Highways (Financing) Bill

Mike Reader Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 15th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

As many Members will know, I joined the industry 20 years ago as a civil engineer. Throughout my career, I have been very fortunate to work on a lot of major infrastructure projects, including the lower Thames crossing, the A303 and some of the big National Highways frameworks, such as the specialist professional and technical services framework and the regional delivery partnership—the delivery integration partner framework. I now chair the all-party parliamentary group on infrastructure, so I come at this Bill as someone who has priced and bid for major contracts and has seen what happens when the money just is not there.

However, I thought I would start my contribution to this debate with a safety moment. Members who have been around the sector will know that safety culture is absolutely critical to delivering our road network and doing so safely, and a safety moment that has always stuck with me is one from National Highways. It is about a lady who I am going to call Jane. Jane had had a busy day at National Highways; she jumped in her car, was driving home, and was involved in a very low-speed traffic collision. When she hit the car in front, her airbag went off and caused her lanyard to be forced through her chest, and she ended up in hospital. That is always a good reminder—when you leave today, if you are rushing to your car to drive home, remove your lanyard, not only for your security but for your safety.

Let me now turn to why this Bill matters to Northampton. Why is an MP for Northampton talking about a scheme in Essex and Kent? Well, Northampton sits at the heart of the logistics network: some 2,640 logistics businesses operate out of Northamptonshire, and 35,000 people in my county work in haulage and logistics. Every day, goods move between warehouses in my constituency and the channel ports, many of them crossing the Thames via Dartford, and when Dartford jams up, those costs are felt in my constituency and across the midlands. I support this Bill—I think it is the right thing to do to deal with that problem—but I agree with the Road Haulage Association and many hauliers that we must also consider the cost for freight operators. When the licensing agreements come forward, we must consider the considerable business and fuel costs that many businesses in my constituency are facing.

Planning has long been the biggest barrier to building roads. In particular, the development consent order process for the lower Thames crossing has been torturous—unfortunately, I know that at first hand. The second biggest barrier, though, has often been money. The Treasury can only fund so many projects at any one time, and every project competes for the same pot. This Bill brings in the private capital to build things that would otherwise sit in the queue. I have long argued that private finance works in this sector; when the Silvertown tunnel opened last year, it showed that modern public-private partnerships can deliver for taxpayers, and I still believe that.

However, having spoken to the Minister previously responsible and now to the current Minister, I want to be straight with this House. This is an ambitious thing that we are doing. I do not believe that the regulated asset base model is used elsewhere in the world for road infrastructure; traditionally, we see it delivered through concessions or availability-based public-private partnerships. I was initially concerned, so rather than shouting at the Department about where the money is coming from, I went out and spoke to industry. Through the Global Infrastructure Investor Association and some of the big advisers to the investment community, I spoke to investors about this project, and they said that this is actually quite an exciting opportunity, particularly because it should reduce the cost of capital. Creating a regulated return reviewed by an independent regulator should deliver cheaper finance and, importantly, more competition for that finance, so it is completely right that the Department cannot say who is funding this project yet, because we need to run the competition to get that funding in the first place. The more certainty we give to the market through a model such as this one, the better our chances of securing that finance at a much lower cost.

[Mr Francois]

The hon. Gentleman has obviously spent a lot of time looking into this matter, and I commend him for that. As a result of his discussions, could he estimate when we might know who the funders will be—is it another year or two? When will it be? As he has obviously spoken to the Road Haulage Association as well, what does he think the initial toll will be for a lorry going through the tunnel?

[Mike Reader]

I would not want to speculate on the Government’s timetable. What is important is that the Bill goes through, and then we will go through the licensing arrangements to find the right partner to deliver this project, as well as the finance, obviously. However, the delays that happened under the previous Government—the first failed development consent order, where they completely ignored the local community, and the second DCO ending up in the courts because of challenges brought forward by the environmental lobby, as my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Jim Dickson) said—were not dealt with, and I am really disappointed that the Opposition are playing that card now when they campaigned against the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025, which brought forward many measures that would have solved the problems that the lower Thames crossing had.

The question of risk is another important one. A RAB model moves construction risk on to the people who are financing, building and delivering the scheme, but the treatment of risk in the delivery of a major infrastructure project can make the difference between success and failure. The question is: who holds that risk? The Competition and Markets Authority’s review of the civil engineering sector rightly identified that the transfer of risk from tier 1s, from financers, and into the supply chain can make a big difference to a project’s solvency and how it is delivered, particularly for major projects. We have to make sure that the licensing arrangements established by this Bill make provision for Government to require equitable risk management and risk treatment within the delivery of projects, as well as prompt payment through the supply chain, so that when billions of pounds of investment are involved, that money flows through quickly into the supply chain and does not get stuck at tier 1 level.

I have a couple of questions for the Minister to round off my speech—I am very grateful for his and his predecessor’s engagement on this Bill. The Secretary of State told the Transport Committee that the process for setting tolls in the first settlement period, which would answer the question asked by the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), would be set out as the Bill progresses. Will the Minister confirm that that is still the case? The standard licence conditions will be set by the Secretary of State without parliamentary procedure, so will the Government commit to publishing the core principles for investor returns and price reviews before any licence is granted?

The Bill puts new requirements on the Office for Rail and Road. I have had relatively good experiences with that organisation, but this is a new skill and capability that it needs to have, so what are the Government going to do to strengthen the ORR’s capability to manage these contracts effectively?

Turning to existing roads, to address the point made by the shadow Secretary of State, the Government have already confirmed in a written answer that they have no plans to use these powers to toll roads that are currently free. I welcome that, but since there is confusion, could the Minister put that question beyond doubt in his closing remarks from the Dispatch Box?

Some will say that this is a pay-per-journey model that will change Britain’s roads, but I do not believe it is. It is a way of getting the biggest schemes—the schemes that get stalled for years, if not generations—off the drawing pad and into delivery. I fully support the Bill.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

Oral Answers to Questions

Mike Reader Excerpts

Thursday 11th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Heidi Alexander]

I am proud of the fact that we are renationalising the railways, bringing the train operating companies back into public ownership. We have launched the brand-new livery and train designs, but more importantly than that, I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that train services that are now under public control are more reliable and have fewer cancellations than those still in the private sector.

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

2. What steps she is taking to improve passenger rail services.

[Jeff Smith (Manchester Withington) (Lab)]

3. What steps she is taking to improve passenger rail services.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Keir Mather)]

Great British Railways will create a railway run by the people for the people, turning the tide on a decade of decline under the previous Government. Eighty per cent of the rail journeys that will ultimately be run by GBR are now being run by publicly owned operators, and we are already seeing more reliable services as a result.

[Mike Reader]

The Minister will be aware that freight services using East West Rail infrastructure already terminate at Northampton Gateway. Will the Minister work with me to ensure Northampton is included in East West Rail’s long-term vision for passenger services, ensuring connectivity across the Oxford-Cambridge corridor?

[Keir Mather]

I thank my hon. Friend for his advocacy on this issue. He will know that, as set out in the recent project consultation, East West Rail services are not currently planned to serve Northampton. However, current work does not preclude that, and East West Rail will provide important interchanges with major rail lines. I would be very keen to work with my hon. Friend as he seeks to take this campaigning issue further.

Bletchley Railway Station: Eastern Entrance

Mike Reader Excerpts

Wednesday 7th January 2026 Commons Chamber

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

Good things come to those who wait, Madam Deputy Speaker. Despite the late hour, I am grateful for the opportunity to champion an issue of strategic importance to Bletchley—namely, the case for a new eastern entrance to our railway station to create a direct and welcoming connection to our town centre, for which local people have waited far too long.

This is about more than bricks and mortar. We need to strengthen our transport infrastructure and give Bletchley a modern shop window through which we can welcome visitors, businesses, investors and, ultimately, opportunities from across the UK and beyond. I thank the Minister, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport and Lord Hendy—the Rail Minister in the other place, whom I met this afternoon—for their constructive engagement on this matter over the past six months. The Minister and his officials have taken the time to listen to us carefully, examine the evidence and understand the significance of this project, not just for Bletchley, but for Milton Keynes more widely. I know that the Department shares the belief that transport investment must go hand in hand with the revitalisation of our communities.

Bletchley is an incredibly proud town. From the wartime codebreakers at Bletchley Park to its foundational role in building the new town—now the modern city—of Milton Keynes, it has played an extraordinary and pivotal part in our national story. Yet while Milton Keynes has become one of the UK’s most dynamic economies, Bletchley has not always shared fully in that success. As the city has expanded northwards, the town to its south, which helped to build it, has too often been left behind. That is not because of a lack of ambition or resilience. Walk through any Bletchley neighbourhood—be it the Lakes estate, Newton Leys, Eaton Leys, Fenny Stratford or the Links estate—and you will find that our town is home to strong and hard-working communities.

For too long, however, too many high quality and skilled jobs have clustered elsewhere. That is not to diminish the importance of Bletchley’s core economic sectors, from logistics to retail and manufacturing, which employ many local residents and play a vital role in keeping our town and city running; rather, it is to recognise that they represent only part of Bletchley’s potential. In technology, artificial intelligence and space-related industries, Bletchley has the potential to align directly with this Government’s industrial strategy and growth mission. Indeed, some have already seen that potential—Starship Technologies, Envisics, Carnot Engines and Pulsar Fusion are just four of the high-growth innovative firms that call Bletchley home.

I want our town to be home to much more than that, which is why I launched our Bletchley investment taskforce last April to begin the process of attracting new investment, new businesses, and new jobs and apprenticeships from which local people can benefit. Yet to unlock that potential in full, we must start with how people arrive in our town. The current station at Bletchley literally turns its back on the town’s centre. Passengers exit to the west, into a car park, with no sightline to Queensway or the town centre. Reaching the town centre requires them to navigate an indirect, unwelcoming route, through an underpass, across a roundabout—we are in Milton Keynes—and along narrow walkways. It is cumbersome, inaccessible for many, particularly those with disabilities, and simply unfit for a growing transportation hub of national significance.

What should be a gateway instead acts as a barrier. That is why an eastern entrance is so important. This is not just a cosmetic change; it is a practical shift rooted in connectivity, regeneration and identity. A new eastern entrance facing the town would deliver, I believe, three clear benefits. First, it would reconnect the station with the town centre, linking directly to the high street and our bus station, increasing footfall and supporting local businesses. It would make the town work better for residents and commuters alike by shortening walking distances, improving accessibility and encouraging greater use of public transport.

Secondly, it would enable Bletchley to unlock early stage investment in our town centre, particularly in the Brunel Centre, but also in the old fire station site and other pieces of residential and industrial land located near the station, that otherwise may stall, as well as other forms of private and public investment that are key to Bletchley’s future. Thirdly, it would create the proper gateway that Bletchley deserves: a modern, welcoming arrival point, especially for those visiting Bletchley Park and the National Museum of Computing, which is just a few moments away and acknowledges Bletchley’s pride in its past, while reflecting its renewed ambition for the future.

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

I travel through Bletchley on my way to London, and have done so while commuting for many years. It has been amazing to see the station grow with the arrival of East West Rail and the high line. Does my hon. Friend agree that a fourth benefit of the proposal is that it sends a message that the Government are serious about investing in the Oxford-Cambridge corridor, which is something the Chancellor has championed?

[Callum Anderson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right: the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor is a critical part of the Government’s growth mission, and key to the UK’s long-term economic competitiveness. I know he will agree that if we are to realise the full potential of that growth corridor, we have genuinely to invest and promote the core and centre that is the engine of the Oxford-Cambridge corridor. That is not just Bletchley and Milton Keynes, but Northampton too.

The case for the eastern entrance is backed by evidence, and I place on record my thanks to the East West Rail team who have completed an incredibly thorough and professional strategic outline business case. It demonstrates high value for money, improved passenger experience, unlocked development potential and support for wider place-based investment, which I referred to a few moments ago.

Space Industry (Indemnities) Bill

Mike Reader Excerpts

3rd reading
Friday 4th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow East (John Grady) for bringing forward this important Bill. It is fantastic to see space made in today’s programme to debate it. Many of the contributions have been out of this world. [Interruption.] I am sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker.

The Bill is a timely and necessary measure to sharpen the UK’s competitive edge in what is undoubtedly one of the most strategically important domains of our time. Having almost completed my first year on the armed forces parliamentary scheme, I have seen at first hand that our security relies not only on land, sea and air, but increasingly on the space domain and our assets in orbit. Satellite communications, Earth observation and precise navigation form the backbone of military operations, but also of our civil economy—I will come back to that later.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Crawley (Peter Lamb) pointed out in his intervention, any disruption up there has immediate and profound consequences to operations down here. We know at first hand that China and other nations are taking leaps and bounds in its drive to dominate the space domain, so anything we can do to strengthen the UK space economy is critical.

Before coming to this House, I was very fortunate that my team supported clients such as Defence Equipment & Support in negotiations around the space domain, in particular providing better commercial and buying support, which is critical, so I have seen at first hand the complexity of this emerging market, and how the public sector needs to keep up to date and respond to the demands and the asks of the private sector, and drive growth.

Just down the road from me in Harwell, a project completed by my former firm in 2023, the National Satellite Test Facility, received £120 million of new investment by the public sector through the Science and Facilities Technology Council. That shows that when we unlock investment, it is not just about the assets that end up in space, but about the big, chunky, complex engineering construction opportunities that are opened up in places such as the OxCam corridor, where my constituency sits. Through that work, I have seen how the private sector is poised and hungry to drive forward the next wave of space innovation. What is holding us back, generally, is not technology, talent, innovation or the drive for growth, but regulatory uncertainty. Despite the fact that the Bill relates to only four words, as my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow East said, it will make a big difference.

The Space Industry Act 2018 laid the groundwork for the modern commercial sector we have in space. I commend the previous Government, as we are debating in a spirit of collaboration and co-operation across the House, for their work on that and for the space industrial strategy, which was published later. I can see echoes of that now in the industrial strategy, and I know that when the defence industrial strategy comes out later in the year, space will be front and centre of that as well. It is positive that we can build on some of the good work done by the Conservatives.

Without knowing what financial exposure firms might face if an accident or an incident occurs, companies hesitate to invest, insurers demand eye-watering premiums, and ultimately, we lose manufacturing contracts to other jurisdictions. The simple but powerful adjustment made by the Bill changes the law so that the indemnity limit for each operator licence is not optional, but mandatory. Each licence must spell out the licensee’s maximum liabilities. This is an essential risk management mechanism and it means that companies know exactly what they are signing up for. It also allows them to secure insurance in a predictable way. In the construction sector, we had a lot of unpredictable insurance post-Grenfell and particularly post-industrial shock, so I know how, for a commercial business, insecure insurance and unpredictability of insurance is important.

The Government’s new industrial strategy is really positive for the space sector. In my constituency, the Bill will stimulate jobs and growth. It specifically recognises that the Government will be investing in research and development for the space industry through the Cambridge Growth Company, which will drive new opportunities for my constituents.

When we consider this issue, we must also remember the wider stakes.

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

I am enjoying my hon. Friend’s speech on space. I must declare that I prefer to have my feet firmly on planet Earth, but none the less I am enjoying his contribution. I have been advised that men are from Mars and women are from Venus. Where does my hon. Friend think those on the second Opposition Bench are from?

[Mike Reader]

I am sure they are working hard in their constituencies right now.

[Adam Jogee]

Where they are from, not where they are.

[Mike Reader]

Where they are from, I do not know, but I am sure they are working hard in their constituencies right now. I will keep the collegiate relationship we have here today, but I thank my hon. Friend for that comment.

I was talking about international impacts. As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on international trade and investment, I think the Bill is a very positive step forward to help drive investment. As we see countries such as the US, Luxembourg, Australia and Japan change their regulatory regimes, we need to keep that front and centre.

I did say I would briefly mention the civil economy, as we have a Minister from the Department here today. Regulatory certainty matters. I see that the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill is coming forward, but I note that the fuel strategy is also very important. One in five of my constituents work in logistics, so it is critical that we see certainty in all sectors of the Department for Transport.

I will conclude by saying this. Space is no longer the preserve of big Government agencies alone. We see a lot of innovation. As my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) said in relation to her constituency, there is fierce commercial competition and a lot of opportunity. The Bill will ensure that, whether we are exploring near space, planets, exoplanets, exomoons or even going out further into space, we support the British economy and get the space industry growing.

Road Safety Powers: Parish and Town Councils

Mike Reader Excerpts

Monday 30th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. Chris and Nicole in my constituency lost their daughter Beccy nearly 18 years ago. On losing her, they discovered a postcode lottery for bereavement services. Some police services provide them, but some do not. It is important that we discuss road safety measures, but I hope my hon. Friend will agree that it is also important that we end that lottery, so that every family who loses someone in a road traffic accident has the bereavement support they should get.

[Sam Rushworth]

It is difficult to disagree with that excellent intervention.

Another example is Howden-le-Wear, where Hargill Road comes down a fast lane. I spoke to a gentleman there recently who told me that he no longer feels safe going out in his electric scooter and going up the road, because of the speed at which traffic comes hurtling down the bank. People there have been asking for traffic enforcement measures, as was mentioned in earlier interventions.