Westminster Hall

Thursday 22nd January 2026 Westminster Hall

Thursday 22 January 2026

[Gill Furniss in the Chair]

Backbench Business

Thursday 22nd January 2026 Westminster Hall

Transport Connectivity: Midlands and North Wales

Thursday 22nd January 2026 Westminster Hall

13:30

[Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered transport connectivity in the Midlands and North Wales.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss, and to open this debate on a subject that goes to the heart of economic opportunity, social mobility and quality of life.

Connectivity determines whether people can easily get to work, get to school and get out and about. For communities such as mine in Aldridge-Brownhills, the state of our transport links will decide whether young people can access opportunities and whether businesses can grow. Reliable transport and good connectivity are not nice-to-have extras; they are fundamental to how well off and connected our region is. Right now, we must do so much better. Today, I will focus on three areas where I believe ambition has been promised but delivery is falling short: buses, rail infrastructure and our roads.

For many people, buses are the only form of public transport available, not least in my constituency, which still does not have a single railway station. Bus fares matter, particularly for young people. If we are serious about opportunity, we cannot price young people off the network. Other regions have recognised that and acted. In Tees Valley, the Conservative mayor, Ben Houchen, introduced a £1 bus fare for everyone aged 21 and under, and it has been a clear success. It has boosted ridership and helped young people get to work, college and their apprenticeships. Wales has followed suit by rolling out £1 single fares for 16 to 21-year-olds across the country, and there are plans to extend the scheme further.

My constituents are left asking a simple question: why not the Mayor of the West Midlands? Our Labour mayor so often talks about fairness and inclusion, yet young people in our region continue to face some of the highest bus fares in the country. While other areas are cutting fares to widen opportunity, young people in my constituency are still paying full price to get to work or education.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

Does the right hon. Lady agree that the issue is not just fares but routes? Derbyshire had a 60% loss of bus routes in the 15 years up to 2023. Would she say that it is hugely disappointing that for such a long time, most of which was under her party’s Government, bus routes have been slashed?

[Wendy Morton]

What I would say is that, although I am not an expert on Derbyshire bus routes, I absolutely recognise the importance of good connectivity. In the west midlands, constituents regularly ask me, “Why has this bus route changed?” or, “Why has that bus route changed?” So it absolutely matters to our constituents.

On connectivity, the lack of fairness for young people is not inevitable. We have seen that targeted youth fares can work, but what is sadly missing in the west midlands is not evidence but political will. If fairness and inclusion really are priorities, a west midlands youth bus fare scheme should be delivered quickly.

Alongside that, our mayor has promised a transformation of the bus network through franchising. In principle, greater local control can offer integrated routes, reasonable fares and improved standards, but the mayor needs to be honest with us about the timetable and the cost. Franchising will not deliver meaningful change for many years, and the funding currently allocated is a fraction of what will ultimately be required to deliver the scheme. Greater Manchester’s experience shows that franchising takes times and significant investment.

In the meantime, our bus services remain unreliable and under-resourced. Once again, passengers are promised jam tomorrow. Transport users need buses that turn up and fares that they can afford, not more empty words.

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

The right hon. Lady represents one part of the west midlands; I represent another part—the last seat in Staffordshire, which is on the Cheshire border. Many of the challenges that my constituents in Madeley, Audley, Wolstanton and Clayton have raised with me are related to the role that private companies, like D&G Bus and First Bus, play in delivering the bad or unreliable services to which she refers. Is it not the case that, as well as political will, we need those bus companies to step up and deliver?

[Wendy Morton]

I absolutely agree; there needs to be a wide approach to make this happen. I know from casework that we sometimes need to write to companies and ask them what is happening with a specific bus service. I just want a better bus service for my constituents, so that they can get to work or education. I remember growing up in a rural area—it was not in the west midlands—where we had one bus service a week. Young people in particular need access to good transport.

Going back to the issue of franchising, there is a long-term ambition, but interim action is essential. That means supporting new routes and the routes that we have now. Improving reliability is so important, as is addressing fares. We cannot pin all our hopes on reforms that are a decade away while services deteriorate in the present. The gap between promise and delivery regarding our buses must be closed as a matter of urgency.

That gap is even more stark when we turn to rail. The midlands rail hub is the single most important rail project for our region—

[Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)]

Hear, hear.

[Wendy Morton]

We agree on many things—alongside Aldridge train station, of course. The midlands rail hub would unlock capacity, allow more frequent services, and make new and reopened stations viable. However, when I ask Ministers whether the scheme is fully funded, the answer is always the same: £123 million has been allocated, not to deliver the project but merely to progress the next phase of development. The remainder, which is an estimated £1.75 billion, is still described as being

“subject to future funding decisions.”

We were told that the midlands rail hub would be delivered in full. The previous Conservative Government committed £1.75 billion in the 2023 Network North plan to deliver it. That funding has since been pulled by the Labour Government, leaving the full delivery of the project in limbo. I would be happy if the Minister could provide, in his response to this debate, the clarity that this project is fully funded to delivery, because it is critical to making sure that the west midlands, and the greater part of the region, keeps on moving, and we have that much-improved connectivity that enables new routes to be opened up and greater passenger capacity. The Government now talk about Northern Powerhouse Rail, but without the midlands rail hub there will be no midlands engine to power it. We need both, and we need them to be delivered.

There is the same uncertainty when Ministers are asked about passenger services on the Sutton Park line, which remains freight-only. Any future passenger use is said to depend on additional capacity, which is the very capacity that the midlands rail hub was meant to provide. There is no timetable, no commitment, and sadly no plan. This is policy paralysis; infrastructure is not funded and then a lack of infrastructure is used as the reason why nothing can progress. The midlands rail hub either will or will not be built, but indefinite reviews and partial funding help no one, least of all residents in my constituency and across the west midlands, and our local businesses.

That brings me to Aldridge train station. It will come as no surprise to the Minister that I am raising this. Why? Because it matters. Aldridge is a major settlement of some 25,000 people, but it has been without a passenger railway station for decades, despite clear demand and a growing population. Under the previous Mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, funding was identified, land was secured, and the project was moving towards delivery. Local people were given a timeline and told that a new station was coming. Then priorities changed. A review happened. Funding was redirected. The project was placed under review and Aldridge train station was pushed into the long grass—some might say, into the sidings. It did not fail a business case; it fell victim to political decisions, with the Government allowing the secured funding for the station to be moved to pet projects of the Labour Mayor of the West Midlands.

Rest assured, I will continue to raise this issue at every opportunity, as the Leader of the House is all too aware from Thursday business questions, because it matters. When pressed on rail expansion in the north and east of the west midlands, the answer is always the same—future funding, future capacity, under review. Aldridge is told to wait. Sutton Park is told to wait. But my constituents have waited for long enough.

I want to highlight the importance of open-access operators. Services such as the proposed Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway could bring new connectivity and competition, with trains running along the Sutton Park line through Aldridge—but because Aldridge still has no station, those trains will pass straight through. Open access has a role to play, but only if the infrastructure is delivered. Supporting open access must go hand in hand with delivering projects such as Aldridge station. I am hugely supportive of this project, but it must stop in Aldridge.

I have focused on public transport, but roads are equally critical. In Aldridge-Brownhills, our roads remain very much the backbone of local travel. Here too, our development needs are racing ahead of infrastructure. Large-scale housing proposals—another topic I regularly raise in this House—on green-belt land around Stonnall Road and Bosty Lane would add hundreds of new homes without the road upgrades needed to support them. Those roads already feed into Chester Road, which is sadly an accident blackspot, with a tragic history of serious injuries and fatalities.

[Dave Robertson]

The right hon. Member and I have both done some work on Chester Road—a place where one of my constituents lost their life a number of years ago. Is the right hon. Member able to update us on any conversations she has had with Walsall council about that area? I, and my constituents, would greatly appreciate that.

[Wendy Morton]

As the hon. Gentleman rightly indicates, this is an issue where we share an interest. He can rest assured that I do and will continue to raise it with Walsall council. It really does matter. I know the case that he refers to. What happened was a tragedy.

Local campaigners such as SCAR—Stonnall Campaign About Roads—have long called for action. I pay tribute to some of our local road safety campaigners—Jayne Preston, who will love having a mention in this place, even though it is in sad circumstances; and also Colin Roberts. They have done tremendous work and continue to raise the issue of road safety and that of the victims as well. Let me also take the opportunity to acknowledge the charity RoadPeace, a national charity for road crash victims, with which I have worked locally. For more than three decades, the charity supported bereaved families and campaigned for safer roads. Its recent closure as a charity is deeply saddening. It should remind us all of the human cost of what happens when we get road safety wrong.

While I welcome some recent funding for safety measures on Chester Road near this particular blackspot, residents are rightly asking where the wider plan is. We cannot add hundreds of homes without first investing in the roads and the junctions that residents rely on every day, even before any more homes are built. This will be development without infrastructure. If housing targets are imposed, which is very much what is happening in the west midlands in my area, infrastructure funding must be part of it. Roads, junctions, traffic management and public transport links must come before houses are occupied, not years afterwards.

The midlands and north Wales do not need more warm words or long-term plans that never quite materialise. We need transport that works at a price that people can afford. Across buses, rail and road, the pattern is the same: ambition without delivery; young people priced off the buses; rail schemes left half funded; towns told to wait; housing built without infrastructure. Things do not have to be this way. We know what works, but what is missing is action and delivery. I gently say to the Minister that if the Government want people to believe in their plans for growth, they must start matching ambition with delivery.

Our region is ready to play its part, but it cannot do so with stalled projects and permanent delay. Our communities have waited long enough. It is time to stop reviewing and deferring, and to start delivering the transport that actually works. I genuinely look forward to hearing from the Minister about how he intends to make this happen. I will happily meet with him to discuss Aldridge station, to see what more we can do to ensure that the Mayor of the West Midlands understands why this matters, why I keep banging on about it, and why I will keep doing so until it is delivered.

13:46

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak with you in the Chair, Ms Furniss. I will focus most of my speech on Rugeley Trent Valley station, which is of interest to my constituents, particularly those in Rugeley and Brereton, even though it is technically just over the border in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson)—a neighbour constituency-wise and in the Chamber today.

As we know, transport connectivity does not stop at constituency or council boundaries, and neither does the impact of stations where the facilities are not adequate for everybody. Rugeley Trent Valley is a striking example. The station has three platforms, yet only platform 3, serving trains towards Lichfield and London, is step-free. Platforms 1 and 2, serving far-distant locations like Birmingham, Stafford and Crewe, can be reached only via a steep footbridge. In practice, wheelchair users, parents with prams, older people and those with limited mobility are effectively barred from using two thirds of the station. With the delays that often characterise Avanti West Coast services and short connection times, running across from one platform to the next is simply not an option for many of my constituents.

Let me give some real-life, human examples. One constituent in her 80s told me that she can no longer visit her family because she cannot carry a suitcase up and down the steep staircases safely. That highlights how the barriers are not limited to wheelchair users. Another constituent recounted travelling with a friend who has serious mobility issues from the waist down. He arrived at the station to discover that the only way for him to catch their connecting train was to physically haul himself up and down the stairs. Station staff did what they could, but goodwill alone cannot overcome infrastructure that excludes so many people in our communities.

People are desperate to make journeys for work, healthcare, or family reasons, and they will often attempt unsafe routes if no accessible alternatives exist. While the British Transport police and station operators do what they can to manage risks, long detours or temporary measures are no substitute for basic dignity and safety.

Using the database of the Office of Rail and Road, I noticed that more than 200,000 people exited and entered Rugeley Trent Valley station in 2024-25. A constituent highlighted that other stations on the network, even ones with fairly similar footfall or electrified lines, such as Kidsgrove station near Stoke-on-Trent, have been upgraded with lifts, waiting rooms, and toilets. Clearly, it is not a question of engineering impossibility, but of prioritisation.

West Midlands Trains and London Northwestern Railway have told me that they fully support installing lifts at Rugeley Trent Valley. They acknowledge the station’s accessibility issues and the impact on passengers, but as many hon. Members will know, major upgrades such as this fall under Network Rail’s Access for All programme, which is always heavily oversubscribed. Over 2,500 stations in the country require upgrades, and Network Rail applies strict criteria, prioritising stations by passenger numbers and the proximity of the next accessible station. For Rugeley, nearby stations such as Stafford or Lichfield Trent Valley score higher under that system.

Although Rugeley has been discussed and even shortlisted in the past, the next allocation of funding is still several years away. In the meantime passengers are offered so-called mitigations, such as being carried to the next accessible station and sent back again or provided with discretionary road transport. For many of my constituents those are simply not viable or dignified solutions. They are workarounds for systemic failure, showing exactly what regional inequality looks like, with smaller towns often having to wait endlessly at the back of the queue while people with the greatest need are left to navigate shortcomings in the system.

[Dave Robertson]

My hon. Friend elucidates the problems that we face at Rugeley Trent Valley station. He is a doughty campaigner and it is a pleasure to work with him and to follow his lead. The issue affects not only his constituents but a number of mine as well. I want to go back to his remark that, “The next station is Lichfield Trent Valley.” Very few people in this room will have tried to do that journey, which is not simple. There is no direct road linking the two places. We have to go through Armitage in a circuitous route. Sometimes just looking at the distance between two stations is not sufficient; we have to look at travel times as well. The practicalities of being able to do that I feel are sometimes overlooked by the Access for All process. He was making an excellent point and I want to reinforce that.

[Josh Newbury]

I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting the plethora of issues we have at Rugeley Trent Valley, which are not restricted to the footbridge. Coming in and out of the station, travellers are met with a national speed limit rural road with very poor visibility from both sides, so the problems at the station are plentiful. Even though it provides a fantastic facility for people to be able to get to destinations as far away as London, it really is not set up very well to handle that level of traffic.

On a more positive note I would like to highlight progress on the midlands rail hub, which will strengthen connections across the west midlands and help more people to get around quicker and easier. I hope and expect that the rail hub will have a positive knock-on effect on the whole region, including on the Chase line that serves my constituency. The project is an example of how investment can make a tangible difference to everyday travel and I welcome the Government’s commitment to progressing the project and delivering improvements, as confirmed in the Budget.

It should also be said that the vast majority of public transport journeys in Cannock Chase are made on buses, and it is buses that often feature heavily in my postbag. I was immensely proud to serve on the Bill Committee for the Bus Services Act 2025 and to support legislation that begins to address the long-term decline in our bus services. Under the previous Government, not only were more than half of all routes in my constituency lost, but the frequency and reliability of services were eroded. I very much welcome the unshackling of councils when it comes to setting up publicly owned bus companies and seizing the opportunities to take back control of fares, routes and timetables, for which my constituents have been calling for many years.

The Act is on the statute book, so now the ball is in the court of Reform-led Staffordshire county council, which so far seems to be showing the same lack of interest in boosting bus routes and taking advantage of franchising as the previous Conservative administration. For residents in parts of my constituency that need reliable buses the most and yet do not live on a route at all, such as those in the Norton East area of Norton Canes, Slitting Mill and Etchinghill in Rugeley to name a few, action is urgently needed.

[Adam Jogee]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and county neighbour for giving way. I just want to give voice to the people in his constituency who he has just referred to, as well as people in Newcastle-under-Lyme and north Staffordshire. On that urgent need, I join him in urging the county council to get its act together and do so quickly.

[Josh Newbury]

I thank my colleague from Staffordshire for backing up my point. We all have examples in our constituencies of where powers are urgently needed and where they could make a massive difference if the council gets its act together, as my hon. Friend says, and gets on with it. He knows that rural parts of our constituencies are often the areas that are the worst served and therefore the most isolated.

My constituents see every day the impact of regional transport inequality, whether it is a bus that never comes or a platform that cannot be reached. I welcome the Government’s determination to put fairness and accessibility at the heart of transport policy, and I will continue to work constructively to ensure that Cannock Chase receives the investment it needs.

Looking ahead, I hope the Department for Transport ensures that accessibility is key to funding decisions, so that towns like mine do not continue to be left behind. I would also welcome clarity from the Minister on what short-term measures could be introduced while longer-term solutions are delivered, so that passengers are not forced to choose between safety and independence and making essential journeys. By working together I am confident that all residents in Cannock Chase and across the midlands can access a public transport network that is safe, reliable and inclusive.

13:54

[Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to take part in this debate with you in the Chair, Ms Furniss. I thank those who have already spoken.

I am here to talk about rail. I would love to talk about buses, but I do not think I will have time. Specifically, I would like to address the midlands rail hub, which the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) has already spoken about. The project was conceived under the previous Conservative Government, and I do not shy away from that. Unfortunately, it then sat on a shelf gathering dust, and there was no real movement on it until after the election, when this Labour Government came in.

[Wendy Morton]

I cannot resist. When we were in government, we committed to the midlands rail hub in the big Network North announcement made before the general election. We also committed the funding.

[Dave Robertson]

The right hon. Lady mentions the Network North money. It was a mythical project last seen leaving London, carried by Dick Whittington riding Shergar. The money simply did not exist. This Labour Government found the money for the project in the Budget, but it is not only the money. The alliance for delivery has already been appointed, and things are moving at pace. I very much hope to see spades in the ground this year, moving the project ahead, so that we can all start to benefit as soon as possible.

[Wendy Morton]

Can I come back quickly?

[Dave Robertson]

Yes, because it is you, Wendy.

[Wendy Morton]

Thanks very much. Again, on the point of funding, is the hon. Gentleman sure that his Government have fully committed all the moneys needed to deliver the midlands rail hub in full, not just one part of it?

[Dave Robertson]

The right hon. Lady drives at that point again, but what we are seeing is the difference between words from one side of this House and action from the other. We have seen that in large parts of my constituency over a number of years. However, I will now seek to make some progress rather than be sidetracked by the numerous failings of the previous Government.

The midlands rail hub is a huge boost to travel across our region. It will increase rail capacity in Birmingham, leading to 300 trains passing in and out of the nation’s second city every single day. The benefits will be felt across the east midlands, the west midlands and beyond, with extra services from the midlands to Wales forming part of the project.

For Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages in my constituency, the midlands rail hub will mean a doubling of the number of hourly trains on the cross-city line to Birmingham—the busiest commuter line in the country outside London. Services were slashed under the previous Government, and we need the midlands rail hub to get them back on a sustainable footing in the long term.

The rail hub is an important investment, but it cannot be the end of the story for the midlands. For far too long, there has been far too little investment in transport in our region and neighbouring regions. I am very aware that I am sitting next to an MP from the east midlands. London and the south-east enjoy a fantastic turn-up-and-go service that we in the midlands can only dream of. We are now seeing investment in the north with Northern Powerhouse Rail, and it is right that we have that rebalancing, but we cannot overlook the bit in between.

In my area, the next step is clear: the midlands rail hub. Following that, we need to look to reopen the Lichfield-Burton-Derby line—the South Staffordshire line—for passenger services. This existing train line already carries passengers; it just does not have stops. It is a diversion route that trains have to use, so drivers have maintained route knowledge. Previous scoping work for the project suggested it could deliver, at a minimum, a £7 million boost to our area’s economy.

The route would halve public transport journey times from Lichfield to Burton and cut journey times from Sutton Coldfield and Lichfield to Derby and Nottingham by up to a third. It would mean easier travel for work and leisure, and crucially, it would mean easy access from my constituency to the University of Derby. It would also take pressure off the heavily congested A38, which runs parallel to the railway. Reopening this line would open up the possibility of a new station in the village of Alrewas to serve the National Memorial Arboretum, which is a fantastic facility that I advise everybody to visit. Unfortunately, that is very difficult on public transport.

Our national centre for remembrance is shockingly underserved, and not only by train links. The only bus option from Tamworth is currently being rerouted on a miles-long detour because Chetwynd bridge, which crosses the River Tame next to the arboretum, is closed to heavy vehicles due to maintenance problems. Despite support for the project from my predecessor, the Conservatives never funded the business case for the South Staffordshire line. I want to see action on Chetwynd bridge and that business case coming forward, so that we can really start to drive improvement in rail connectivity not only within regions but between regions from the west midlands to the east midlands. The South Staffordshire line is a fantastic place to start on that.

13:59

[Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) for bringing forward this important debate on transport in the midlands—which is one of my favourite subjects, so I had to be here for it. I represent North West Leicestershire, so my focus will inevitably be on the east midlands.

My constituency is at the heart of the national forest, and East Midlands airport rests at the very top of it. However, in tune with other semi-rural constituencies, we have no passenger rail at all, and a pretty poor level of bus connectivity. As North West Leicestershire is also not in the East Midlands combined county authority, it will not directly benefit from the financial settlement allocated to the city regions, so I would welcome the Minister’s view on how the areas within the midlands that are not covered by devolution can get their fair share of transport connectivity.

Before I came to this place I sat on the highways and transport committee at Leicestershire county council. I know at first hand how poor transport funding has been under the last Conservative Government, including in Leicestershire, with 62% of services being cut in my constituency alone. As a county councillor, I lost count of the number of notifications of bus service changes I received, which included cuts. Bit by bit, those changes cut off public transport access to healthcare, college, work and leisure.

Through new funding, thanks to our Government and our clear commitment to public services, we can restore some of that, although it can be frustratingly difficult to liaise with our county colleagues to get the changes in services that our communities desperately need. It still feels disjointed and patchy, and I know the issue will not be solved overnight.

In 2023-24, the east midlands had the lowest transport spending per head of the population at just £368 per person, compared with the UK average spend of £687 and the London spend of £1,313. Between 2019 and 2024, research shows that the east midlands received £10.8 billion less in funding than it would if it had been allocated just at the average, not at the London level.

[Catherine Atkinson]

My hon. Friend is very effectively making an important point. As she has set out, between 2019 and 2024, the Conservative Government gave the east midlands a quarter of the funding that they gave to London and half of what they gave to England on average, and I know that her area does not benefit from the £2 billion that our brilliant East Midlands Mayor Claire has secured for transport. Does my hon. Friend agree that if our regional transport was more equal, it would create more prosperity, economic growth, social equality and regional development?

[Amanda Hack]

The economic benefit of effective and connected transport is there for us to see. Having never worked in London before, it always surprises me how easy it is to get to places—if a bus or train gets cancelled, it is fine, because there is one five minutes away. If a bus gets cancelled in my constituency, people need to get a taxi or they will not get home. That is the inequality that we see.

What does this issue mean in my constituency? Around 87.4% of households in North West Leicestershire have access to one car or van, compared with 61% in Manchester and 22% here in London. With the lack of available and reliable public transport, more people are forced to rely on personal transport, thereby increasing the volume of cars and vans on our roads. That also has a devastating impact.

Some 80% of east midlands commuters drive, and the average number of rail journeys per resident is just seven per year, which is half the rate of the west midlands and a third of the east of England. In fact, East Midlands airport has the highest proportion of travellers getting there by car, at 91%, which is mainly down to it having the lowest connectivity of all airports across the UK. We have to think about transport connectivity—railways, buses—and how we get to our airports.

North West Leicestershire has not had a passenger rail service since the Ivanhoe line closed there in the ’60s. My constituency relies heavily on buses, but I will say much more about the Ivanhoe line next week in a dedicated debate on the subject.

I have done a little research on how my constituents get to their nearest train station. From Coalville, the station is about 12 miles away, and it would take an hour on public transport to get to Loughborough or Leicester—far too long; it would be about 30 minutes by car. It would also take about an hour to get from Ashby-de-la-Zouch to Burton train station, but that would include more than one bus, which could be problematic for travellers, who are really reluctant to take multi-bus journeys because one of the buses might fail to come. Residents in Kegworth have the most convenient public transport journey to a train station—to Loughborough, which takes just 36 minutes. However, East Midlands Parkway train station is only a few minutes by car.

We are massively underserved as a result of this connection problem between rail and buses. The fact is that my constituents have to make ridiculous, non-efficient journeys just to get where they need to be. I would welcome the Minister’s view on how the difficulties of connecting communities are a real barrier to growth, as my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) mentioned in her intervention.

My constituents tell me that they are driving to get to the train station anyway, often in the wrong direction, so they might as well continue by car to their destination and avoid getting on the train altogether. That means more cars on our roads and more pressure on our road network.

Obviously, I have given simple examples, but I want to think about what the situation means for my constituents when they are trying to get to work, school or hospital. Accessible, efficient, reliable public transport should not be a luxury; it should not be a postcode lottery, but that is what it seems to be. When I meet young people across my constituency, they tell me that the public transport situation is a huge barrier to getting the training opportunities—the apprenticeships and classes—that they want and deserve.

Recently, a resident of Ashby-de-la-Zouch got in touch about their daughter’s problems in getting to college in Loughborough. I thought it would be useful to share their words:

“The number of buses are extremely limited and this results in her leaving the house at 06.30 am and not returning until 7 pm with several hours waiting in and around bus stops”

—for a girl of 16, that is not ideal.

“Secondly, the service has on multiple occasions failed to turn up and left her in Loughborough without a way of getting home other than hoping my wife or myself are able to pick her up.”

When a young person is trying their best to get their life on track, the very last thing we should be doing is putting additional hurdles in front of them. Yet for too many, transport—or the lack of it—becomes a deciding factor in whether they can engage in their chosen education at all.

If we get transport connectivity right, the impact on individuals, families and the long-term prosperity of our regions can be transformational. I cannot continue to accept a situation in which my constituency has an international airport yet has no passenger rail and such poor bus services.

[Gill Furniss (in the Chair)]

Order. I warn hon. Members that there may be a vote soon.

14:08

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) for securing this important debate.

Transport links are essential to our economy, tourism, trade and everyday life, but all too often they have been neglected. Up and down the country, people in businesses have been plagued by an inefficient, unreliable and unaffordable public transport system, which was completely neglected by the former Conservative Government. Now, as with many other areas of our creaking infrastructure, the public find themselves wondering when the change promised by the Labour Government will finally arrive, as if it were another heavily delayed train.

As we have heard at length today, too many rural communities remain effectively cut off from public transport. I grew up in Market Rasen in Lincolnshire, and I distinctly remember the frustration of simply trying to get to Lincoln—or beyond, to Newark or Nottingham—given the unpredictable and unreliable single-carriage trains that filled the air with thick, black diesel smoke.

Those challenges impacted the job opportunities of the people I grew up with and left our local economy—though beautiful and traditional in its own way—hanging off the edge of the rest of the east of England like a loose thread. It is startling that now, more years later than I care to admit, very little has changed. I am going to channel the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), and join his calls for improved services to Market Rasen, including a direct link to King’s Cross, which may well improve my home town’s connection to the rest of humanity.

We have already heard how suburban communities such as Smethwick and Solihull, Loughborough and Long Eaton have suffered for years with poor train and bus services. In fact, it could be said that suburban towns do not get the attention that they deserve in the wider debate about this issue. As someone who represents a suburban town on the outer bounds of London, I reassure Members present that the problems discussed today are not completely alien to those faced by commuters in Sutton. Having lived in rural Lincolnshire, lived and worked in Lichfield, Ilkeston and Nottingham, and travelled to Broughton in north Wales for years on the train and bus services, I have personally suffered the impacts of that lack of connectivity.

Improving people’s lives, however, is not just about grand plans for infrastructure—even though as an engineer and recovering transport planner, I do wish that all problems could be solved by it—it is also about delivery and real funding for those projects, coupled with good leadership and real results. That is why the Liberal Democrats welcome the Government’s announcement last week that they are backing the long-standing Lib Dem calls to finally deliver Northern Powerhouse Rail—a clear Lib Dem win if ever I saw one. The plan, following the completion of Northern Powerhouse Rail, to build a new rail link through the midlands from Birmingham to Manchester is also welcome.

[Dave Robertson]

It is always great to see the Liberal Democrats finding a south-east MP to come and talk about transport in the midlands and north Wales. The hon. Member mentioned the well-overdue news that the Government will be following through on the rail improvement projects and building north to south, rather than south to north—as they always should have done. I wonder if he would like to reflect on the fact that the areas that returned massive Labour majorities are now seeing the investment from a Labour Government, so is he absolutely certain that he wants to claim that as a Liberal Democrat win?

[Luke Taylor]

When we see the investment going in, the tracks being laid and the services turning up to stations, I think we will agree that that is a win for any Government. For too long, we have seen empty promises that have not been funded and have not arrived, so perhaps we should all pause our congratulations and backslapping until those projects finally materialise.

With just over £1 billion of funding allocated for those projects so far, however, we had hoped for something more concrete. Indeed, beyond the headline that up to £45 billion can be spent, the mere £1.1 billion commitment to spend another five years making a plan to make a plan to consult on a consultation is cold comfort to those whose dreams of a truly joined-up economy rest on the delivery of this project—those are the dreams of not just businesses and councils, but ordinary people and community groups. The Government have not yet done enough to convince us that, following a decade of broken promises and distant dreams for transport in the north, we are actually on the cusp of real change.

For communities that have been waiting for rail upgrades for years—like a young boy waiting for the train to Lincoln on the platform at Market Rasen station—there will be another long wait before we see spades in the ground. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for the Government to go further and faster, like the trains that we so badly need, to improve transport links in the midlands and north Wales.

The economy of our entire country will benefit from reversing years of overlooked investment in transport systems. The statistics make that clear, with my home region of the east midlands receiving the lowest transport spending per head in 2023-24 at just £368 per person—a quarter of that in London and half of the average for England. Wales received just £566 per head, compared with an average of £693 in England and £763 in Scotland. Passengers and businesses across the midlands and north Wales deserve better, and the Liberal Democrats will continue to hold the Government’s feet to the fire in delivering improvements for them.

To reiterate, we do not pretend that the challenges that the Government inherited are easily fixable. The British railways were left in a terrible state by the previous Conservative Government, but nearly two years on from the general election, many Brits remain fed up with the state of the British railways—with a network still plagued with delays, high ticket prices and overcrowding.

The Government would do well to remember that most passengers just want the strong delivery and good leadership that I mentioned, regardless of who owns the railways. People want better, more reliable and more affordable services—full stop. If nationalisation fails to make the impact that it promised, as the early warning signs indicate may be the outcome of the Government’s intervention, nothing will have changed.

In the spirit of constructive opposition, I invite the Minister to consider how the Government might align their plans more closely with the Liberal Democrat plans for our railways. Namely, I invite the Minister to meet my Liberal Democrat colleagues to discuss introducing a passengers’ charter like that laid before the House yesterday by my hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover). It would go a long way towards offering passenger protections on reliability, accessibility, affordability, amenities such as wi-fi and toilets, and seat guarantees. It could be folded into the ongoing development of the Railways Bill. Similarly, will the Minister outline how the Government plan to significantly extend the electrification of Britain’s rail network without committing, as we have done, to a 10-year plan for more electric trains, greater investment in batteries, and ensuring that all new lines are electrified as standard? Such measures could make a huge difference to the carbon impact of our train network, including by creating new capacity for freight to be carried by rail rather than road, while delivering real results for passengers at the same time.

Finally, I invite the Minister to outline why the Government are not working with local authorities, not just in the midlands and north Wales but across the nation, to unleash the pent-up capability of transport-led economic growth in our towns and cities. The repeatedly delayed Leeds tram would be a great start, as would—if you will indulge me, Ms Furniss—extending the Transport for London tram to Sutton. However, I imagine that the Minister will be able to discuss some of these matters with the Mayor of Greater Manchester face to face much sooner than he had anticipated when he woke up this morning.

14:16

[Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) on securing this important debate. It is not the first time that I have heard her make the case for Aldridge station, which she does with considerable force. She has been not just consistent but consistently impressive and determined in her campaigns for that station, and on wider transport issues, particularly in the west midlands.

Much has been said about the daily reality facing passengers, businesses and communities across the midlands and north Wales region, where ambition has too often outpaced delivery. Transport is not an end in itself; it is the wiring that allows our economy to function and when that wiring is faulty, growth stalls, opportunity narrows and communities are left behind. That is nowhere clearer than in the midlands. A recent report by the Centre for Cities put it starkly, stating that

“Transport is the wiring that allows urban economies to function”

but that in large UK cities outside of London that wiring is simply not working as it should. Today, with a fragmented network, only around 600,000 people, just 20% of the city region, can reach Birmingham city centre efficiently. But with properly integrated transport, increased bus frequency and reduced journey times, that figure could rise by over 250,000 people—a 44% increase—and take connectivity to nearly 30% of the city region. That is not a marginal gain; it is the difference between a city region that functions as a single labour market and one that does not.

Buses, of course, remain the backbone of local transport, particularly for young people and those without easy access to a private car or to rail. Targeted youth fares, such as those introduced in Tees Valley and Wales have shown what can be achieved, but fares alone are not enough if services are unreliable, infrequent or poorly connected to rail and tram networks. Integration is the missing piece. Joining up existing networks so that they function as one system is the fastest and most cost-effective way to improve public transport in England’s major cities outside London. With greater devolved powers, metro mayors can increase frequency, reduce journey times and better connect buses with commuter rail and tram networks, but only if national Government provide clarity, consistency and backing.

The consequences of poor co-ordination are most visible on rail. The midlands rail hub, about which we have heard a lot in this debate, is critical to unlocking capacity, improving frequency and enabling stations and services that would better connect communities across the region, but instead of certainty, we have partial funding, endless reviews and projects left “subject to future decisions”—a phrase worthy of whatever sequel comes to “Yes Minister”.

This matters not just for the midlands but for north Wales too, particularly when it comes to open access rail, which has the potential to deliver connectivity more quickly and introduce genuine competition. Proposals from Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway to operate direct services between Wrexham and London would significantly strengthen links among north Wales, the midlands and our capital. That is exactly the kind of market-led connectivity that can expand access to jobs, education and private investment.

But open access services can succeed only if the supporting infrastructure is in place. Capacity constraints, missing stations and poor integration with local transport risk meaning trains pass through communities, rather than serve them. If the Government are serious about improving connectivity across the midlands and north Wales, they must ensure that decisions on infrastructure enable new services, such as the WSMR, rather than frustrate them.

The wider connectivity challenge is felt acutely around Wrexham industrial estate—one of the largest in Europe. Major employers there, including JCB, Platts Agriculture, Kellogg’s and Net World Sports, have highlighted persistent difficulties for workers travelling from the surrounding villages due to poor public transport links into the estate. There was a welcome announcement of a new bus network designed to link communities with industrial estates in the Flintshire and Wrexham investment zone, but business and residents alike are still waiting for the detail: routes, frequency, timelines and how the services will integrate with existing rail and bus networks.

Connectivity is about not just long-distance rail, but whether someone can reliably get from their village or town to work on time and at a reasonable cost. Without last-mile integration, growth zones risk becoming isolated islands of investment. Those challenges are mirrored elsewhere in north Wales: the A55, the north Wales main line and the Menai crossings are strategic routes not just for Wales but for the entirety of our United Kingdom, yet road projects have been frozen, rail electrification funding has been withdrawn, and a blanket 20 mph policy has been imposed without regard for the economic impact—or any regard for common sense. Labour’s explanatory memorandum acknowledges that default 20 mph limits could cost the Welsh economy up to £9 billion, yet the policy was forced through, despite a record-breaking Senedd petition opposing it.

Only yesterday, it was confirmed that repairs to the Menai suspension bridge, one of just two crossings linking Anglesey to the mainland, will be delayed yet again, and that it will now stretch into 2027. That grade I listed structure, approaching its 200th anniversary, remains subject to weight limits and traffic lights, and there is still no long-term plan for resilience. That is not a minor inconvenience; it affects emergency response times, supply chains, tourism and livelihoods. That is why the Conservatives have consistently argued for a third Menai crossing, working constructively to deliver the infrastructure that north Wales needs.

In the midlands and north Wales, the pattern is the same: ambition without delivery, promises without integration and growth plans without the connectivity to support them. If the Government are serious about growth and levelling up, they must focus on delivering better transport connectivity now, joining up existing networks, backing proven projects, supporting new rail services and ensuring people can get to work, education and opportunity. The Government’s call for evidence on an integrated national transport strategy closed in February 2025, but we are still waiting for the outcome. I therefore ask the Minister when the results of that consultation will be published, and how they will support better connectivity across regions such as the midlands and north Wales, rather than adding further uncertainty.

As Jonathan Spruce, a trustee of the Institution of Civil Engineers, told the Transport Committee, planning transport without an overarching framework is

“like trying to solve a jigsaw without the picture on the box”.

The Government must help put that picture in place so that regions can plan, spend and connect with confidence.

14:25

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

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Furniss. I thank the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) for securing this important debate, and for her continued advocacy for her constituents in the wider west midlands.

Transport connectivity is not just an abstract policy issue; it shapes people’s daily lives. It is how they get to work, education and healthcare, and stay connected to their loved ones and communities. Connectivity sits at the heart of this Government’s mission to drive economic growth, unlock housing and tackle regional inequality. We are moving away from fragmented, short-term decision making, and towards an integrated, people-focused system. Our ambition is clear: a transport network that works for everyone, wherever they live.

The midlands has long been a national transport heartland, from historical canals and industrial-era railways, to engineering leadership in Birmingham, Derby, Coventry, Solihull and beyond. The region has always known that connectivity drives prosperity. That legacy continues today, with metro expansion, HS2 and innovations such as Coventry Very Light Rail, which I was very lucky to see myself, cementing the midlands as a historical engine of growth and a test bed for the next generation of connectivity.

In supporting new public transport connectivity across the West Midlands combined authority, we confirmed £15.6 billion for transport for city region settlements, including nearly £2.4 billion for the region up to 2032. That complements the £5.7 billion already allocated through the city region sustainable transport settlement. That long-term funding will deliver integrated transport at scale and end fragmented uncertainty.

[Wendy Morton]

Will the Minister give way?

[Simon Lightwood]

I have a lot to get through, and I would really like to respond to the right hon. Member’s points in due course.

Exciting progress is already visible because this Government is backing Mayor Richard Parker’s plans. Metro extensions, new rail stations, the Dudley Interchange and a new active travel corridor are transforming connectivity for millions across the region. Connectivity, however, does not stop at mayoral boundaries. Through the consolidated transport fund, all local transport authorities will benefit from more predictable, flexible and aligned funding. More than £1.3 billion will be delivered across the west midlands by 2029-30 to strengthen the links between our towns, cities and rural areas.

To embed this investment, we will soon set out the integrated national transport strategy, mentioned by the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith). It is a people-centred approach that recognises that different regions face different challenges. It will focus on reliability, safety and accessibility, and closer alignment between transport, housing, healthcare and public services, ensuring that connectivity supports equality and opportunity for everyone.

We are the country that created the railways, and they are an iconic part of the heritage of the west midlands. Through Great British Railways, we are building a simpler, more unified railway that delivers reliable, safe and better-value journeys for local people, putting local priorities front and centre to deliver what communities actually need. In that context, the midlands rail hub is a clear example of how targeted rail investment underpins economic growth and housing delivery.

[Catherine Atkinson]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Simon Lightwood]

I am going to stay consistent. Members have made a lot of points, and I would like to respond to them. I have a lot to cover.

In July 2025, the Chancellor committed to progressing to the next stage of the midlands rail hub. Once delivered, it will enable up to 300 additional trains each day to travel in and out of central Birmingham, as well as improving services at 50 stations, transforming regional connectivity and providing the capacity needed to unlock sustainable growth.

The right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills will know the difficult decision this Government inherited on HS2. Past mismanagement had led to significant cost increases and delays. Nevertheless, this Government have taken decisive action to reset the programme and progress delivery at the lowest reasonable cost. Recognising the importance of strengthening connectivity between the west midlands and the north-west, on 14 January, as part of our plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail, we set out our long-term intention to deliver a full, new rail line between Birmingham and Manchester.

I appreciate that taking this responsible, long-term decision on future capacity needs on the west coast main line will prolong the uncertainty for residents and businesses along the route. We will listen to the concerns of businesses, residents and hon. Members when making decisions about land powers, and we will work with them, and with HS2, to ensure that we minimise the disruption to people’s lives as far as possible. I understand that a number of affected hon. Members are meeting the Secretary of State and the Rail Minister next week to discuss this issue, and I thank them for raising some of those concerns today.

We also recognise that railways in Wales have seen lower levels of enhancement spending in recent years, and we are taking action to put that right. The 2025 spending review and infrastructure strategy recognised Wales’s long-term infrastructure needs and committed to delivering at least £445 million of rail enhancements to realise them. That funding will invest in both north and south Wales, fixing level crossings, building new stations and upgrading existing lines. The plans for future rail investment in Wales are being made in close consultation with the Welsh Government, who will be consulted ahead of the next spending review so that Wales’s long-term infrastructure needs continue to be recognised.

We also recognise the interest of the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills in open-access applications for Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway. Open access will continue to have a role in the reformed rail sector, and we understand the potential connectivity benefits that the Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway proposals could deliver. We have provided conditional support for that application, subject to the ORR and Network Rail being satisfied that services can be accommodated without compromising network performance or adversely affecting the rights of other operators.

Buses remain the backbone of public transport, and they are the everyday lifelines that keep our communities connected. The Bus Services Act puts passengers firmly in control, driving better services and stronger local accountability. From ’26-27, over £3 billion in funding will boost local services nationwide, including £700 million in local authority bus grants. The west midlands alone will receive £264 million to improve reliability, coverage and affordability. For the first time, our funding formula recognises rurality, ensuring that isolated and underserved communities get the support they need.

Cars are, of course, the most common and dependable way for people to get around. Well-maintained road networks keep our economy moving and daily life running smoothly. By ’29-30, we will be investing over £2 billion every year in local road maintenance, which is double what we inherited. That will give councils four-year certainty over their funding, so that they can shift from patching up potholes to making sure—

[Catherine Atkinson]

According to the RAC, Derbyshire has the worst potholes in the country. East Midlands Mayor Claire Ward has announced £121 million for road maintenance, which is a 60% uplift on last year’s funding. But with Reform in control of the county council, the number of potholes in Derbyshire is still absolutely abysmal. With both our mayor and our Government giving the funding that is needed, how can we ensure that local authorities such as Reform-led Derbyshire county council actually get on and fill our potholes?

[Simon Lightwood]

My hon. Friend is right to recognise the historic levels of funding going into local areas, which are almost doubling by the end of this Parliament. We increased funding this year from £1.1 billion to £1.6 billion, which came with conditions about publishing transparency reports on their websites. The multi-year funding that we have announced will also come with some conditions and incentives, to make sure that we turn the attention of local authorities from just patching those potholes—going back to fill them again and again is not a good use of taxpayers’ money—to preventing them from forming in the first place and ensuring that we fully resurface roads. That accountability will be there for all our constituents to see where the council is or is not doing its job. If it does not spend the money, we will pass it on to a local authority that will.

To come back to a point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), we are providing the East Midlands combined county authority with £2 billion through the transport for city regions fund, with the east midlands receiving £450 million from the local transport block. That means the east midlands will receive significantly more local transport funding per head than the England average in the coming years—£561 per person against an average of £391.

[Amanda Hack]

I want to reflect on those numbers. The east midlands mayoralty is not the east midlands. It covers only Derbyshire, Derby, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire. How does the rest of the east midlands fare in terms of funding?

[Simon Lightwood]

My hon. Friend jumps ahead of my next comment. The Department is providing all local transport authorities with a multi-year consolidated funding settlement, delivering on our commitments in the English Devolution White Paper to simplify funding. Leicestershire county council will be allocated £22.5 million in local authority bus grants over the next few years, in addition to the £8.2 million it received in 2025-26. It is then for her local authority, which I appreciate is a Reform council, to use that funding to the best effect. She touched on bus services. What I would politely say to her local authority is that it has the funding and the powers—it should get on with the job.

I thank the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills for her comments on Aldridge station. She is a former Minister of State in the Department for Transport. Mayor Andy Street failed to use the £1.05 billion allocated to him in 2022 to fully develop designs for Aldridge station when he had the chance. This Government have allocated a record £2.4 billion in transport for city regions funding for the West Midlands combined authority.

[Wendy Morton]

Will the Minister give way?

[Simon Lightwood]

I will finish my point.

Mayor Richard Parker is delivering on local priorities and taking forward schemes that are good value for taxpayers and will deliver real improvements. Perhaps the right hon. Lady would like to explain, when she intervenes, why the previous mayor did not use the money allocated to complete the design work on Aldridge station. There is £3.6 million allocated from the city region sustainable transport settlement funding for development from this mayor, with a report due later this year.

[Wendy Morton]

Let us be absolutely clear that Mayor Andy Street allocated the money for Aldridge station. I questioned both the Transport Secretary and the Treasury about that money, and I had a reply explaining that this Labour Government had moved the money out of the budget for Aldridge station. Had the mayor left the money in place, Aldridge station could have been funded and delivered by 2027. The only money that Mayor Parker has allocated to Aldridge is for doing some initial groundworks. The business case is already there. This is not about funding; it is about politics, I am sad to say.

[Simon Lightwood]

Mayor Andy Street failed to deliver a fully developed design for Aldridge station. When we promise to deliver something here, we will do it with a sound business case. [Interruption.] He did not have the designs, and he failed to deliver. There was £1.05 billion to deliver it, and he did not do that.

There is now £3.6 million, which this mayor has invested sensibly and pragmatically for a development report to do this properly, to make sure that we have value for taxpayers’ money and that we deliver the best possible solution. That report is due later this year.

[Wendy Morton]

Can I come back on that point?

[Simon Lightwood]

I am going to make progress.

This Government are backing Wales, the midlands and all our regions with long-term investment, local autonomy and an integrated approach across buses, rail, roads and active travel. We are building not an isolated scheme but a coherent, people-focused system that strengthens growth, opportunity and pride in place. Together, the midlands and Wales have long shaped the nation’s transport history and, with this programme, they will continue to drive national connectivity for decades to come.

14:40

[Wendy Morton]

First of all, I thank colleagues from across the House for joining the debate this afternoon. The hon. Members for Cannock Chase (Josh Newbury), for Lichfield (Dave Robertson), for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee), for North West Leicestershire (Amanda Hack) and for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) showed that, whether they are from the east midlands, the west midlands or Staffordshire, transport connectivity absolutely matters, and absolutely matters to our communities. That is where there is a lot of cross-Chamber, cross-party consensus.

We know why this matters, and why Aldridge train station absolutely matters. I have had no more answers from the Minister than I typically get from Ministers at the Dispatch Box. At one point, I was not sure if he was even going to mention Aldridge train station. I am glad he did, but the facts of the matter remain. I set out the case: Aldridge deserves better. Aldridge will keep asking what has happened to fully funding our train station, and I will continue to campaign and bang on about it.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered transport connectivity in the Midlands and North Wales.

14:42

Sitting suspended.

International Day of Education

Thursday 22nd January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Valerie Vaz in the Chair]

15:00

[Bambos Charalambous (Southgate and Wood Green) (Lab) [R]]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the International Day of Education.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. This Saturday, the 24th of January, will mark the eighth International Day of Education, which was established by the United Nations to highlight the importance of education for peace and development worldwide. Nobody can doubt the transformative power of education in empowering individuals, opening up life-changing opportunities, strengthening communities and creating a more peaceful world. The right to an education is enshrined in article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which begins with the line:

“Everyone has the right to education.”

Today, unfortunately, there are still many millions of children globally who are not in education. There has been great progress in improving access to education across the world, and the UK has played a powerful role in achieving that progress as one of the world’s most influential donors, advocates and innovators in global education. However, in recent years progress has slowed, against the backdrop of successive cuts in the education aid budget, and an increasingly dangerous world of conflict and climate change.

The UK has played a unique role in basic education. Foundational learning provides the building blocks for essential life skills, such as literacy, numeracy and personal development, but there is a serious concern that basic education will be one of the areas hardest hit by cuts in aid, because historically the UK and US Governments have been the biggest donors in that space. The Centre for Global Development has highlighted the catastrophic impact that not funding basic education would have internationally.

I urge the Minister to consider funding basic education as an area of high priority for the UK Government when global education funding is being considered. There is evidence to show how effective investing in basic education could be. New data, which was released this week by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office-funded What Works Hub for Global Education, shows that achieving universal foundational learning could increase global GDP by $196 trillion over the next 20 years.

Just yesterday, I joined parliamentarians and campaigners to celebrate 25 years of the Send My Friend to School campaign, as well as the efforts of millions of young people to push for the right to education globally. I thank everyone involved in making that event a huge success and I particularly thank the young people for their impressive advocacy. At the event, I had the chance to speak to the former Deputy Speaker of the Afghan Parliament, Fawzia Koofi, who has dedicated her political career to defending the right to education of women and girls in Afghanistan. She told us that when her husband was imprisoned by the Taliban, she wrote letters to the group asking for his release. When she spoke to his prison guard, he said that she should count herself lucky to be able to read and write. So many of the girls that she grew up with did not continue their education beyond grade 6, and did not learn how to read and write. For her, it was receiving a full education that gave her the opportunity to become who she is today.

Investing in education is one of the smartest long-term investments that we can make for global stability. Improvements in learning opportunities contribute directly to the achievement of sustainable development, and to the empowerment of women and girls. One additional year of education can reduce the risk of conflict by up to 20%, and there are particularly strong effects when girls and women have equal access to learning. In addition, research has shown that improvements in education have powered half of global economic growth in the past 50 years.

The United Nations set a specific strategic development goal for education, SDG 4, which aims to

“Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”

by 2030, but with over 270 million children across the globe not in education, it is highly unlikely that that goal will be met. I note that the International Parliamentary Network for Education recently put out a statement expressing its solidarity and the need for global co-operation to tackle the challenges and achieve sustainable development goal 4. It is imperative that we also take urgent action to help to meet that goal. But as we speak, global education is facing a serious threat as a result of sharp cuts to the official development assistance budget. Aid to education is projected to fall by around 24%, or $3.2 billion, globally by the end of 2026. Unless that course is reversed there will remain significant barriers to accessing education in the poorest parts of the world.

As I mentioned, according to UNESCO over 270 million children are out of school. Cuts to the educational aid budget could push a further 6 million children out of school by the end of this year. In some contexts, including in Chad and Sudan, funding for education in emergencies has already been cut by up to 90%. Such figures reflect real choices that are impacting strides that have been made in expanding access to education across the globe.

The Global Partnership for Education has been instrumental in addressing those challenges against the backdrop of aid cuts. It supports partner countries by designing and financing national education plans, strengthening systems and aligning donor and partner efforts behind one coherent reform programme. In Somalia, where girls’ enrolment in secondary school is a mere 9.7% and large numbers of girls drop out due to discriminatory gender norms such as early pregnancy, early marriage and involvement in household work, GPE funds programmes to enhance the learning of Somali children in the federal member states of Galmudug and Hirshabelle, and in Mogadishu, in Banaadir. The programmes construct and rehabilitate classrooms, as well as water, sanitation and hygiene facilities.

As a result of GPE’s work, 400 new classrooms across 147 schools were constructed, 394 classrooms were rehabilitated and 669 were provided with new furniture, including 15 sets of desks. That supported access to education for over 33,000 out-of-school children, with girls’ enrolment increasing by 59%. Between 2026 and 2030, GPE will double the co-financing that it attracts to $10 billion, reach over 300 million more children and boost UK investment beyond what can be achieved by bilateral programmes alone.

Yet, as aid is set to fall, payments to multilateral partners such as GPE have been delayed. The Government will soon decide whether to maintain their future financial support to GPE for this period in the coming weeks. By investing in GPE, the UK could help prepare this generation to drive prosperity in their own countries and strengthen the foundations of a safer, more stable and more liveable world.

Emergencies, and educational emergencies in particular, are another area I want to focus on. In a world that has become increasingly dangerous, education protects children from violence and exploitation, lowers long-term humanitarian and recovery costs, and helps to mitigate conflict and displacement pressures. Financing education in emergencies supports the UK’s priorities on peace and security, migration, climate resilience, and violence against women and girls. Yet, with the risk of further cuts to the education aid budget, the climate crisis and conflicts threaten to destroy any chances of children getting access to an education.

Globally, 234 million crisis-affected children currently require educational support—an increase of 10 million in the last two years. Children in Africa and the middle east face the largest impact, with millions of them looking at disruption or cancellation of their education. The climate crisis is an underlying cause of that. As climate emergencies become more prevalent, children and families are being displaced from their homes and forced to take shelter elsewhere. When international aid comes in, education is often deprioritised—despite being a lifeline for children in crisis.

That means that classrooms are left without teachers, learning materials and safe spaces, and a generation of children risk losing not just months but years of education at the very moment when stability and hope matter most. According to UNICEF, nearly 40 million children a year have their education interrupted by disasters and disease outbreaks following extreme weather events. Not only are children losing access to drinking water, healthcare and food, but their education is being forgotten and they are left vulnerable to violence and despair.

Furthermore, in places like Sudan, which is experiencing the world’s largest humanitarian and displacement crisis since records began, just shy of 12 million people are displaced internally or have fled to neighbouring countries. The civil war is leaving many children traumatised, uprooted from their communities and cut off from education and basic protection. This increases their risk of exploitation, early marriage and long-term poverty, making it harder for the country to rebuild peace and stability for the future.

Education Cannot Wait is a global fund dedicated to financing education in the world’s most severe humanitarian crises, working in places such as Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan and Nigeria. It invests in safe learning spaces, sustaining minimum education pathways and acting as a frontline protection measure for violence against women and girls. In South Sudan, Education Cannot Wait worked with the Minister of general education to expand equitable access to education and reduce the number of out-of-school children. Through its multi-year resilience programme, more than 190,000 learners—46% of them girls—have gained access to formal and alternative education systems such as accelerated learning programmes.

ECW funding provides tailored support to vulnerable girls, supports the distribution of dignity kits, strengthens school-based child protection systems and expands safe learning spaces where girls feel protected and welcomed. However, we are in a situation where there have been minimal funding commitments by the Government for the upcoming replenishment of both GPE and ECW.

According to UNICEF, planned funding cuts for education in emergencies will mean that crisis-hit countries in Africa and the middle east will lose over 10% of their national education budget. This will also impact teacher development and data systems and will have a lasting impact on education due to a loss of skilled educators and gaps in data, making a recovery less likely even if funding returns in future. That is why it is crucial that the Government provide adequate funding for education aid and support for organisations, such as Education Cannot Wait, that are on the frontlines delivering education in emergencies.

I have a few questions for the Minister. The first relates to the Government’s commitments to education in emergencies. Does he agree that it is vital that as part of our humanitarian assistance we support the provision of education in areas of conflict and climate emergencies? When countries emerge from conflict and climate emergencies they need help to get themselves re-established, so can the Minister tell me whether the Government intend to support countries to transition from the emergency education provision to national education systems, particularly if support mechanisms such as the Global Partnership for Education are reduced? Will the Government ensure that the ODA budget will be focused on foundational learning where every lesson has the most transformative impact on a child’s life chances? Will education feature in the Future of Development conference being hosted by the UK in May?

The UK has always understood the importance of education. We championed girls’ education before others. We fought for foundational learning when the world’s attention risked drifting elsewhere, and we played a defining role in the creation of the Global Partnership for Education and Education Cannot Wait, which are some of the most effective engines for transforming education systems around the world. With a smaller aid budget it is essential that the UK makes its money go further. As we mark the UN International Day of Education, let us celebrate the huge strides we have made in progressing access to education across the globe, but also be honest about the scale of the challenge that we face.

We find ourselves at a crossroads: the Government can choose to continue their efforts in fighting for education for those who need it most, or they can abandon decades of hard work on the international stage. Let us step forward once again and work together to invest in teachers, systems and safe and inclusive classrooms. Let us ensure that every child can learn and thrive, because when we invest in education we build not just schools but futures.

15:14

[Sam Rushworth (Bishop Auckland) (Lab)]

It is a privilege to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous) for his excellent speech and for the excellent event he hosted this week with Send My Friend to School. It was very moving to see so many young people and children coming to Parliament to tell us to speak up for their values and their belief in global education.

Prior to entering this place, I had the privilege of spending a few years as a teacher at a school in Rwanda, where I was doing my PhD research. It was a world away from what we know as a school. I had a chalkboard at the front and a few pieces of chalk, and the children had notebooks and pens—those were about the only resources we had to deliver learning. To this day, it always warms my heart when they reach out to me on social media to let me know how they are doing. Most of them are in their mid-20s, successful and thriving in the world.

I want to talk briefly about one of the young men who attended that school. He was a genocide orphan who, after the genocide, found himself living at the rubbish dump in Kigali in the shell of a burned-out car. He would go out each day with other children and pick through the dump for food to survive. After a few years of that, an American woman who was in the area got out of her car one day to give these street children—they are called mayibobo, which means children of the street—some bread rolls. This young man went up to her and said, “Please, I would like to go to school.” She felt moved, so she put him in the back of her taxi, took him to a local family she trusted, and paid them to put him through school.

A few years later, another child at the young man’s school was being bullied because he was poor—he was scruffy and did not have the school supplies. Remembering his experience as a street child, the young man formed a little charitable group in the school. They clubbed together to secretly put school supplies on the student’s bed to help him through school. From that act, they set up a charity at their school, which now has chapters across the entire country, and also in North America and Europe. It is a youth-led charity and it inspires young people to do good. The young man went on to get a scholarship to Harvard University. He did not mention his background because he wanted to have it on merit. Today, he continues to do incredible work. That story illustrates to me not only the incredible success, but how many children like him remain at the rubbish dump and are not given those opportunities.

Global education is facing cuts of £3.2 billion by the end of 2026. That is severe, and the impact will be felt by an entire generation of children around the world. That amount sadly includes cuts to UK aid, although I should say that the UK cannot and should not be expected to go it alone on global education. There are many other things that we need to do. For example, 34 countries in Africa spend more on debt interest every year than they spend on education and health. That is a disgrace. This Parliament could do something by legislating to change that reality, and I hope that we do. We need to do more to encourage other countries that, frankly, could give more and do not to step up.

It is in our national interest to build strong partnerships. I have worked in international development and met many Ministers in other countries, and I noticed how often they were educated in the UK, and how often they previously worked at a university. Unlike in this place, where we tend to appoint Ministers who are not necessarily specialists in their field, it is generally the case in the global south that Ministers come through the academic ranks and are a specialist in their area. They often have views that were shaped by their time studying at a UK university, or by their relationship to one, which is incredibly important. Other institutions that we should be greatly proud of include the Voluntary Service Overseas, which does important work in education around the world, and the British Council. They are really important parts of UK soft power.

As the world is changing and becoming more volatile, and as Britain’s place in it is shrinking, there are some big players in the world today who do not share our democratic values or our belief in human rights, and who are positioning themselves to sweep up influence across the global south. In that context, we really need to think, as they often do, of a 100-year plan, and what it would look like to shape the world in our image, have people learning our language and have more people feeling a great affinity with this country. That is another important role we can play by investing in education.

I am aware that other Members wish to speak, so I will conclude by appealing for education to be a bigger part of UK thinking about development. The higher education partnerships are so crucial, but so are the school-to-school partnerships and the idea of making development education a part of our national curriculum. It was heartwarming, at my hon. Friend’s event this week, to see children who were globally aware citizens who wanted to connect with children in other parts of the world and to work together to shape a better world. They had some strong messages for us, and we need to listen to them.

15:21

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Reform)]

It is a great privilege to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I put on the record my thanks to the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous), who secured this timely debate to coincide with the International Day of Education.

Over my 25 years as a Member of this House, I have been extremely fortunate to travel to all parts of our planet, whether as part of the Foreign Affairs Committee, on which I served for 15 years; the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, which does excellent work, as we all know; the Inter-Parliamentary Union; the NATO Parliamentary Assembly; the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly; or, most especially, the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, which I served as a governor for nine years, doing work in countries around the world. I have also taken part, over the years, in various missions with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to countries including Uganda and the British Indian Ocean Territory. I will say a bit more about the Chagos islands later.

Through my travels I have seen at first hand the impact of British education, cultural exchange and institutional engagement around the world. I felt it right to participate in this debate because I was due to respond to it on behalf of His Majesty’s Opposition as a shadow Minister. Although that is no longer the case, I am sure that the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) will do justice to the role this afternoon, and I wish him well in his endeavours.

Education has the ability to transform lives and, ultimately, it shapes the world in which Britain must operate. For generations, this country has been regarded as the workshop for global leaders, and the world’s elites have wanted to send their children to be educated here in the United Kingdom. That includes post-colonial leaders such as Lee Kuan Yew, Robert Menzies and Mahatma Gandhi, and contemporary leaders such as the great Tony Abbott and Shinzo Abe. The list goes on—it is very extensive—and we should take great pride in the fact that so many distinguished figures from around the world choose to send their children and families to be educated here in the British Isles.

It is clear that our schools, universities and language, and our great British culture, have projected British influence further than any number of tanks or treaties ever could have done. That influence has been built deliberately through institutions and scholarships that are respected across the globe, including the Rhodes scholarship, the Chevening programme, the work of the Association of Commonwealth Universities, and the generations of Commonwealth scholars who have gone on to become leaders in politics, business, science and civil society. As chairman of the all-party parliamentary group for the Commonwealth, I have seen how thriving these networks of influence truly are.

However, I am afraid that the Commonwealth itself, and bodies such as the Commonwealth of Learning, have been understood by successive Governments as almost like a hangover of colonial times—something from the past that should belong in history. That attitude is wrong and needs to change. We should be proud of what Britain has achieved over the centuries and we should continue those traditions today.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous) for securing the debate—I am sorry that I could not have been here earlier; I was in the Chamber.

I know the focus of the debate is on what Britain does when it comes education, but the other side of it is that many churches across all of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, including in my constituency, have built schools and universities. Does the hon. Gentleman recognise the good work done by the churches in my constituency? The Elim church has built a hospital, a health centre, a primary school and a secondary school, and it does work on job training for farming as well. All these things are done by people from Newtownards going to Malawi, to Swaziland and to Zimbabwe. That is an example of what can happen if we all look at some of the good things that are happening.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. The debate is about the International Day of Education.

[Andrew Rosindell]

That was a fine intervention and I entirely endorse everything the hon. Gentleman said. One of the reasons Britain has had so much outreach around the world is because of our Christian foundations. It is so important to uphold and cherish our Christian heritage. Of course, Christian missionaries have travelled the world and established schools, hospitals, universities and churches, helping countries far and wide and people of all religions. I entirely endorse the hon. Gentleman’s examples from his constituency; my constituency also has many churches that do excellent work and support causes around the world. I thank him for raising that point.

The Commonwealth is, I believe, a tangible force for good—I am sure we can all agree with that—and it should be central to any Government’s foreign policy. A voluntary association bound by shared language, legal traditions and educational standards embodies the very arguments that we are debating here in Parliament this afternoon. Above all, it provides Britain with a unique global reach that no other country enjoys. There are Commonwealth countries in every part of the world, including, let us not forget, our cherished overseas territories and Crown dependencies, such as the British Indian Ocean Territory, which should remain a British territory.

The Commonwealth has presented our great nation with an inheritance that is the envy of the world. But, obviously, soft power works only when it also serves the national interest. I am afraid that is where this debate has to be honest. Too often, international education policy has drifted away from British priorities and towards fashionable global causes, administrated by bloated bureaucracies with little regard for value for money or outcomes. My new party, Reform UK, believes in engagement with the world, but on Britain’s terms, not at our expense.

Last month, in my previous role as shadow Minister, I met with the British Council. It does invaluable work—I place that clearly on the record—but what I heard in that meeting should concern the House. Funding from the Foreign Office has still not returned to pre-pandemic levels. The British Council is being forced to consider the closure of up to 35 country offices, with 10 having already been lost during covid. Just £20 million would stabilise the British Council network, yet at the same time, this Government appear perfectly relaxed writing cheques running into the tens of billions for the handover of a British territory, thereby betraying British people, based on questionable interpretations of international obligations that deliver nothing tangible for the British taxpayer.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. I ask the hon. Member to stick to the motion.

[Sam Rushworth]

While the hon. Member is on that point, we are all aware of a letter that he wrote in 2020, in which he urged President Elect Joe Biden to do exactly what the Government are doing. Will the hon. Member say why his opinion has changed on the matter?

[Andrew Rosindell]

I am so pleased that the hon. Member has raised that point. With your permission, Ms Vaz, I will answer it.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

I have been advised that we have to stick to the motion, which is about the International Day of Education.

[Andrew Rosindell]

I will certainly do so. To say one brief thing to the hon. Member, the letter was written to reflect the consensus of an all-party parliamentary group that I happened to be the chair of. The letter did not necessary reflect my opinions on everything. Self-determination should always determine decisions.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. Could the hon. Member address the Chair, please?

[Andrew Rosindell]

I will go back to the point. We are told that there is no money for the British Council, yet somehow we find the cash for all sorts of other things: for housing the people who are coming to this country illegally; for the failing digital identification experiment; and for a long list of projects that do nothing to strengthen Britain’s position in the world or to promote education.

I am sure we will shortly hear warm words from the Minister about the importance of international education, and rightly so, but those words will ring hollow when the Government are presiding over an erosion of Britain’s ability to support education, influence and cultural engagement across the globe. What makes matters worse is that the cuts are focused on British Council offices in developed countries—the countries that need our support more than most. These are places where English teaching may not be the primary objective, but where influence, networks, science, culture and diplomacy absolutely are.

The British Council is certainly not just an English teaching charity. Its stated aims are to foster cultural, scientific, technological and educational co-operation with the United Kingdom. Undermining that mission weakens Britain. However, Reform UK is not calling for a blank cheque—far from it. If Britain is to help educate the world, that education must champion the United Kingdom and its values, free speech, our model of parliamentary Government and the rule of law. It must never put Britain second.

We should not be funding programmes to apologise for our history, undermine our institutions, or promote ideologies fundamentally hostile to our way of life. Nor should international education be used as a back door for uncontrolled migration or permanent settlement. Students should come to Britain to learn, and then return home as ambassadors for this country and assets to their peers. They should certainly not be numbers that disappear into a broken system that is already overstretched.

Ahead of the International Day of Education, I say that, yes, education changes lives, but it also helps to shape geopolitics. If we hollow out our soft power while pouring money into symbolic global gestures, we will wake up—as we have for some time—poorer, weaker and less respected. Reform UK believes that Britain should engage with all nations of the world and treat all countries with respect, working with all nationalities and peoples for the best interests of humanity, but always in Britain’s national interest. Our educational institutions and global networks remain world class—dare I say, the best—but the question is whether the Government are willing to end the bipartisan policy of managed decline and once again put British cultural influence back on the map.

15:34

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under you chairship, Ms Vaz. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous) for securing this debate to mark the International Day of Education this Saturday. I pay tribute to our hard-working teachers and our schools in the UK, especially in my constituency.

This should be more than a moment of reflection; it must be a call to action. Education is a moral good, but it is also one of our most effective tools to prevent poverty, conflict and instability. When children are pushed out of classrooms by war, displacement or climate disaster, the consequences are long lasting. The scale of the crisis is severe: worldwide, more than 272 million children and young people are out of school and that figure is projected to rise to 278 million due to global aid cuts.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

The hon. Lady is making a powerful point about the number of children who are outside of the classroom globally and the impact that has, but it also happens in our own country. I recently visited the Gillford Centre pupil referral unit in my constituency. It does phenomenal work and, unlike other schools, the hallmark of its success is pupils leaving and going back into mainstream education. Does the hon. Lady agree that pupil referral units like the Gillford Centre make a huge contribution to closing the opportunity gap that we know exists abroad and at home?

[Monica Harding]

I agree 100%, and let us not forget that children are left behind in our country too. In my Esher and Walton constituency, we found that 1,800 children were missing school because of special educational needs and disabilities. Pupil referral units do brilliant work in bringing children back into mainstream education, which is good for our economy and for growth.

As I said, children around the world are missing education; the global aid cuts will increase that number and that rise will be concentrated in humanitarian hotspots. Education systems are being put under strain by the combined impact of conflict, climate shocks and humanitarian collapse. Last year alone, 242 million students in 85 countries saw their schooling disrupted by climate events.

Education is not a luxury; it underpins development, public health, gender equality and long-term stability, yet the global commitment is weakening just as pressures on education systems intensify. International education funding is projected to fall by $3.2 billion dollars this year—a 24% cut—placing an additional 5.7 million children at risk of dropping out of school. Cuts to the United States Agency for International Development alone are expected to push 23 million children out of education in the years ahead.

Girls will be hardest hit, with gender-focused education aid projected to fall by 28% this year, despite clear evidence that educating girls delivers some of the highest returns of any development investment. At the same time, primary education funding faces a 34% cut, with severe long-term consequences for literacy, numeracy and economic growth. Against that backdrop, the Government’s decision to cut the aid budget to the lowest level this century will only deepen the global education crisis, undermining long-term stability, prosperity and the UK’s influence abroad.

With aid projected to fall to 0.3% of national income by 2027, education funding is already being squeezed, and overseas education spending is set to drop by 40% this year alone. At the same time, one fifth of the aid budget is now spent on in-country refugee costs, crowding out overseas investment—precisely the spending that helps prevent instability and forced displacement in the first place.

Britain has not always stood on the sidelines. For many years, the UK was a leading global voice on education—particularly girls’ education—backing that leadership with sustained multilateral investment. Between 2015 and 2020 alone, UK aid helped more than 15 million children attend school worldwide.

I will now illustrate the scale of the crisis by giving examples from some of the worst-affected areas globally. Nowhere is the global collapse in education more stark than in Afghanistan, where more than 2 million girls are formally banned from secondary and higher education, making it the only country in the world to exclude girls from school legally. Meanwhile, learning outcomes for boys in the country deteriorate amid systemic breakdown. The collapse in education in Afghanistan has been worsened by the collapse of international aid: the United States has effectively disengaged from Afghanistan, while British aid to the country has fallen by nearly half over the past five years.

In the Gaza strip, over 650,000 children—almost the entire school-age population—have received little or no formal education for years, with around 97% of schools in the region having been damaged or destroyed. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which has long been the backbone of education provision for Palestinian refugee children, educated over half a million children in the Gaza strip and the west bank. However, it is now operating under severe legal and operational constraints imposed by the Israeli Government, including bans in east Jerusalem, the demolition of facilities, and restrictions on staff, utilities and partner NGOs.

In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where more than 7 million children are already out of school due to conflict and displacement, a flagship education programme for girls that was previously supported by British aid is set to close this year. That will affect 170,000 children in just one region, the vast majority of whom are girls, and is a direct consequence of our aid cuts.

In fragile and conflict-affected states, education is not only about future opportunity; it also provides safety, routine and dignity right now. Schools often deliver clean water, meals, sanitation and access to child protection services. Yet globally, school feeding programmes face cuts of over 50%, while education in emergencies has been reduced by 24%, with countries such as Haiti, Somalia and the Central African Republic losing aid that is equivalent to more than 10% of their public education budget.

It should not be, and does not have to be, this way. The Liberal Democrats believe that education must be a protected priority within the aid budget and not a discretionary extra. However, that requires reversing the aid cuts and setting out a clear path back to meeting the legally enshrined target of spending 0.7% of national income on aid. I respectfully point out to the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) that although I agree with his words about the British Council and the potential cuts to its budget, and about the influence of British education, it is impossible to see how the British Council could be protected under the cuts that his party is proposing, whereby just 0.1% of GNI would be spent on ODA.

The International Day of Education is a reminder that behind every statistic in this area is a child whose future depends on political choices. If we are serious about reducing poverty, empowering women and building stability—which in turn will benefit the UK by providing economic trading opportunities in global markets, less compelling reasons for people to migrate to these shores, and more global stability and security for our citizens—education must move from the margins to the centre of our international priorities.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

We now come to the winding-up speeches. The Front Benchers have 10 minutes each.

15:42

[Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz, and I thank the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous) for securing this debate.

What is education for? It is about so much more than remembering facts to pass exams. It is about lighting a spark in our children, and fostering their creative spirit and critical thinking to ensure that every child grows up with the life skills, the confidence and the resilience they need to be happy, healthy and successful adults, however that looks for each individual. In my view, that is every bit as important as academic achievement. In line with the theme of this year’s International Day of Education—the power of youth in co-creating education—we should all seek to create an educational environment that allows children the world over to learn and to ignite that spark.

The Liberal Democrats believe that education is the best investment that we can make in our children’s potential and our country’s future—indeed, every country’s future. It is the root of everything that follows in adult life: the potential for better health; the ability to work and earn a living; and the skills that enable people to participate in work, sport, craft, music and all the other things that enrich a human life. As the International Day of Education celebrates, education also has a significant role to play in enabling peace and development. The United Nations sustainable development goal 4 recognises education as a foundation for “escaping poverty” and for fostering peaceful, healthy societies.

When a girl goes to school, she is more likely not only to achieve higher educational outcomes—that much seems obvious—but to earn more and contribute to economic growth, and to participate in decision making in her community and country. She will be healthier, as will her children. She is less likely to be subject to child marriage, and to experience harmful practices and unwanted pregnancy.

Since the sustainable development goals were set in 2015, girls’ enrolment has increased by more than 50 million globally, with 5 million more girls annually completing each level of education up to upper secondary, but still more than 100 million girls of school age across the world are not in formal education today. One of the worst examples, as other Members have mentioned, is Afghanistan, where over 2.2 million girls are officially barred from attending school. Afghanistan is the only country in the world where girls and women are prohibited from accessing secondary and higher education. As families lose hope for their daughters’ futures, there has been a rise in forced and child marriages. Girls are kept hidden and are silenced. The Liberal Democrats want to see a foreign policy agenda with gender equality at its heart. The lives of women and girls must not be ignored in favour of trade or regional alliances, and we call on the Government to immediately restore full funding to educational programmes that support women and girls.

At this very difficult time, I am sure that I am not alone in being deeply troubled by the lack of visibility on the world stage of women who are helping to build peace and reconciliation in various conflict zones. As President Trump builds his so-called board of peace, it looks like there will be more male billionaires represented than women. Where are the women who will speak up for their local communities and civil society, and have a deep and vested interest in securing peace and stability for their children’s future?

Evidence shows that women’s participation in peace agreements increases the probability of them lasting at least two years by 20%, and lasting 15 years by 35%, yet in a UN study, decision making was left to a small group of male leaders in 15 of the 16 national dialogues examined. We see this every day on our TV screens, and I suggest that it starts with education. If we do not give girls the tools and knowledge to grow up to be part of that conversation, we embed that dangerous imbalance and perpetuate in boys the idea that theirs are the only voices that matter.

Looking globally, perhaps the lesser-told story is that an almost equal number of boys are out of school worldwide, and the biggest disparity is poverty related. In the poorest countries, 36% of students are out of school, compared with 3% in the richest countries, and almost three quarters of the global out-of-school population is in central and southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. The astonishing and moving example recounted by the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) shows how education can transform not only lives, but communities and countries.

The UK has an important role to play in reducing this stark international educational inequality. As proud internationalists, the Liberal Democrats believe that our country thrives when we are open and outward looking, and that applies so much to education. The Liberal Democrats value the UK’s central role in founding UNESCO, and we remain steadfast in supporting its mission to contribute to peace and security by promoting collaboration among nations through education, science and culture. Most important, we want to restore the UK’s reputation as an international development superpower, by restoring spending to 0.7% of national income and re-establishing an international development Department. We would also recognise the role of education as a force for good, by committing to spend 15% of ODA on education in the world’s most vulnerable areas.

We should focus not just on what the UK can provide to the world on education, but on what we can learn from the world to improve our own system. The part of our education system that is in the worst shape is the way we educate children who have additional needs and disabilities. Broken by the previous Conservative Government, the SEND system is failing those children every single day. Years of cuts to school and council budgets have left parents struggling to secure the support their children need, and the system has become intrinsically adversarial, pitting councils and parents against each other in a situation that is not fair to either of them. It urgently needs reform. Although it is welcome that the Government recognise that, it is incredibly important that they get it right.

I urge the Government to look overseas for inspiration. On a recent trip to Ontario as part of the Education Committee’s inquiry into SEND, we saw a significant focus on communication right from kindergarten. Parents there do not have to fight for support because dialogue works, families are listened to, and behaviour is seen as a form of communication. In Ontario, they understand that we must listen to what our SEND children are trying to tell us and focus on inclusion rather than exclusion. Their approach is worlds away from our combative system. I therefore hope that when the Government come forward with their schools White Paper and set out SEND reform, they will draw on the success stories of SEND systems overseas, such as Ontario’s, to create a system that truly places children, young people, families and carers at its core.

Our education system should also draw on world-class, internationally recognised programmes that are used around the world, such as the international baccalaureate diploma programme. The IB sets a global benchmark for education and is trusted by universities, employers and educators worldwide. The Government’s recent decision to slash the large programme uplift funding, which allows state schools to provide the IB, simply makes no sense. The money saved is a drop in the ocean in the overall Department for Education budget, but by stripping that funding away, the Government are stealing opportunity and further entrenching the divide between our state and private schools. No Government who want to truly close the attainment gap would pursue that policy. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling on the Government to reverse the cuts to the large programme uplift and ensure that any school wishing to deliver the IB diploma has the funding to do so.

Zooming out to look at our education system more broadly, it is fair to say that, like the rest of the world, we also suffer from persistent levels of educational inequality. Far too many children are leaving school without the skills they need to succeed. The disadvantage gap we see when children walk through the school door on day one grows throughout the education years and is wider at age 16 than it is at age five, according to research from the Education Policy Institute. It is down to us to fix this stubborn inequality. The Institute for Fiscal Studies notes that the gap in GCSE attainment between rich and poor households in this country has remained largely constant for the past 20 years.

To address the failings in our education system that are leading to inequality, the Liberal Democrats call on the Government to take steps including a tutoring guarantee for every disadvantaged pupil who needs extra support, high-quality early years education to help to close the attainment gap by giving disadvantaged children aged three and four an extra five free hours a week, and tripling the early years pupil premium to £1,000 a year.

We want a Government who fulfil their role in helping to reverse the worrying trends in global educational inequality, especially when it comes to women and girls, who look overseas at what the world can do for our own education system, and who properly address the educational inequalities that persist here in the UK. We must ensure that every child’s education provides the tools they need to thrive in every aspect of their life.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

I call the Opposition spokesperson, Lincoln Jopp—congratulations on your new post.

15:53

[Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)]

Thank you for that welcome, Ms Vaz. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I congratulate the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous), who is also the chair of the APPG on global education, on securing this debate and on his long-standing interest in this matter. I also thank the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) for his gracious words of welcome, particularly because he was due to be standing at this Dispatch Box. When I saw him walk into Westminster Hall, I have to admit that my blood ran slightly cold, worrying that perhaps our shared team had prepared the same speech for us both to give—I should have known better.

We on this side of the House recognise the huge benefits that education brings to supporting aspiration and helping to fulfil potential. Whether at home or abroad, we know that education lays the foundation for young people to build better futures. Here in England, the last Conservative Government raised standards in our schools and lifted the UK’s standing in international league tables for literacy to first in the western world, and fourth in the world. We also increased the number of full-time teachers by around 27,000, which is about 2,000 a year on average—a higher annual rate of growth than the 6,500 over five years promised by the current Government.

Internationally, we played our part in supporting initiatives to lift people out of poverty. With the United Nations International Day of Education approaching on 24 January, this is an opportune moment to reflect on the links between education and economic development, and the role that the UK can play. Members will be aware of the UN’s sustainable development goal 4, which focuses on quality education to

“Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”.

The previous Government focused effort and resources on this area, including expanding and improving access to education, especially for women and girls, who face particular barriers to securing a meaningful education and childhood in parts of the world. This led to 19.8 million children, including 10 million girls, being supported with a decent education since 2015. That made a profound difference to those lives.

The international women and girls strategy launched in 2023 had a strong focus on education. It highlighted the wider societal benefits of improved education for women and girls in developing countries, including that

“A child whose mother can read is 50% more likely to live beyond the age of five”,

is more likely to be immunised, and is about

“twice as likely to attend school.”

Girls benefiting from higher levels of education are also less likely to be affected by violence from a partner, less likely to marry as a child and more likely to find employment and start businesses. One of the great untapped potentials in developing countries is the enterprise and entrepreneurial spirit of women. Better education can help to unleash that potential. That is something that Members in all parts of the House can agree on.

That strategy also focused on the three Es of educating girls, empowering women and girls and championing their health and rights, and ending gender based violence. But education is the essential first step. I ask the Minister, are the Government committed to implementing that strategy? With international development budgets understandably being reduced to support efforts to bolster our defences and national security, can the Minister update the House on the areas where the Government intend to focus resources for the rest of the decade?

My team and I had prepared a rather different speech, but I have been very struck by the fact that four Members have mentioned Afghanistan. If the Chamber will indulge me, I, like the sponsor of this debate, would like to understand from the Minister what the Government are doing in terms of education in Syria, Iran, Gaza and the west bank and Sudan, but I want to tell a rather different story about international education.

It is 2009 and we are in Basharan in the Helmand river valley of Afghanistan. There is a small village in Basharan with a defunct school. A young company commander by the name of Sean Birchall takes over that area and is determined that the school should open for boys and girls. He spends vast amounts of time going backwards and forwards, at great risk, to Lashkar Gah to try to get the education department there to provide teachers and school equipment, such as books and chairs. Sean was killed by a bomb, leaving a widow and an 18-month-old son, Charlie. Nevertheless, the men and women in his company of Welsh Guards continued his extraordinary work and the school got up and running.

Fast forward to April the next year and I am the commanding officer of the Lashkar Gah battlegroup. We have Basharan in our patch, and very near one of the routes into Basharan was an impassable road—the Taliban had put a tax office on it and seeded it with a number of improvised explosive devices. I was given the mission to clear the road. I discussed it with the company commander and said, “It looks to me like we now need to start at one end and go to the other, or start at the other end and go to the other.” He said, “Let me have a think.” Then he said, “Right. I want to start in the middle and clear out in two directions.” I said, “Right, okay.” Taking the Taliban tax office would send a signal to the area that there was greater control.

This involved a lot of moving people and equipment around, which alerted the locals that it was happening. I was at the checkpoint nearest to where we were going to start the operation the next day, and a young lance corporal called Cammy sent a message saying, “Commanding officer to the front gate,” so I went there. My approach to counter-insurgency, which I told the battalion, was: “We need to take risks to be safer.” It is one of the paradoxes of counter-insurgency; it is incredibly dangerous but, nevertheless, it can bear results.

Cammy introduced me to a fellow with a wooden leg—a local—who had come to the gate and asked what was going on. Cammy said—he did not ask me—“I’m going to tell him the plan for tomorrow,” and I said, “Crack on.” So he told him the plan: that we were going to go in the next day and take down the tax office, and that we were going to clear the bombs but knew it was very dangerous indeed.

The man, who was known as the Muj—mujaheddin—said, “Well, I’m going to come with you tomorrow at dawn and I’m going to show you where the bombs are.” I asked him, “Why are you going to do that? It’s incredibly risky.” And he said, “I will show you where the bombs are so that you can clear them, so that you can open the road and my daughter can go to Basharan school.”

We all had a fitful night’s sleep, and, good as gold, the next day, at dawn, he turned up and we gave him a can of yellow spray-paint, and he hopscotched his way around a high-density minefield and sprayed paint on where the bombs were. It is so rare for the good that we enable off the security line of operations—namely education—to play so directly into local consent, in order to advance the cause and British interests.

Under the UK aid flag, our support for education should be a sign of hope and freedom for those who receive it. We have had strong successes in recent years in delivering quality education for those who need it across the world, providing new opportunities for millions. Along with our key partners, the UK should continue to play a leading role, exercising our resources, leverage and expertise to improve educational outcomes and lift millions, globally, out of poverty and into a better future.

16:02

[The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)]

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Vaz. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous) for securing this debate ahead of the UN’s International Day of Education. It is a topic close to my heart, as the son of a primary school teacher and a youth worker, and having engaged in a number of educational initiatives myself over many years, including teaching English one summer in Ukraine, which I will come back to. I thank hon. Members for their sincere and passionate contributions on this crucial issue.

Of course, education is also important to us all in our own constituencies. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden), spoke of a number of the issues around education in the UK. While I am, of course, hugely proud of schools and educational institutions in my own communities in Cardiff South and Penarth, and of the investment from the Welsh Labour Government into new schools and a new further education college there—and proud of many other aspects—we are largely talking today about international efforts on education.

Such efforts include the very powerful examples that the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) just raised. I visited Afghanistan at the very same time that he was serving gallantly there—I thank him for his service at that time—because, under the last Labour Government, I served as an adviser in the former Department for International Development and worked on Afghanistan policy. Indeed, I worked on many of those issues, including the ways that we tried to support girls’ education in Afghanistan in particular back then, and I have been to many of the places that the hon. Gentleman described.

I also thought about that context today, not only for the people of Afghanistan, tragically, and particularly those young girls, but for the young people I engaged with just last week, in a live video conference linking up Stratford Manor primary school in east London with a school in Kyiv. That was part of the school twinning programme under the 100-year partnership, which is now reaching up to 300 schools. It was really powerful to speak to those young children live on camera with the children in London. They told us about the massive bombardment they had faced the night before in and around their schools and homes in Kyiv, thanks to Russia’s barbarism. They were lucky to be able to join us at that moment because most of the time they have no electricity or heating at their school. The stark challenges faced around the world by children who deserve education are very clear to me, whether that is in Gaza, Sudan or many of the other locations that have been mentioned.

[Andrew Rosindell]

Will the Minister give way?

[Stephen Doughty]

I will make some progress, then potentially take some interventions later.

I previously worked in the international development sector for a Christian international development charity, World Vision, and for Oxfam, and have engaged with many educational programmes around the world. I have seen the real difference made by not only UK assistance, but international organisations and the United Nations, and the excellent charities that we have here in this country.

Many Members reflected on the important work of the British Council and our scholarship programmes. I have done a lot of work with Chevening scholars and Marshall scholars, among others, as well as Commonwealth scholars, of course. I am really proud that this Government have taken us back into the Erasmus+ programme and its opportunities for international exchange and engagement. It is crucial for young people in Britain, but also for those long-standing partnerships that make us strong and understood, and speak to our values in the world.

As advocates for global education, the Members present know all too well that the system is in serious crisis. UNESCO estimates that every $1 invested in education and youth skills in developing countries generates $10 to $15 in economic growth. Education has also been central to reducing inequality and empowering women and girls. We know its impact, yet 272 million children are out of school globally and 70% of children in lower-middle-income countries are unable to read and understand a basic text by 10. That figure rises to 90% in sub-Saharan Africa. That has to change.

With better research and evidence on what works, a range of different interventions and partners and countries working together, we can make a difference, particularly through taking on board new technologies and new ways of accessing the curriculum and learning. We are part of that effort, building modern and respectful partnerships, as well as shifting from being a direct donor in many circumstances to acting as an investor and an adviser and convenor.

We will always retain our focus on reaching the most marginalised children who need and deserve quality education. For example, in Sierra Leone, we are working with the Government to build gender-based violence prevention and response, especially with regard to children with disabilities who face gender-based violence. We are helping partner Governments to finance and manage their own education systems more effectively, and we are using world-class evidence to improve teaching in the classroom to ensure that children are learning.

Our people and our expertise and the great strength we have in education in this country means that we are trusted advisers to partner Governments. We have funded pioneering research, particularly on the issue of foundational learning referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Southgate and Wood Green and many others. We are a founding partner of the global Coalition for Foundational Learning, working closely with UNICEF, UNESCO, the World Bank, the Gates Foundation and other Governments. We are a founding member of the Global Partnership for Education. We were at the forefront of setting up Education Cannot Wait, which has done important work. We are continuing to deliver through a range of multilateral investments.

We have had to take tough decisions, which have been referenced by a number of Members. We took the tough decision to reduce our official development assistance spending to 0.3% of GNI by 2027 so that we could respond to pressing security challenges and geopolitical circumstances with which Members are only too familiar. With less funding, we need to do things differently. We have to focus on the greatest impact and we need to target funding on the people who need it the most.

[Andrew Rosindell]

Will the Minister give way on that point?

[Stephen Doughty]

I will not, if that is okay.

We are focusing on five areas: first, improving learning outcomes for all children, particularly targeting girls and the most disadvantaged; secondly, helping partner Governments to strengthen their education systems; thirdly, increasing the scale and sources of financing, so that Governments can access financing to fund education reforms; fourthly, safeguarding education in emergencies and protracted crises, including those affected by conflict and climate change; and finally, driving the reform of multilateral education organisations. I will say a little more about that conflict work in a moment.

We are leading on our own strategy. On 20 January, the Government announced our new international education strategy, which builds on our strong leadership, skills and expertise. Education already contributes more than £32 billion a year to the UK economy. Our strategy sets out a plan to increase that to £40 billion by 2030, generating jobs and skills here in the UK as well. We have expertise, leadership and commitment. I think Members understand that we are in a different circumstance with regard to the funding, but we will continue to remain focused on these issues.

In my last few minutes, I want to turn to some of the points that hon. Members raised. My hon. Friend the Member for Southgate and Wood Green and many others asked about work in emergencies and protracted crises. We recognise that that is a huge challenge, and of course we are continuing to focus on it. We have committed a further £10 million for strategic partnerships on education in emergencies. We are of course the largest bilateral donor to the Global Partnership for Education, £5.6 million of which is earmarked for education and psychosocial support in Gaza and the west bank.

The situation in Afghanistan is of course absolutely tragic, but even there we continue to support the delivery of education through UNICEF, the International Rescue Committee and other partners, including the Afghanistan Resilience Trust Fund. We are continuing to try to work in those incredibly difficult circumstances, which are a tragedy for girls, in particular.

My hon. Friend raised foundational learning and asked about the Future of Development conference in May this year. The agenda is still being finalised for that, but we will update him and the House in due course. We are of course looking at new ways to generate resource in straitened circumstances. For example, our support for the International Finance Facility for Education has already unlocked $1 billion in additional education finance from multilateral development banks. That is very good value for money for the UK taxpayer, because $1 of cash invested there generally leverages in $7 of additional concessional finance.

I absolutely assure Members that we will continue to stay focused on the education of girls and those who are most marginalised and least likely to go to school. I agree that the British Council is an important partner, and it will of course help to deliver the international education strategy. I visited the British Council team in Kyiv—tragically, their offices were hit by one of the Russian strikes. Our funding to the British Council is still under discussion.

Of course, that international commitment is matched by our commitment to young people in this country. I mentioned the investment that we are putting in and the Government’s focus on this issue. It is not just about schools, in terms of teaching, facilities and curricula; it is also about ensuring that young people are in the best place to learn. That is why we have put 750 primary breakfast clubs in place and extended free school meals to half a million more children. I am incredibly proud of that work, which draws on the lessons we have learned from Wales.

We are proud of what we are doing on education in this country and internationally. These are changed financial circumstances, but we will continue to focus resource where we think it makes the biggest difference for the most marginalised communities, and we will leverage in support from other donors. I thank all Members for the sincerity of the points that they made today.

16:12

[Bambos Charalambous]

I thank all Members who contributed to this wide-ranging debate. We have had lots of incredible insights into what education means, particularly from my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth), who talked about the young man who lived at a rubbish tip in Kigali and now has a Harvard scholarship. That is an incredible story. The hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) spoke movingly about his personal experience in Afghanistan. It shows how much people value education, no matter where they are from, and how much of a difference it makes to parents, as well as to children.

The hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding) said that we need to thank teachers, who are a very important part of providing education. There is a huge shortage of teachers internationally, which is another area that we need to focus on. She made some excellent points. All hon. Members spoke about how important girls’ education is everywhere, so we need to focus on that. The hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) spoke about the importance of soft power. He mentioned the British Council and scholarship schemes such as Chevening and, historically, the Rhodes scholarship scheme.

This has been a really good debate, and I thank the Minister for his response. There are a few wishes that I am very keen to follow up on. Times are hard, but we need to ensure that education, which is so transformative and changes people’s lives, carries on making a difference. It is one of the most essential things that we can provide funding for.

I thank all my colleagues on the APPG on global education, and particularly Results UK, which provides the secretariat. I thank all the other organisations that provide support, such as Send My Friend to School and other campaign organisations for education. I will leave it there. I thank everyone for taking part.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the International Day of Education.

16:14

Sitting adjourned.