient airspace design; proper and proportionate assessment of environmental impacts, including noise; and engagement with local communities.

With the establishment of the UKADS, these measures will strengthen the UK’s role as a global aviation leader and confirm this Government’s support for airspace modernisation and the benefits it will bring for the country.

[HCWS670]

Oral Answers to Questions

Mike Kane Excerpts

Thursday 15th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) (Lab)]

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

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

The recently published maritime decarbonisation strategy supports sustainable growth, working with industry to reach zero emissions by 2050, supported by £30 million for clean maritime research and development. The Government have also allocated £850,000 to maritime clusters to support skills and training programmes, boosting growth and improving our coastal communities.

[Jayne Kirkham]

Cornwall has a thriving maritime sector, particularly in Falmouth, that is well-served by training establishments, such as Cornwall Marine Network and Falmouth marine school, as well as leading apprenticeship programmes across Falmouth. Much of that centres around our Port of Falmouth. Will the Ports Minister meet me and officials from the Treasury to ensure that Government support reaches Falmouth port and that Cornwall can take advantage of the new green jobs that will be provided by the port’s upgrade?

[Mike Kane]

My hon. Friend is a fierce advocate for the maritime community in her constituency. This Government are committed to unlocking investment in UK ports, and I was delighted by the announcement just yesterday by LS Eco Advanced Cables that it will be investing £1 billion into the Port of Tyne, which will be the first of many such investments over the months and years ahead. We are streamlining regulatory and planning processes, updating our national policy statement for ports, which is long overdue, and we will make targeted investments through the national wealth fund. I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend to discuss that.

[Mike Tapp]

The Port of Dover has ambitious targets to be the first green shipping corridor. What are the Government’s plans to ensure sufficient power supplies to the port for ships to plug into?

[Mike Kane]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that infrastructure, which is so important to our nation. I was pleased to meet Doug Bannister, the chief executive officer of the Port of Dover, just the other day to talk about these matters. This Government are implementing a new strategic planning process and reforming connections to ensure that electricity meets future demands. If we do that right, we can have the greenest shipping corridors in the world.

[Lorraine Beavers]

Fleetwood, in my constituency, has a proud fishing industry, but our port is currently massively underused. The Government’s clean power mission is a huge opportunity for ports like Fleetwood to take advantage of jobs and investment brought by offshore wind projects. Will the Minister meet me to ensure that the Port of Fleetwood gets the investment it needs to take advantage of those projects, so that my community can start to rebuild after the last 14 years of austerity inflicted on it by the previous Conservative Government?

[Mike Kane]

That is so true. I was delighted to join my hon. Friend on a recent visit to Fleetwood nautical campus in her constituency, where I saw the excellent facilities and what a fantastic advocate she is for the people of Fleetwood and its port. I briefly met with the soon-to-be new owners of that port. Once that deal is finalised and they have plans to progress, I will sit down with my hon. Friend and the new owners to look at the potential for what we can achieve there.

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

Isle of Wight ferry company, Red Funnel, is controlled by Canadian pension funds. It is unregulated and charges Isle of Wight residents up to £400 to take a return car ferry crossing. Does the Minister support that ownership model and pricing structure for a lifeline transport connection in the UK?

[Mike Kane]

I can tell the hon. Gentleman that the Avanti up to Manchester can cost more, but that does not help his constituents in the Isle of Wight, who have been struggling for some time. That is why I went to the Isle of Wight to meet the hon. Member and representatives from the council. We are establishing an local transport forum, and we have agreed a number of ways forward, looking at ticketing, pricing and the reliability of those ferries to the Island. I promise to continue to be engaged, but I will need the hon. Member’s help with this as well.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

In common with the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers), I have concerns about the fishing sector. In terms of maritime needs and co-ordination with the drive towards net zero, and with the push towards marine-based renewable energy, what discussion has taken place with the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero to ensure that the needs of the fishing industry are considered, weighted and fully evaluated?

[Mike Kane]

This is a huge opportunity for the UK. Our mission to have clean energy by 2030 is an incredible target, and we are getting on with it. That means making big decisions with the Crown Estate, our fisheries, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Department for Transport and Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. We are working together at pace, and we are beginning to see some of the fruits of that, such as the investment in the Port of Tyne that I just mentioned, but the work is ongoing.

[Andrew Ranger (Wrexham) (Lab)]

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

--- Later in debate ---

[Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)]

7. What steps she is taking to support the aviation sector.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

We are unlocking growth by progressing airport planning decisions and inviting third runway proposals for Heathrow by the summer. A new UK airspace design service and support fund will drive airspace modernisation. We introduced the sustainable aviation fuel mandate, and yesterday we proposed a revenue certainty mechanism to support UK production.

[Alice Macdonald]

SaxonAir, Norwich airport and Norfolk and Suffolk county councils recently launched Aviation East, a call to make East Anglia the heart of aviation innovation. We are already leading in the development of electric aircraft and the early availability of sustainable aviation fuel, but we could do so much more to unlock growth and deliver jobs. Will the Minister outline how this Government will support aviation in the east? I am due to meet him soon, but will he also come to Norwich, take a flight in an electric plane and see what innovation is under way?

[Mike Kane]

This Government want to see the UK maximise the benefits of the future of flight technologies, including flying taxis, both for the economy and for communities. We recently announced over £20 million of Government funding for the Civil Aviation Authority and the future flight challenge to deliver the future flight programme this year. That joint programme between industry, Government and the CAA will enhance drone capability by 2027, with flying taxis in the UK’s skies by 2028. I would be delighted to visit Norwich and the airport in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

[Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)]

As the Minister is well aware, the Government have supported and signed off on the development consent order for Manston airport in my constituency. It is hoped and expected that the final private funding for that package will be in place and that work will start in the very near future. Will the Minister now reaffirm his support for the contribution that Manston can and will make to freight and growth in the United Kingdom, and can he also seek to expedite the necessary licences at the appropriate time?

[Mike Kane]

I was delighted to spend my Easter holiday in the right hon. Member’s constituency, cycling the Cantii way. I stopped and took a look at Manston airport—and a sip of water from my bottle, because it was a hot day. I am looking forward to the outcome of the talks and the funding, and at that point I will be happy to look at the proposals from Manston and sit down with the right hon. Member to unlock that capacity.

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

My hon. Friend will be as aware as I am that the air passenger duty, which was introduced by a Conservative Chancellor more than 30 years ago, has been studied intensively. Every study shows that the revenue generated by that tax is much less than the benefit of abolishing it. Will my hon. Friend and the Secretary of State try to talk some sense into the Chancellor of the Exchequer and her officials, to get rid of this tax and benefit both aviation and the economy?

[Mike Kane]

I would never disagree with the former leader of my council, but on this occasion, I might have to. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend as somebody who was chairman of the airport that delivered the only international runway in this country in 80 years. Air passenger duty is part of the rich mix of the aviation tapestry; however, last month in April, Heathrow had 7.1 million passengers through its doors, the largest number ever. Most airports and airlines are seeing demand go through the roof. We are modernising the airspace, decarbonising the fuel and unlocking the constraints on our airports, which is why we are seeing record passenger numbers.

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)]

I recognise the vital importance of the aviation sector, but any airport expansion —including at Bristol airport—should reflect the cumulative impact of emissions and our legal commitment to net zero. Does the Minister support the Climate Change Committee’s advice, published last year, that no airport expansion should proceed without a UK-wide capacity management framework?

[Mike Kane]

First, I congratulate Bristol on the excellent job it is doing and the growth it is seeing. We have strict criteria on carbon emissions, noise, growth and pollution at our airports. That is our guiding principle as a Government, but we also want to see local ambition in terms of growth. Those carbon budgets are fixed; we still want to reach net zero by 2050, even with the growth in our air markets that is expected over the next few years.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)]

As we approach the summer holidays, we know that many families are looking forward to the opportunity to get away. However, in what may come as concerning news, Labour’s Employment Rights Bill could threaten passengers’ ability to travel without disruption or additional costs. This is because in existing passenger rights legislation, under article 5(1)(c)(i) of Regulation 261, passengers are entitled to compensation if they are informed of cancellations less than two weeks before their flight. The Employment Rights Bill reduces the required notice period for strike action in any industry from 14 days to 10 days, increasing the risk of last-minute cancellations. That could in theory cost airlines tens of millions of pounds, which could in turn lead to higher costs for passengers as airlines pass the expenses on to the travelling public. Does the Minister agree that the Government should maintain the 14-day notice period in aviation, putting the interests of passengers ahead of those of their union friends?

[Mike Kane]

The shadow Secretary of State will forgive me if I have not read that sub-paragraph that trips off the tongue. This Government will always put passengers first. That is why more passengers than ever are flying in our skies and leaving our airports. The Department is fully engaged with the aviation sector at all stages, including on this issue.

[Juliet Campbell (Broxtowe) (Lab)]

8. What steps she is taking to reduce the backlog for driving tests.

--- Later in debate ---

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

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

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

My hon. Friend is a doughty champion for the Grangemouth refinery. He asks what we are doing: yesterday, we introduced the SAF Bill to bring forward the revenue certainty mechanism, and we continue to consider the Project Willow report and its recommendations.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

Airports across the country are participating in the airspace modernisation review. However, there is a clear conflict of interest between environmental imperatives and profit motives. Will the Secretary of State undertake to introduce an independent member on each airspace review panel?

[Mike Kane]

The Government are pressing on with airspace modernisation and have set up the UK Airspace Design Service. I recently met the hon. Member in my office to discuss this issue. We continue at pace on this work and will be consulting widely.

[Sean Woodcock (Banbury) (Lab)]

Every week on my journey to and from this place I join constituents on overcrowded Chiltern Railways trains that are often advertised as standing room only. The oldest class of carriages operating on that network has an average age of 47 years. In the light of this, can Ministers tell me what action the Department is taking to support the replacement and refurbishment of these carriages to improve capacity, service reliability, and passenger experience and comfort?

--- Later in debate ---

[Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)]

Farnborough airport’s noise and emission pollution affects a significant part of my constituency. The airport has announced that it will be launching its consultation to expand in August. This has obviously brought a lot of concern from residents groups and campaigners, who are worried that people will be away at this time. What can the Minister do to ensure that there is maximum engagement with the public and therefore a proper consultation?

[Mike Kane]

I thank the hon. Member for his question, but he will know that this matter is for the determination of Rushmoor borough council, the local planning authority. He will appreciate that this is a live application, so it would not be appropriate for me to comment at this time.

Driving Licences: Zero Emission Vehicles

Mike Kane Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

I beg to move,

That the draft Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2025, which were laid before this House on 14 March, be approved.

The aim of the regulations is to support the transition to zero emission vehicles, to reduce the regulatory burden on business, and to drive economic growth on our journey to becoming a clean energy superpower.

Businesses and families are choosing to make the switch to cleaner, greener vehicles that are cheaper to run and reduce noise and air pollution on our streets. The UK was the largest electric car market in Europe in 2024, and so far this year demand is up 42%, according to industry figures. However, zero emission vehicles can be heavier than equivalent petrol and diesel vehicles because of the weight of their battery or power train, which can push them into a higher driving licence category than their petrol or diesel equivalents.

Regulations to partially solve the problem were passed in 2018, allowing category B licence holders to drive alternatively fuelled vehicles weighing up to 4.25 tonnes if they fulfilled additional requirements, including receiving five hours of additional training from an accredited instructor, driving only for the purpose of transporting goods, and having no ability to tow. However, following the rapid growth of zero emission technology since 2018, the existing regulations represent an unnecessary barrier to switching to zero emission vehicles. The cost of the training, and of taking drivers off the road to complete it, can be prohibitive and time-consuming for businesses. These regulations will therefore enable the holder of a standard category B licence to drive a fully electric or hydrogen-powered vehicle up to a maximum weight of 4.25 tonnes without those additional requirements. Existing category B rules on ages and passenger numbers will apply.

Category B licence holders can also usually drive minibuses weighing up to 3.5 tonnes if they fulfil additional requirements, including the requirement for the driver to be over the age of 21. The regulations apply the same additional requirements to zero emission minibuses weighing up to 4.25 tonnes. They also allow zero emission vehicles weighing up to 4.25 tonnes to tow a trailer, just as rules permit their petrol and diesel counterparts to, provided that the total combined vehicle and trailer weight does not exceed 7 tonnes.

It is important that people with disabilities should have equitable driving licence flexibilities. To ensure that they are not excluded from the benefits of these regulations, an eligible zero emission vehicle may weigh up to 5 tonnes if it is fitted with specialist equipment for the carriage of disabled passengers. That additional weight allowance also applies to minibuses.

[Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)]

Could the Minister elaborate on the types of vehicles that will be covered by the provision for additional weight for disabled users?

[Mike Kane]

The provisions apply to electric vehicles, not to gas or synthetically fuelled vehicles.

The fuel types in scope of these regulations are zero emission, rather than alternative fuels. The only vehicles not covered by these regulations, but that were in scope of the old ones, are gas-powered vehicles. The Government estimate that there are fewer than 30 on the road today, and their technology does not require an additional weight allowance.

A public consultation on these proposals was held in 2022 and received 89 responses, which were largely supportive of the changes, though some concerns were raised about safety. Following a detailed analysis, the Government are confident that these regulations pose an extremely low risk to road safety. Between 2020 and 2023, there were a total of nine collisions involving such vehicles, and six of them were minor collisions. However, we will closely monitor incident data as it becomes available, to protect the safety of all road users. In the unlikely event that a concerning trend emerges, swift action will be taken to protect the public. The Department will publish detailed safety guidance, which we are working with industry to disseminate.

In closing, these regulations are a common-sense measure to equalise the driving licence rules for zero-emission vehicles and their petrol and diesel counterparts. I commend this statutory instrument to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the shadow Minister.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mike Kane]

With the leave of the House, I will respond briefly to the points that have been raised. I thank hon. Members for their consideration.

The hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith) said that he would be brief and got a cheer, but then went on for just a little while to talk about his favourite subject of synthetically fuelled cars. We know he has one.

[Mr Francois]

That was brief! [Laughter.]

[Mike Kane]

I think Churchill famously said from this Dispatch Box that a fanatic is someone who cannot change their mind and will not change the subject. I say that gently—[Laughter.] I really am being gentle there.

The intention of the SI is to support the transition to zero emission vehicles. The driving licence flexibility is therefore designed to account for the additional weight of heavier batteries in fully electric vehicles and some implementations of hydrogen fuel cell technology. Vehicles powered by natural gas or biogas are not net zero. I get what the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire is saying about the single life cycle of the carbon, but they are not subject to the standard category B licence requirements, meaning that they can be driven if they weigh up to 3.5 tonnes. The Government estimate that there are currently fewer than 30 such vehicles on the road.

E-fuels and synthetic fuels—which I know are the hon. Gentleman’s area of expertise and interest—are not disadvantaged by the standard category B requirements, which apply to petrol and diesel vehicles, and are therefore not included in the SI. As I have said, synthetic fuels are already treated no differently in the driving licence regulations to their petrol or diesel counterparts, and do not require the additional weight to achieve payload parity. The instrument seeks only to achieve parity with zero emission vehicles.

I am not sure about the issue with driving licences raised by the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), who is no longer in his place. I will undertake to write to him.

In closing, this instrument, while technical in nature, represents a common-sense step that will support industry to make the switch to zero emissions and decarbonise our road transport as we make progress to net zero. It will cut transport costs for business, reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and further accelerate our progress to becoming the clean energy superpower that we so hope to be. I trust that the House has found this debate informative and will join me in supporting the legislation. I commend the regulations to the House.

Question put.

Oral Answers to Questions

Mike Kane Excerpts

Thursday 27th March 2025 Commons Chamber

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

17. What steps she is taking to support the aviation sector.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

The Government have shown that we will support the UK aviation sector by backing airport expansions that promote economic growth while meeting climate and environmental standards. We have invited proposals for a third runway at Heathrow, and introduced a package of measures to encourage the production and use of sustainable aviation fuel.

[Gurinder Singh Josan]

Aviation is a crucial part of the UK economy, with regional airports supporting jobs in communities across the UK, but with many more opportunities ahead. Will the Minister make representations in relation to the industrial strategy both to support the development of hydrogen fuel and to develop the associated infrastructure to make hydrogen-powered aviation a reality?

[Mike Kane]

My hon. Friend is a great champion in this area. In addition to the sustainable aviation fuel I mentioned, we recognise the role that hydrogen can play in decarbonising aviation, because it literally produces zero emissions at the tailpipe. We have invested £63 million in the advanced fuels fund, announced by the Chancellor, which will also be available for power-to-liquids sustainable aviation fuel projects.

[Chris Vince]

I thank the Minister for his answer. As the Prime Minister pointed out yesterday, Stansted airport is a huge employer and training provider for my constituency of Harlow. What work is the Department, alongside the Department for Work and Pensions, doing with employers and training providers in the aviation sector?

[Mike Kane]

I acknowledge that my hon. Friend is a great champion for the airport near his constituency. We engage with airports to understand their plans. Stansted has committed to creating over 5,000 jobs from its £1.1 billion expansion, and it has established an employment skills academy in the Aerozone to boost careers and deliver STEM—science, technology, engineering and maths—outreach. I encourage him to carry on engaging as he has been doing.

[Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)]

I know that the Aviation Minister will understand the need for a major diversion field in the south-east of England. With that in mind and in the light of my question to the Prime Minister yesterday, will he welcome the potential reopening of Manston airport in Kent in October 2028, and the huge investment and growth potential that will create?

[Mike Kane]

The right hon. Member, who raised this with me while I was in opposition and has now done so while I am in government, is a doughty champion for this campaign. Manston needs to come forward with its plans, which will be subject to a development consent order, and we will then make a judgment about what is in our best interests.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister very much for his answer. There are lots of training and employment opportunities for young people in careers as cabin crew and pilots, or indeed in aerospace and engineering—for example, at Spirit AeroSystems in Belfast—so what can be done, working alongside the Education Minister, to ensure that those opportunities are made apparent in schools to all the young people who will be the future of our country?

[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.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Mike Kane]

The Climate Change Committee advises; we decide. We are not going to take any lectures on tough decisions. I remember when the former Member for Uxbridge was Foreign Secretary in 2018, he concocted a trip to Kabul to avoid a debate on expansion plans for Heathrow. We are getting on with growing aviation in this country.

[Greg Smith]

If it is tough decisions the Minister wants, I invite him to look at what happened in the Budget of broken promises. Air passenger duty went up significantly. For example, a couple flying to New York will pay £204 in tax. That is a 16% increase. Does the Minister not see that he needs to stand up to the Treasury if he is going to stand up for the aviation sector? Otherwise he is doing what socialists always do: tax growth out of existence.

[Mike Kane]

I enjoy the hon. Member trying to polarise the Chamber. He is sort of all right at it, but we are getting on with decisions around Luton, Stansted, Heathrow and growing the aviation sector. Yes, tax is an important element, but in the past two months we have seen the biggest demand ever—even before the pandemic—in people wanting to fly. That is a testament to the work we are doing in Government to get on with the decisions that should have been taken years ago.

[Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)]

4. What steps she is taking to promote active travel.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)]

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

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

This week we published our maritime decarbonisation strategy, setting decarbonisation goals, along with policy and regulatory measures, to support the sector through the net zero transition. The strategy provides clarity to the sector and will unlock investment in clean maritime technologies, ensuring that the sector is prepared for a zero-emission future.

[Dr Sullivan]

The lower Thames crossing announcement a couple of days ago was a disappointment to many of my constituents. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we can use a small proportion of the tolls to support the maritime sector, particularly the Tilbury-Gravesend ferry, to reduce congestion and rat-running through the villages?

[Mike Kane]

I recently met my hon. Friend about her campaign to reinstate the local ferry. Local ferries are a matter for the competent local transport authority, and I call on Kent county council to help her in that campaign to re-establish the ferry. I know that she is working with maritime partners, but I am happy to meet her.

[Julia Buckley (Shrewsbury) (Lab)]

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

--- Later in debate ---

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

Project Willow reported back last week. Among the options is a hydrogenated esters and fatty acids plant producing sustainable aviation fuel and renewable diesel, and the report recommends a delay in the implementation of the HEFA cap. Is the Department currently considering that action?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his commitment to Project Willow at Grangemouth. We introduced a 2% mandate from 1 January, so 2% of all aviation fuel has to come from sustainable sources. We will be legislating on the revenue certainty mechanism and looking at how we can contribute to the future of that great site.

Maritime Decarbonisation Strategy

Mike Kane Excerpts

Tuesday 25th March 2025 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

By publishing our new maritime decarbonisation strategy today, the Government have set out plans to encourage and support our maritime sector in using fuels of the future and shipping “chargepoints” to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The maritime decarbonisation strategy sets out the Government’s vision of for the future of the UK’s maritime sector, by setting new domestic decarbonisation goals for a 30% reduction by 2030 and an 80% reduction by 2040—both relative to 2008—and outlines our key policies to meet them.

To support this, we are also publishing two supplementary calls for evidence: on “Net zero ports” and on “Decarbonising smaller vessels”, with measures for small, sub-400 gross tonnage (GT) vessels and accelerating uptake in targeted subsectors. These calls for evidence will allow us to gather evidence to provide a more holistic understanding of the current state of play of the maritime sector and how to decarbonise the sector moving forward.

In 2019, the UK domestic maritime sector produced around 8 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent, on a fuel lifecycle basis. Decarbonisation of our maritime sector will support this Government’s missions: driving the uptake of clean fuels and energy, helping to make Britain a clean energy superpower, seizing the green growth opportunities which will help to kick-start economic growth, and realising the co-benefits that reducing emissions can have for health, supporting our health mission, in line with our plan for change. It is conservatively estimated that the decarbonisation of the UK maritime sector could support £130 million to £180 million of gross value added (GVA) and around 1,400 to 2,100 jobs in the UK on average in each year between now and 2050. This is in respect to the provision of on-board technologies, fuel storage and engines alone. The investments required on land to support the decarbonisation of the sector, including the production of zero and near-zero GHG emission fuels and energy are also expected to further drive growth in the UK, and deliver energy security.

This ambitious, but credible and evidence-based maritime decarbonisation strategy is based on a state-of-the-art maritime emissions model, representing a significant step change in our ability to estimate the emissions from the UK maritime sector. Responses from the two calls for evidence will also inform the development of the maritime emissions model as we look to increase our understanding of how to decarbonise maritime.

Maritime Decarbonisation Strategy

The maritime decarbonisation strategy outlines this Government’s vision for how the maritime sector can decarbonise. The strategy sets new goals for domestic maritime emissions, aiming for zero fuel lifecycle GHG emissions by 2050, with at least a 30% reduction by 2030 and an 80% reduction by 2040, relative to 2008 levels. These interim goals are aligned with the level of highest ambition of the 2023 International Maritime Organisation GHG strategy, allowing us to take pragmatic action domestically while continuing to push for high ambition internationally.

These goals highlight our commitment to decarbonising the maritime sector and will provide the industry with the certainty it needs to invest, playing its part in kick-starting economic growth and making Britain a clean energy superpower.

The strategy will cover five key policies to drive decarbonisation from now to 2050:

Fuel regulation. Alongside a fuel standard being developed at the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), we will, subject to consultation next year, introduce domestic fuel regulations to drive the uptake of zero and near-zero GHG emission fuels and energy sources.

Emissions pricing. The UK emissions trading scheme (ETS) will be expanded to include UK domestic maritime GHG emissions from 2026. At the IMO, we are also continuing to push for emissions pricing through a global shipping levy, introduced from 2027.

Ports and emissions at berth. We are considering further action to reduce emissions at berth and are launching a call for evidence to inform this work alongside the maritime decarbonisation strategy.

Smaller vessels and targeted subsectors. We need to reduce emissions from the whole fleet over time, including smaller vessels. To build our understanding, we are launching a call for evidence to begin this policy development. We are aware that while this will be challenging for some subsectors—such as fishing vessels—there are others that could move quickly, such as offshore wind vessels.

Energy efficiency. We will support the IMO review of short-term measures to further incentivise energy efficiency and explore domestic energy efficiency measures.

This strategy continues to build on the innovation and expertise developed through our research and development programme UK SHORE, which, as well as accelerating the commercialisation of the future fuels and technologies necessary, positions the UK as a leader in clean maritime development and drives investment into clean maritime technologies. Supporting this will be the Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s new UK maritime innovation hub, which will encourage innovation and research and development, and support economic growth by helping innovators bring new technologies to safe commercial use in the sector.

“Net zero ports” Call for Evidence

This publication will collect evidence to support the Government’s consideration of an at-berth emissions requirement in the maritime decarbonisation strategy. It looks at the role of ports in enabling shipping to decarbonise and reduce shipping’s wider environmental impacts. This includes providing new infrastructure and aims to capture evidence on the future electricity demand at ports, recognising this is a shared asset to enable ports, shipping and port tenants to decarbonise and capture new commercial and economic opportunities.

The publication also looks at the progress ports are making in decarbonising their own operations and how Government could potentially galvanise the sector to decarbonise. We focus on whether ports are planning to decarbonise their own operations, their goals and what they have included in their strategies, including wider environmental considerations.

“Decarbonising smaller vessels” Call for Evidence

This call evidence will provide Government with essential information and data to help decarbonise and reduce the environmental impacts of vessels under 400 GT. It asks questions on the costs of these vessels, when the new technologies will be ready, what infrastructure will be required and where these vessels are likely to be built. It seeks to identify which subsectors have a clear decarbonisation pathway and may be able to move quickly. This call for evidence represents a balance between ambition and deliverability, recognising that some subsectors such as fishing will need more time, and that this is the start of a conversation with them. This means we will have a stronger evidence base to make informed policy decisions in the future.

Next steps

Following the publication of the maritime decarbonisation strategy, and the two calls for evidence, we will continue to work with the sector to deliver the domestic decarbonisation goals and to reduce wider environmental impacts. We will collect and analyse the responses from the calls for evidence to inform our next steps and will publish a consultation on future UK fuels regulation. Furthermore, we will continue to champion ambitious action at the IMO to drive the global maritime sector towards zero emissions and deliver the IMO GHG 2023 strategy.

[HCWS550]