Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

Tim Roca Excerpts

2nd reading
Wednesday 9th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

Today is an important day, as this Bill starts its Commons journey, but it is a hard day on which to talk about the criticality of our civil aviation sector, given the disruption endured by so many over the past 24 hours. With your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will take a few moments to address this issue. A four-hour air traffic outage yesterday left hundreds of thousands of passengers facing cancellations, diversions and delays. I apologise wholeheartedly to passengers for that disruption. We often take for granted the way in which our aviation system just works, but yesterday that was not the case. Safety must remain the overriding priority for air traffic controllers.

This morning I spoke to the chief executive of the National Air Traffic Services, Martin Rolfe, who informed me that this outage was due to a technical issue at their Swanwick site. While my understanding from that is that we can rule out a cyber-attack on this occasion, I do not believe this issue was unavoidable. We also spoke this morning about how NATS responded to resolve and minimise the disruption as quickly as possible. I am grateful to the airports and airlines that responded straightaway, but I am clear that passengers should not have to face this disruption. I have therefore asked the Civil Aviation Authority to conduct an independent review, to establish cause and ensure that our air traffic control systems can get passengers where they need to be. The review will report to me within six months.

Robust systems that support our national infrastructure are the bedrock of the measures contained in this Bill, from better rights for disabled passengers and modernised airspace to slot reform and quicker enforcement of passenger rights. While passengers undeniably experienced a bad day yesterday, it is still true to say that few industries match the ability of aviation to adapt, evolve and innovate. For generations it has pushed the boundaries of what is possible, from faster aircraft and new destinations to safer technology and cleaner fuels. Bad days, like yesterday, just serve to underscore how central aviation is to Britain’s success, not only making our summer holidays and family reunions possible, but connecting businesses to the global marketplace and supporting thousands of skilled jobs across our island nation.

Right now, fresh challenges and opportunities are emerging. Drones are beginning to transform our airspace and flight numbers are climbing year after year, all while global headwinds continue to put enormous pressure on the sector and those who depend on it.

[Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)]

I am really grateful to the Secretary of State for updating the House on the NATS outage and what she and colleagues are doing to ensure that it is sorted out speedily. Does she anticipate that the review she has ordered will be the way in which we ensure this never happens again? So many of us have constituents who have been very badly and unacceptably impacted by these delays.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. and hon. Friends in the ministerial team for their assiduous work in preparing and bringing forward this Bill. He is no longer in his seat, but I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane) for all the work he did as a Minister in government and a shadow Minister in opposition. I also thank the Members of the other place for their work in scrutinising the Bill ahead of its coming to us here.

The Bill represents another example of how the Government are on the side of consumers. On taking office, the new Prime Minister launched a series of very practical, everyday fixes to improve consumer rights in a number of areas, including lowering costs and empowering consumers to take action when they have been inconvenienced. I see this Bill in that tradition, as another step on the path of improving consumer rights in aviation. By giving the Civil Aviation Authority direct enforcement powers and increasing transparency to ensure that passengers are always told who is operating their flight and how they can find redress, the Bill is another example of the Government rebalancing power back in favour of the consumer, and I applaud it.

My constituency of Macclesfield is well served by Manchester airport. More than 500 jobs in my constituency are dependent on the airport, which is the third busiest in the UK. I understand that it is the busiest airport outside London, and it is certainly the global gateway to the north of England. Like many people, I fly out of Manchester myself. It is a great airport, and a great part of the economy of the north-west. Perhaps not uniquely— I may be proved wrong—its major shareholders are mainly the councils of Greater Manchester, which is a great example of sharing prosperity from an important economic asset. I thank all the staff at the airport for helping 30 million people to get through check-in, security and the departure lounge, and to fly to where they need to be mostly hassle-free, and I think we should acknowledge that.

However, as I am sure is common across all airports, sometimes things go wrong, whether it is a bag that does not make it or a flight that is significantly delayed. Disruption can occur at any moment, and we have certainly seen that with the NATS events in the last 24 hours. Clauses 1 to 3 of the Bill will give me and other passengers much greater confidence that, when things do go wrong, they can be put right. Given the changing nature of air travel and global trends, it is right that the Bill empowers the Secretary of State to act on behalf of passengers without having to pass further primary legislation, such as on baggage damage, liability for passenger insurance, ensuring price transparency and ensuring flights are accessible to all passengers, especially those who are disabled, about which my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) made a powerful case.

These new powers ensure that the Secretary of State can be a true advocate for passengers and quickly update the rules to ensure that there is appropriate compensation when things go wrong. I was much taken by the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West (Mr Barros-Curtis) about exploring an automated delay repay system, which I think has great merit. I certainly want to see the new British standard-sized bag when it finally emerges. For a moment, it sounded as though the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor) had a particularly traumatic summer because of at least one airline. I look forward to the consultation that Ministers will bring forward within 12 months, and I will certainly urge my constituents who have written to me about their own experiences to respond to that consultation so that Ministers can act on their behalf.

I particularly welcome the change in clause 4 to provide greater compensation for damaged or lost accessibility equipment on domestic flights. As has been said, a wheelchair is a precious and crucial asset for disabled people. They sometimes—too often—have to fight to get a mobility aid in the first place, and it can often be specialist and extremely expensive. It is therefore right that if an airline is careless enough to lose or damage an aid, the compensation owed to the person it has left inconvenienced in an incredible way is made properly and is appropriate for someone who is unable to navigate with the freedom they once had. I cannot imagine the level of inconvenience caused to people in those circumstances, so I am glad the consumer rights in this area are being strengthened. With the Bill giving the CAA the same consumer protection enforcement powers as the Competition and Markets Authority, passengers will now have a powerful new ally in the fight for compensation that is owed but is not as forthcoming as it should be.

Beyond the consumer protections, I welcome the reforms the Bill introduces to the antiquated airspace management system of airport slots, schedules and allocations. It is particularly positive that the airspace changes will hopefully lead to reduced noise around airports for residents and decreased emissions through more efficient flying. These are sensible, long overdue reforms that help to make aviation more sustainable. Anyone who has been held in a stack while waiting for a landing spot can attest to the fact that a more efficient use of airspace to decrease the need for holding patterns is very welcome. It is good that the Government are reforming slots and schedules. We saw during covid that the current system is not flexible enough. Giving Ministers the power to adjust the rules, either in an emergency such as covid or to encourage competition between airlines, which is so important, it is a welcome step that will improve things for passengers.

I will finish on the issue of airport drop-off charges, which has been raised by Members on both sides of the House. I ask that Ministers think carefully about it in view of the scrutiny in the other place. A number of residents in Macclesfield have raised it with me. Manchester airport operates a barrierless drop-off. That is great for efficiency, but constituents have complained to me that the signage is inadequate, the prices are too steep and the period to pay is not long enough. Certainly, the fines for those who do not pay within that short period are punishing. Manchester airport, through APCOA, levies a £100 fine if the charge is not paid within 24 hours of drop-off or pick-up.

I simply do not believe that 24 hours is a long enough period for many people, including my constituents who have written to me on this issue. Many did not realise that they had to pay, not having seen the signage, which is inadequate. Some struggled with the online payment system, or the payment system rejected their car registration number. In one particularly egregious case, a constituent of mine was fined because their bank did not process the payment over a Sunday. There seems to be no reason why the payment period could not be increased and I do not see any reason why the third-party provider could not issue a written notice of the requirement to pay before a fine is levied. One gets the impression in these cases that the policy is designed to cause people to incur fines to increase revenue, rather than to encourage people to pay for parking in an orderly and appropriate way.

[Chris Vince]

The idea of drop-off fines is to try to convince people to travel to airports via other means. My airport, Stansted, is very accessible by train and new bus routes have been put on, but in the example given by my hon. Friend the Member for North West Leicestershire (Amanda Hack)—we have discussed this before—that option is not available. It seems unfair, if there are not good transport links to an airport, that such charges exist. As I say, in my case it is not such an issue, but in my hon. Friend’s case I can see why it is a problem.

[Tim Roca]

I completely agree with my hon. Friend. Earlier in the debate, my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) made the powerful point that his constituents live within 10 miles of the airport but do not have decent public transport links to it. That certainly has to be a part of the conversation as well.

[Alison Taylor]

Does my hon. Friend agree that if there are to be drop-off charges, then at the very least they should be increased only in line with inflation? At Glasgow airport, the increases since 2019 have way outstripped the cost of living and the normal rate of increases in line with inflation.

[Tim Roca]

I totally agree with my hon. Friend. Every day is a school day in this place and I was not aware that Glasgow airport did not have a direct rail link to the centre of Glasgow, one of the UK’s most important cities. One might think, after however many aeons the SNP has been in charge in Scotland, that it might have seen that as a priority, but that is not for me say.

In conclusion, this is a very practical and pragmatic Bill, which I thoroughly welcome. I thank Ministers for all their hard work and I hope it progresses smoothly through its further stages.

Roadworks: Cheshire

Tim Roca Excerpts

Wednesday 21st May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the impact of roadworks on communities in Cheshire.

It is a privilege to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I am grateful to you and to the House for granting me this opportunity at short notice. I particularly thank the Minister for being here as well; I know that she has an incredibly busy schedule as well as a terrible inheritance from the previous Government, which she is trying to fix.

In my constituency of Macclesfield and elsewhere in Cheshire, we rely on our road network day in, day out, and it should be stable, dependable and free flowing. Over the past year, that network has become a source of constant frustration: what should be routine journeys have turned into a daily ordeal and a monotonous misery. Week in and week out, I find myself fighting to get basic roadworks resolved. I cannot quite believe that one year on in one place and six months on in another, the works are still unresolved—one year of disruption, one year of misery. That is what brings me here today. The two specific cases I want to highlight are the closure of the B5470 in Rainow and the traffic lights at the A523 Mill House bridge in Adlington.

The Mill House bridge sits on the A523, which is the main road in and out of Macclesfield. It is regularly used by people heading to Manchester, Poynton, Adlington and the north—or pretty much anywhere, including Leek and Stoke to the south. The importance of that road simply cannot be overstated to residents across swathes of Cheshire. A full year ago, part of the bridge collapsed, meaning that two-way traffic was unsafe. The council acted properly, putting in place temporary traffic lights to restrict the flow of traffic to one lane at a time.

Since then, to be frank, insufficient progress has been made by Ringway Jacobs, the main contractor for the council. When it comes to the delays, it has talked about the complexity of a nearby gas main and confusion over who is responsible for part of the repair. But the delays are simply unacceptable. In January, works beneath the bridge finally began, after much urging from me, but that was eight months after the traffic lights had been installed. Those works are scheduled to be completed in early summer, which basically begins next week.

I probably do not need to tell you, Sir Desmond, that confidence among my constituents that the issue will be resolved in a few weeks’ time is very low because too little has happened too slowly and with insufficient communication. Expected completion dates keep getting pushed back and back with no accountability, sincere apology or explanation.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Back home, we have had the very problems that the hon. Gentleman refers to, but those doing the roadworks have found a different way of responding to exceptional circumstances. The Sydenham bypass in east Belfast in Northern Ireland is a main thoroughfare for traffic. It was closed down for the Saturday and Sunday and contractors worked solidly for those 48 hours to get the work done. It was then reopened on the Monday morning so that the commuter traffic could continue. In my constituency of Strangford, the Portaferry road was closed from 7 pm to 7 am so that all the work could be done at night; the next morning, the traffic was able to go about its business. I mention that by way of being helpful to the hon. Gentleman. Is that something that the road service in his constituency has considered?

[Tim Roca]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising the point. Constituents mention the issue of night time works to me, but perhaps I will let the Minister comment on that in a little more detail. In Cheshire, we are really lucky to be on the fast track for devolution, which is opposed by local Conservatives. Hopefully, when we get more powers and more money from central Government, we will be able to consider such things in Cheshire ourselves.

There has been too little regard for how these roadworks are impacting the public. I have a work experience student in my constituency office from my old school in Poynton, and she says that her mum describes the traffic lights on the bridge as the “bane of her life.” Traffic routinely backs up all the way to Poynton during rush hour, impacting travel in the north of the constituency. One Poynton resident complained to me that trips to Macclesfield, usually a 10-minute drive, can sometimes take up to an hour. An employee of AstraZeneca who commutes in says that every day they see large tailbacks of traffic with frustrated motorists, and all the while nobody is seen to be working on the bridge.

Another Poynton resident who works in Macc has had to add 20 minutes on to his journey both ways. He says that the queues start from 7.30 in the morning and are not gone until 9.30, so they are not even possible to avoid with flexible working. Forty minutes a day, 200 minutes a week, equals over 10,000 minutes of him sitting in a traffic jam this year. That is 166 hours away from his family before he can relax—or, heaven forbid, go out for the evening. That is 10,000 minutes per person every day—and it is going up—until the bridge is safe and the traffic lights are removed.

Although work sometimes takes place under the bridge out of sight from passers-by, the reality is that no matter how much progress is being made and however earnest the attempts to fix the bridge, this saga has lasted a year. Very little, if anything, took place prior to January and I have had to get increasingly involved with Ringway Jacobs and the highways team at the council. All that is simply not on. Everyone involved owes the residents across Macclesfield’s communities an apology. United Utilities gives compensation to residents if they lose their gas, electricity or internet, even for short periods. Would Ringway Jacobs even be solvent if it had to pay compensation to every driver who has experienced delays?

The disruption caused by the traffic lights at Mill House Bridge pales in comparison with the horror that is the B5470. This saga started with temporary traffic lights due to the embankment structure falling away on part of the road; they were in place, causing disruption, for a few months. In January, the difficult and necessary decision was taken to close the road between Rainow and Kettleshulme after it suffered a much larger collapse of both the carriageway and the supporting embankment following heavy rainfall. The road has been fully closed since January, and I have met with the council multiple times since the closure. I have spoken to the leader and conveyed my absolute demand, on behalf of my constituents, that the road is reopened as soon as possible, because the disruption and the impact on them is profound.

[Jon Pearce (High Peak) (Lab)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I am extremely grateful to my hon. Friend for securing this debate. The issue is having a huge impact on my constituency of High Peak. The closure of the B5470 in my hon. Friend’s constituency has made the morning drive for many of my constituents living in Whaley Bridge and Furness Vale a nightmare, with some estimating that it has added an hour on to their daily commute. Does my hon. Friend agree that enough is enough, and that Cheshire East council need to resolve this issue? We have been waiting for far too long and it is having a huge impact on our constituents’ lives. It is affecting jobs, and we really need a resolution sooner rather than later.

[Tim Roca]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. This needs to be resolved as quickly as possible. It is affecting my constituents and his. He has also been working tirelessly to get that road reopened; I thank him for working with me on that.

The road closure is impacting real people’s lives. The chair of governors at Kettleshulme primary school told me months ago that the June completion date was totally unacceptable. They said:

“We have families who utilise this route who will struggle with timely drop off and pick up of their children. Delivery of our curriculum is now compromised. The bus journey to Bollington for swimming lessons will take over an hour.”

As a result, the school has had to cancel swimming lessons. It has also had to cancel its parents and tots sessions, as the facilitator lives in Macclesfield and can no longer get to the school on time. It has pulled out of sporting events. Any collaboration with schools, which used to be easy to organise, now requires a minimum 40-minute trip and a whole host of planning. More seriously, the school has had to stop advertising places to families in Macclesfield because it knows that no parent will sign up for an 80-minute round trip to drop off their children, even at a really good school.

A company in Rainow has staff who cannot get to work because of bus cancellations. Not everyone has a car, or the time, to work their way around the road closure. One constituent said to me:

“To get to Macclesfield we have to make a huge detour via Bakestonedale Road to Pott Shrigley, then through Bollington to join the A523. We cannot use our bus passes to get to Macclesfield as the bus route is basically severed in two.”

Another, who has commuted to Sheffield every day for six years, said:

“This road closure is significantly extending what’s already a complex drive.”

They also noted that heavy goods vehicles are being forced on to narrow and unsuitable roads.

The diversion is not a suitable long-term plan. Bakestonedale Road is a single lane in places, with a steep and narrow track. It is really not suitable, especially in the winter months. It has already deteriorated, with huge potholes forming. Alicia—the head at Kettleshulme—hit one of those potholes recently and, having no phone signal, was forced to walk the rest of the way to school.

The diversion is also having an impact on those who live on the roads that are now seeing above-normal use. Keith Nixon, a resident on Shrigley Road, told me that as a direct result of the closure, commuters become frustrated and attempt to make up for lost time. Residents see cars travelling at well over the speed limit; he has suffered near misses twice, with vans passing within inches of him on the pavement outside his house; and of course, there are issues with noise as well.

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

I do not live in Cheshire, but in Staffordshire—a neighbouring county—we have been plagued by roadworks in a similar vein. The Parkside roadworks have been taking place for over 18 months now, with repeated extensions to deadlines. On the point of road safety, we have parents who are not able to get their children to school safely because the roadworks are not putting in proper crossings for those children. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is imperative that when these essential roadworks are taking place, communication from local authorities and county councils is improved, and that residents’ experiences are prioritised when we think about safety?

[Tim Roca]

I agree with my hon. Friend. She is more than welcome to move to Cheshire, but I suspect her residents will not let her, because I know she is a really good champion for these issues in her constituency.

The impact of the closure is widespread. The consequences of the disruption are wear and tear on roads that are not meant to be main arterial routes; the increased emissions from sitting traffic; and the loss of time in school and with family, of time in town with friends, of productivity through decreased trading, or of time spent caring for loved ones. I could go on and on—certainly, my inbox is full of stories like these.

Before I wrap up, I want to spare a thought for one constituent who represents many others who have to navigate both of these disruptions every day. She lives in Disley and works in Tytherington—both in my constituency—which means she has to go around this closure and over the Mill House bridge, which I mentioned at the beginning of my speech. Like others, she is being hit by a double whammy of roadworks. Her 20-minute commute has doubled, and given that she drops her child off in Macclesfield three days a week at set times, she has had to remove the first appointment of her day from her diary. She is a physio, so she is losing money.

When the things we rely on every day go wrong, the impact is huge. That is why I have been working closely with the council, feeding back these stories. I am grateful for the new sense of urgency that the highways team has—particularly since last week, when I called this debate—and I appreciate that things have to be made safe. In fairness to the council, it inherited a £100 million backlog of highway maintenance from the previous Conservative council, and we know that the austerity of the past 14 years has really impacted councils. I also appreciate that the contractor, Ringway Jacobs, used to get away with marking its own homework under a 15-year contract that was given to it recklessly by the Conservatives. However, these roadworks need to close. We need real progress for my constituents, and I am grateful that the Minister is present and will take the time to respond to the debate.

Cost of Rail Fares

Tim Roca Excerpts

Thursday 10th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster) on securing this debate on rail fares, and all Members who have made contributions this evening.

For the past 200 years, our railways have been at the heart of our transport network. During that time, they have played an essential role in enabling people to travel across our country, visit their loved ones and seize economic opportunities. This Government are committed to getting our railways back on track, which is why we are already delivering major reforms to fix our country’s broken rail network, in the context of a challenging fiscal inheritance. They include the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill, which will potentially save taxpayers up to £150 million every year in fees alone once all franchises are in public ownership.

Reform and public ownership are essential to delivering further fares reform. The current system is fragmented, with train operators that take no revenue risk making decisions on aspects of fares and ticketing. That is hampering the Government’s ability to make the fares system fit for purpose. Public ownership will allow a joined-up approach to be taken across the network.

[Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)]

In Macclesfield we have the pleasure of being served by both Avanti and Northern trains, unfortunately. The previous Conservative Government handed Avanti yet another franchise, despite its being one of the least reliable operators in the previous year. Does my hon. Friend agree that our plans for Great British Rail will not only improve reliability but ensure that rather than profits being repatriated to Italy, they are used for the public good here at home?

[Simon Lightwood]

I agree, and I can assure my hon. Friend that in the very first week, when the Secretary of State took office, she summoned a number of companies to her office to hold them to account. They will be held to account, and we are determined to see improvements.

Fares revenue is crucial to funding day-to-day railway operations, as well as Government priorities to put passengers first and improve performance on the railway. However, I recognise the serious concern that consumers have about the cost of rail fares. The affordability of the railway is a key objective for this Government, making sure that, wherever possible, prices are kept at a point that works for both passengers and taxpayers. A rise in rail fares can affect the family budgets of working people, including commuters between Woking and London.

Rail fares have always been an emotive subject, and rises in fares are often contentious. In that context, it is vital that passengers know that they are getting value for money. That is why this Government are committed to reviewing the overly complicated fares system with a view to simplifying it. The regulation surrounding the fares system is rooted in the privatisation of the 1990s, so there will be many opportunities to modernise the fares system as we move towards establishing Great British Railways and bringing forward the legislation needed to take on fares, ticketing and other operational aspects of the railway.

However, there is progress we can make now in improving fares and ticketing. We are progressing the expansion of simpler, easier and more flexible pay-as-you-go ticketing across the south-east. Along with simplified ticketing, pay as you go with contactless offers passengers a best price guarantee on the day. For most passengers, it will always provide them with the best price for a single day’s travel. We are also considering how simplifying long-distance fares can unlock better-value opportunities for passengers, as well as smoothing demand to make the best use of capacity while minimising crowding.