Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether trains carrying Greater Manchester Bee Network branding or livery will remain rail assets of Great British Railways or the Secretary of State, rather than assets of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.
Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
Livery reflects who is responsible for the service, not who owns the trains. Aside from some devolved services, where there are instances of ownership by the devolved authority, rolling stock is leased from rolling stock companies and managed day-to-day by the train operator. There is currently one Northern unit in temporary promotional Bee Network livery operating on Manchester‑area services, highlighting the forthcoming tap‑and‑go contactless integration on local rail; this is a branding exercise only and does not change ownership or leasing arrangements. As there are currently no rail services devolved to Greater Manchester, any trains operating on the GBR network would carry GBR livery rather than Bee Network branding. Through partnerships with GBR, there could be opportunities for external co-branding of rolling stock where Mayoral Strategic Authorities take a financial stake in service provision.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 4 December 2025 to Question 95968, for what reason there is a difference between the estimates of the fiscal cost of freezing rail fares (a) as set out in that Answer and (b) the figures published in the Office for Budget Responsibility’s Economic and Fiscal Outlook, November 2025.
Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
The difference is due to a difference in rounding. The estimates provided in the Department’s previous response were sourced from the published Budget document, where numbers are rounded to the nearest £5m. The OBR choose to round figures to the nearest £1m in their own publications, including their Economic and Fiscal Outlook published in November 2025.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, how paragraph 3.9.2 of the draft National Policy Statement for Ports will be applied by decision-makers when considering development consent for port infrastructure.
Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
We are currently considering the views received from consultation on, and Parliamentary scrutiny of, the draft revised National Policy Statement for Ports, and will lay a final text in Parliament in due course.
In line with the recommendation of the Transport Select Committee, we are considering further guidance on how developers assess carbon emissions as part of Environmental Impact Assessments.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of (a) the abolition of non-dom status and (b) increases in levels of taxation on the retention of international shipowners in the UK; what estimate she has made of the number of shipowning individuals or companies that (i) have relocated and (ii) are considering relocating as a result of these changes; and what steps the Government is taking to ensure that the UK remains an attractive base for global shipping and maritime businesses.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government’s priority is improving the UK’s competitiveness internationally and securing economic growth. The reforms to the tax treatment of non-domiciled individuals have been specifically designed to make the UK competitive, with a modern, simple tax regime that is also fair. The reforms establish a tax regime for new residents which is more attractive to new arrivals than the current rules.
The introduction of a residence-based tax system is expected to raise £39.5bn by 2030-31 (as costed by the OBR last autumn), and the OBR have said that there is no firm evidence to change the estimated impact of the reforms on migration. As set out at Budget 2025, the Chancellor has been clear that she will continue to assess the regime to ensure it strikes the right balance, including on competitiveness.
The Government published a Tax Information and Impact Note for this policy on 30 October 2024, which can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tax-changes-for-non-uk-domiciled-individuals/reforming-the-taxation-of-non-uk-domiciled-individuals
Regarding global shipping and maritime businesses, the Government is maintaining the Tonnage Tax regime, introduced in 2000 to improve the competitiveness of the UK’s shipping industry. This is designed to make it easier for shipping companies to move to the UK and ensures they are not disadvantaged compared with firms operating in other countries.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 1 December 2025 to Question 93460 on Roads: Safety Barriers if she will publish the (a) location and route section, (b) date granted, c) reason of each departure from standard; what plans she has for upgrades to rigid concrete barrier.
Answered by Simon Lightwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
The locations, routes and dates of approval for the departures from standard allowing steel crash barrier to be replaced with new steel barrier, rather than concrete, are as follows:
M4 Junctions 13-14: 20/08/2025
M6 Junction 37-38: 12/05/25
M5 Junctions 23-24: 24/04/24
A1(M) Junctions 37-38: 02/12/24
The reason for permitting departures from standard allowing the replacement of life-expired steel barrier with new steel barrier and not concrete barrier is due to the affordability of concrete barrier schemes – this can be either due to the cost of the concrete barrier in isolation or the additional works which would be required in order to change the barrier provision from steel barrier to concrete barrier.
Plans for upgrades to rigid concrete barrier:
Given the availability of new higher-containment modular precast concrete barriers, and higher-containment steel barriers, a tiered approach has now been adopted for the renewal of existing central reserve barriers. The highest tier is the provision of rigid, higher-containment concrete barrier. This can be relaxed to the provision of a non-rigid, higher-containment concrete barrier or a higher-containment steel barrier. However, this is only permitted if supported by a documented justification and risk assessment.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, pursuant to the Answer of 5 February 2026 to Question 110095, whether the Department plans to publish route-specific or island impact assessments before domestic maritime is brought into scope of the UK ETS in 2026.
Answered by Chris McDonald - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Impact Assessment set out that it is not possible to robustly break down compliance costs to the level of individual routes or service types, as ticket prices, fare structures and commercial operating decisions vary widely. The Assessment therefore considers impacts at the sector and scheme level.
The Authority consulted extensively with all operators, including those serving island mainland and shortsea routes, to ensure all perspectives informed policy development.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when he plans to respond to the publication of the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Part 1 of Sir Brian Leveson’s Independent Review of the Criminal Courts was published on 9 July 2025, which contained a number of recommendations for structural reform of the criminal courts. On 2 December, the Deputy Prime Minister set out the reforms Government intends to pursue, alongside investment and modernisation.
On 4 February 2026 Sir Brian Leveson published Part 2 of his report, where he makes 135 recommendations to improve efficiency and modernise the criminal courts. The report is thorough and I welcome his ambition to see real improvements in the system.
We will urgently consider the latest recommendations, alongside Sir Brian’s remaining recommendations from Part 1, and respond to them in the coming months.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 3 February 2026 to Question 108309, in which month the upcoming national strategy for integrated transport is expected to be published.
Answered by Lilian Greenwood - Government Whip, Lord Commissioner of HM Treasury
The Department is committed to publishing the integrated national transport strategy shortly, which will set the long‑term vision for domestic transport across England.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether her Department has assessed the potential impact of the Wheels to Work scheme on youth unemployment; and what steps she is taking to support that scheme.
Answered by Lilian Greenwood - Government Whip, Lord Commissioner of HM Treasury
I refer the Rt Honourable Gentleman to the answer given on 3 February 2026 to question number 108310.
Asked by: Richard Holden (Conservative - Basildon and Billericay)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what the average grant-supported cost per bus was under each bus procurement scheme in each of the last five years; and what assessment she has made of the potential impact of social value weightings on tendered prices.
Answered by Simon Lightwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
My Department is not responsible for the procurement of buses and so does not hold this information.