Transport in the South-East

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller) for securing this important debate. It was really interesting to hear her mention the M25/A3 junction 10, which is in my constituency. It has taken many years and has caused all sorts of challenges to my residents. As it comes close to completion, it is good to hear from colleagues—it is amazing how many MPs are interested in that project—and regular users about the difference that the upgrades are making. I hope it will show the potential for major long-term infrastructure improvements, but the learning points must be taken, because we need to recognise the disruption caused to residents and the significant financial problems caused to local businesses and the Royal Horticultural Society.

There are many issues in my constituency that I could raise, but I want to focus on Guildford town, which demonstrates the enormous opportunity and the significant strain facing transport networks across the south-east. Guildford is a thriving economic hub. It is home to a world-class university, a rapidly expanding research park, a major regional hospital and a highly productive local economy that continues to attract talent and investment, but that success has created real and growing pressure on our local infrastructure. Road usage is exceptionally high, and congestion continues to worsen. Some residents tell me that it takes them an hour and a half to travel the hundreds of metres between the research park and the hospital junction. Too many feel that, despite the congestion, they have no real alternative to relying on their car.

We have dual pressures. We have the strategically important A3 and A31—I imagine many Members have travelled down that major artery—and the concentration of employment, education and housing growth has not been matched by increasing public transport capacity. That is not just a local complaint or anecdote; the challenge is recognised at a national level. The Wessex Corridor study, commissioned by Network Rail, explicitly identifies the corridor between Reading, Guildford and the wider south-east as experiencing rising demand, constrained capacity and major unrealised potential. The study makes it clear that without targeted intervention, housing growth, employment expansion and limited rail capacity will lead to worsening congestion, increased car dependency—which we absolutely do not want—and a missed opportunity to shift journeys on to sustainable modes of transport.

That brings me to the long-standing case for Guildford West railway station, which would serve the research park, the Royal Surrey, the University of Surrey and the surrounding communities. The community has been waiting for it for well over a decade. It would demonstrably have an enormous impact on congestion, access to important services and our local economy, and it would make an environmental difference by shifting everyday travel patterns away from car dependency and towards sustainable transport.

I am committed to getting an answer on the scheme for local people and businesses. Just last week, I was pleased to bring together key delivery partners, including Guildford borough council, Network Rail and South Western Railway, to discuss the viability and next steps. Despite the overwhelming case for Guildford West station, delivery remains painfully difficult. Network Rail does not fund new stations, Department for Transport funding has become more restrictive and, although the Government have set ambitious housing targets, there is no dedicated centralised funding pot to deliver the transport infrastructure required to support the homes we are building. Local government finances are stretched to breaking point, and councils are being asked to plan for growth without the funding or power to deliver the infrastructure that it demands. No matter how much local need or enthusiasm there is, there is simply not enough money to deliver the projects that are needed.

Of course, we must remember that sustainable transport is not just about rail. Too many residents are forced to drive simply to reach the station because bus services, ticketing systems, cycle routes and secure bike storage remain fragmented or inadequate. We should also remember the disproportionate impact on disabled people, low-income residents, students and young people—anyone without access to a car.

I close by asking the Minister a couple of questions. What are the Government going to do to support communities such as Guildford that have been formally identified as critical growth corridors? Why is there no centralised funding mechanism to link mandated housing growth with the transport infrastructure needed to sustain it? How can areas like Surrey realistically unlock growth without clarity on governance, funding or long-term support? My Guildford constituency has great opportunity, but it needs Government help to unlock transport projects to support economic and community growth. I hope the Minister has heard my comments, and those of colleagues, and will respond positively to this request.

Oral Answers to Questions

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Tuesday 8th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[James Murray]

At the autumn Budget last year, the Chancellor announced a series of reforms to fix the public finances in as fair a way as possible, and make sure that the wealthiest in society pay their share of tax. The welfare reforms announced in the spring statement are principled reforms to help get people back into work, because work is the best way out of poverty. The reforms also provide support for those who need it and make sure that the system is sustainable for the future.

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

Earlier this year, I spoke to members of my local Christians Against Poverty debt support team in Guildford, and they explained to me that they support many low-income individuals out of debt, but they are no sooner out of debt than they start accruing it again, because universal credit is insufficient to cover their basic needs due to the cost of living in areas such as Guildford. What work has the Minister done to assess whether universal credit levels are sufficient to cover the varied and increasing basic living costs across the country, and to prevent people on the lowest incomes from getting further into difficulty and debt?

[James Murray]

The Government have already taken action on the fair repayment rate, lowering the cap on deductions from universal credit to 15%—it was 25% before the autumn Budget last year. That will benefit 1.2 million households by an average of £420 a year, and 700,000 of the poorest families with children will benefit.

Christmas Adjournment

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

I will use my time in this debate to raise an issue that we have heard so much about over the last six months: the crisis in special educational needs. Two weeks ago, I had the privilege of visiting a coffee morning held by Family Voice in my constituency of Guildford. I was honoured to hear some stories from a group of mums who shared their experiences relating to their children’s journeys, and trying to get support for those young people. Every single one of them stressed to me how challenging those journeys have been, with emails going unanswered; caseworkers who go on holiday and never come back; months—sometimes years—of their children not being able to attend education; thousands of pounds spent on private assessments to get the support that their children need, or appealing decisions made by the local authority; and fighting every day to be heard, and the exhaustion that that brings.

The thing that distressed me most was the moment when one mum shared that, as a result of the whole process, she had considered suicide. Then another mum said the same thing. How are we in a position that the process that is designed to support and provide for young people is creating so much distress that families are at breaking point and even considering ending their own lives? I am deeply grateful to Education Ministers for making it very clear that the Government are committed to addressing the SEND crisis, and I hope to be able to work with the Government to address it in 2025.

I will tell the House two very quick stories to emphasise how desperately the situation needs to change. The first is that of a 17-year-old woman in my constituency who has been out of school for five and a half years. She was not able to do her GCSEs. She was given a placement in October at a place where she has thrived. She has said herself that she has felt seen and has found her community, but that placement has not yet been renewed by the local authority. She has been failed, and the hope that was there has potentially been ripped away.

The second story is that of a nine-year-old boy with autism and pathological demand avoidance. The local authority, Surrey, sent him to an independent school in 2022 to provide for his needs. That school has now said that it cannot provide for those needs. It has removed his placement and said that it will not hold the place while his family try to find a school. I find that deeply unacceptable. They are apparently not the only family who has experienced that off-rolling, but Surrey says that the families have elected to home-school. Will the Minister ask a colleague to meet me to discuss the practice of off-rolling, which I am sure is happening not just in my own constituency?

I reiterate that so many of us will have received deeply distressing emails seeking support from our residents. These are the people who are able to advocate for themselves. How many families are unable, for various reasons, to advocate for themselves? As we try to fix the SEND crisis, we must remember that we do so not just for the families we hear from every day in our inboxes. At the moment, I have nearly 50 separate cases, but we are also seeking to fix the crisis for those families we do not know about. I hope that we will be able to work across the House in 2025 to fix this crisis, because we cannot and must not continue to allow our children to be failed.

VAT: Independent Schools

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Tuesday 8th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Munira Wilson]

I point out for a start that when the Liberal Democrats were in government, school budgets increased in real terms, and we introduced the pupil premium to help the most disadvantaged children. When the Tories were left to their own devices, they slashed budgets, and the pupil premium has been devalued over the years.

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

I just want to return briefly to the topic of EHCPs. We all know that there is a crisis in special educational needs. In my own constituency, a quarter of pupils attend an independent school. At least 700 or more students do not have an EHCP. Those parents who are paying for places at private schools desperately want to get support for their children. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is crucial, if the Government insist on pursuing an ill thought-through policy that impacts on children with special educational needs, that all children with diagnosed educational needs—with or without an EHCP—and those eligible for disability allowance should be exempt from that VAT?

[Munira Wilson]

I would rather the Government do not go through with this policy at all and drop it, but if they insist on pressing ahead with it, all children with special educational needs, whether or not they are on the SEND register—they can be identified in other ways—should be exempted.

I will share a story from a constituent who contacted me recently. They have two children, both of whom have complex learning needs and have struggled to thrive in their local state school. After moving to a private school that was better able to support them, they are finally making progress and most importantly, to quote the parent, they

“don’t feel like they are failing”.

The children’s family has made huge financial sacrifices to give them this education, including remortgaging their home and cashing in pension plans. As this policy is set to be introduced in the middle of the school year, this family and thousands of others have little time to prepare or save. It will be disruptive for children who have already suffered enough disruption to their education in recent years. This parent who contacted me told me:

“We are terrified of the prospect of having to uproot our children for a second time because we can’t see a way to afford this rise.”

Labour’s rushed-through and ill thought-through plans will snatch opportunities away from thousands of children just like my constituents.